Processor Speed Definition

Status
Not open for further replies.

Excelsius

Baseband Member
Messages
81
IÂ’m somewhat confused when it comes to comparing all the processor types with one measure stick. For example, my PC is P4 1.80 GHz (HT disabled) and 512MB RAM. The computer at work is again P4, but 3.20 GHz with HT and 1GB RAM.
Now this summer I am going to build my first PC. If I am going to use 2GB RAM and 2.4 or 2.66 GHz Conroe, how much faster is it going to be than the 3.20 GHz at work? It better be A LOT faster because I am not too impressed with the 3.20. I read that dual to single core ratio is 1.5. So 2.66 Conroe is supposed to be 3.99 GHz when compare to P4. Is that right? That doesnÂ’t sound too good because itÂ’s only a 20% improvement (if I donÂ’t overclock).
How long will it take to restart windows with 2.66 GHz Conroe? I was really hoping it would take only about 5-8 seconds to restart and load all the applications.
 
Well, on a clean install of Windows, it would propably only take 10-15s to boot into Windows. But Windows load time depends on more than just the CPU. Harddrive RPM and cache play a big role, as does the POST before you even get to the Windows Load Screen.

*edit* Oh, a 20% increase in performance is huge in the world of PCs. The new architecture of the Conroe transgresses raw clockspeeds, in much the same way the Athlon 64s do.

Sorry moderators if this breaks my conditional probation. :D
 
Yes, but current hard drives are almost exclusively 7200RPM. There are very few 10,000 RPM one which are overpriced.

As for CPU, 20% is not impressive. Keep in mind that every 18 months CPUs DOUBLE in speed. That's 100% for you. So a 20% improvement is something you'd get every ~ 4 months.
 
Fair enough, but you will see more than 20% when comparing the Pentium to the Core 2 Duo CPUs. It's about more than clockspeeds. The AMD Athlon XPs and 64s ran slower (in MHz) than Pentium 4s, and yet they performed the same or better than the P4s. Same thing with the Core 2 CPUs. Its all about streamlining the way CPUs process data.

I'm thinking you will see close to double the performance from Conroe 2.66 compared to a Pentium 4 3.2.
 
10,000 RPM one which are overpriced.

Anything that is above the normal standard is obviously overpriced, but it's most definitely worth it, IMO.

How long will it take to restart windows with 2.66 GHz Conroe? I was really hoping it would take only about 5-8 seconds to restart and load all the applications.

I think you need to be a bit more patient, even the new Conroe's won't start Windows that fast. A computer has to go through quite a few stages before getting to the desktop. You can do a google search for faster XP startup though, because their are so mild mods that will allow XP to boot faster.

THE MEGAHURTZ WARS ARE OVER, clock speed is only one of the many variables of performance in computer processing now.

As for CPU, 20% is not impressive. Keep in mind that every 18 months CPUs DOUBLE in speed. That's 100% for you. So a 20% improvement is something you'd get every ~ 4 months.

No they don't ... you will only notice huge performance jumps when a new core or processor type/division is released. But the difference between a P4 1.8Ghz and 2.0Ghz isn't that significant, it's more the architecture than the clock speed that will determine a CPU's performance.

I'm thinking you will see close to double the performance from Conroe 2.66 compared to a Pentium 4 3.2.

It depends how your using it, the Conroe will be a bit faster than the 3.2Ghz in most single tasks, not be an alarming amount though, but when your multi-tasking with the Conroe, performance wise, it will definitely pull ahead. Conroe is dual core, Pentium 4 is single core.
 
The increase over a 3.2GHz prescott with a 2.4GHz conroe will be insane. **** even the base 2.13ghz conroe would destroy it.


Oh, FYI, 10,000 RPM over 7200 RPM is a huge increase and will be VERY noticeable. You all know how much faster a 7200rpm hard drive is over a 5400rpm one, correct? Well, thats only an 1800rpm difference. The difference between 10000 and 7200 is 2800rpm. It will be even bigger than the difference between 7200 and 5400, which is already huge.
 
Is it really well documented that there is a huge difference between 7200 and 10,000? In that case I'll get the faster one but will use the 74GB to cut down on price. All my applications will fit there anyway. Here are the two I'm considering:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...2E16822136033,N82E16822144160,N82E16822116133

I know that WD is the best in HDs.
Now if 10,000 makes such a difference, then 15000 should rock my world assume? Take a look at this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...2E16822141139,N82E16822141140,N82E16822116002


Is Fujitsu reliable in HD's? It's only 37.4 GBs, but considering that I can easily fit all my applications and most accessed files and if the speed is really going to be crazily fast, then it's worth it. I have 500GB space in esternal hard drive, but the only files I access from there often are my music files. What do you think? Anyone in here uses 10,000? Anyone 15,000? Can you tell me how much difference do you notice (quantify it)?


**EDIT: This website has to be fixed! I can't post a link that works. My only option was to paste the site - you have to copy and paste it. This sucks. What is going on?
 
That link you have there is all messed up. Yes, 15000 would rock your world. But afaik, the only 15k hard drives are scsi, which not only are they insanely expensive, but the equipment needed to use them is also insanely expensive.
 
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...&description=&srchInDesc=&minPrice=&maxPrice=

WHAT THE ****! I edited this post like 5 times. Those webmasters need to fix this site. Long hyperlinks don't work. This is frustrating!

Anyway, I couldn't make the link to the comparisons on Newegg. The best I could do is provide the link to the entire page. (Why is this like that?).
I am considering the ones for 150-180 for both, 10,000 and 15,000.
 
You can't use the 15000rpm drives, they are SCSI, which means you have to buy a seperate SCSI controller for your harddrives. Obviously, it's your money, but a 10000rpm drive just isn't worth the high cost. Can you seriously tell me that 2 seconds off your boot time is worth $180? But, nevermind me..........
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom