Dan,
FWIW, I have basically the system you describe, except a larger HD — I'm
quite happy, but I'm a biased Mac user, although I love my Ubuntu Linux
machine as well… One can bring any machine to its knees, so there is the
element of expectations. A MacBook Pro stacks up as well or better
On 26 Feb 2015, at 06:26 , Dan Murphy chiefmur...@gmail.com wrote:
Quick responses as usual. Can always count on R-Help! Bert's point
that it depends is key, of course. Mark and Karim reminded me that R
does not use all cores natively. Putting those together, an expensive
quad core machine
I am possibly in the market for a new laptop. Predominantly a Windows
user, I owned a macbook pro 10 years ago and am considering going that
route again. Does the standard advice still hold: Get the most
powerful processor (i7), most ram (16GB), and largest internal storage
(512GB), if affordable?
What does this have to do with R?
Does the answer not depend on what you intend to do with your laptop,
e.g the sorts of data you deal with, of which we have no idea?
Cheers,
Bert
Bert Gunter
Genentech Nonclinical Biostatistics
(650) 467-7374
Data is not information. Information is not
For what I do, which does not require a lot of parallel work, the high end iMac
was faster and much less expensive than the Mac Pro.
Mark
R. Mark Sharp, Ph.D.
msh...@txbiomed.org
On Feb 25, 2015, at 1:50 PM, Dan Murphy chiefmur...@gmail.com wrote:
I am possibly in the market for a new
Hi,
It is not so efficient to have the most speed processor or biggest RAM. In
general One processor is working at the time.
It is more interesting to work with Linux for multiple multi_thread package
and 64 bit.
I am not sure if turbo boost is working with R.
Quick responses as usual. Can always count on R-Help! Bert's point
that it depends is key, of course. Mark and Karim reminded me that R
does not use all cores natively. Putting those together, an expensive
quad core machine is not necessary for simple package development,
documentation, etc. And
7 matches
Mail list logo
