In article <dhilao$1lb$02$1@news.t-online.com>, "Norbert Wenkel"
<lc_4c.DeleteThis@web.de> wrote:
> Dear Reader,
>
> i need some advices for a new Intel based PC which i would like to build up
> in the next few weeks.
> Applikation that are used mainly:
>
> windows xp prof (vista next year!)
> any kind of intensive internet usage
> 3D simulations (GTR, GT legands Live for Speed
> 3D shooters (just sometimes)
> office applications
> ...
>
> what intel processor should i use (Dual core or just HT)
> what main board (should have SATA, firewire, 2.0 USB, Raid controller?)
> RAM advices are welcome
>
> system today
> xp prof.; 3.06 Intel (HT); 1024 MB 2.5 RAM; nVidia 6600GT AGP +....
>
> Any comments are wellcome
>
> Norbert
If you do a lot of video encoding, for burning your own DVDs
and the like, a dual core might make sense. The vast majority
of programs that you would use singly, will not benefit from
a dual core. In other words, for the programs I own, I would
rather have a single 3.8GHz processor, than a dual 3.0GHz
processor.
Photoshop has traditionally been able to use more than one
processor, but other software has been slow to move to using
more than one processor. And the speedup is not linear in
any case - two processors would not be exactly twice as fast.
You will not likely see any difference in the performance of
the desktop, by moving from a 3.06GHz processor, to one of
the >3GHz processors. Only if you use the CPU at 100% usage,
will you notice the execution time of long computations being
improved.
In the old days, moving from a Celeron 300 to a Pentium 1000
made a big difference. Moving from a 3.06Ghz P4 to a 3.4GHz P4
by comparison, would be almost undetectable.
Paul
>> Stay informed about: setup of a new asus mainboard based intel system