Processor Impact on Computer Speed

[O'GodHowGreatThouArt]

Question for computer geeks.

Assuming a baseline of 8 GB of RAM, how is the computer speed impacted by a dual-core processor? What about a quad-core processor?

 

[Casey]

It's important to take into account that RAM and hard drives also have different speeds. With a very fast processor there can be a bottleneck in RAM speed.

 

[jfschultz]

It can have a significant impact if there are several programs running that are demanding CPU cycles/time. On a PC this is not usually the case. The program you are dealing with is demanding CPU time while the others are sitting idle in the background. (There are system tasks that will claim some CPU time but usually not much.)

It is possible to write a program that can start several "threads" running in parallel. This can take advantage of a system with multiple cores. I recently modified a program to take some code that was being run 4 times in sequence to do the 4 items in parallel. Even though this task was not the biggest time hog, this change cut the program's run time in half.

 

[nasa30]

The only other thing to consider is if this will be in a laptop that your battery life will fall through the floor if you step up the processor. So for laptops, determining what you will be doing on it and just deciding what you are willing to sacrifice, speed or battery life, is crucial.

 

[O'GodHowGreatThouArt]

It will be a desktop. So unless someone refits the thing with a battery, it will hardly be an issue.

Let me give you guys a couple computers I'm eyeing (Almost the exact same computers, but one is dual-core and the other is quad-core).

Dell Dual-Core Computer

If the link doesn't work, plug in the number 9698845 in the search engine. It'll take you right to it.

HP Quad-Core Computer

If the link doesn't work, plug in the number 9840522 in the search engine. It'll take you right to it.

 

[MLCOPE2]

Here is a slightly more expensive alternative that offers superior speed, power, usability, and luxury.

Apple - iMac - The ultimate all-in-one desktop computer.

Don't just take my word for it, check it out yourself.

 

[nasa30]

Well, just my but between the two you have linked, I would choose the Dell. But my only reasoning is because it has the Intel. I am not a fan of AMD (or HP computers. Worst PC I have ever had) and much prefer the Intel to true speed and reliability. In my humble opinion, AMD claims better performance that it actually delivers. Just my experience.

 

[O'GodHowGreatThouArt]

Here is a slightly more expensive alternative that offers superior speed, power, usability, and luxury.

Apple - iMac - The ultimate all-in-one desktop computer.

Don't just take my word for it, check it out yourself.

Umm....forgive me. But how exactly does it "offer superior speed, power, usability, and luxury"? The PCs I linked can tear that Mac (and 99% of other Macs) to pieces and still have enough speed and processing to do some heavy multitasking.

I've never bought the argument that Macs are better hardware wise because of the cost for them (often one to two thousand). I can build one of the fastest computers in the state from the ground up at that cost.

 

[MLCOPE2]

Here is a slightly more expensive alternative that offers superior speed, power, usability, and luxury.

Apple - iMac - The ultimate all-in-one desktop computer.

Don't just take my word for it, check it out yourself.

Umm....forgive me. But how exactly does it "offer superior speed, power, usability, and luxury"? The PCs I linked can tear that Mac (and 99% of other Macs) to pieces and still have enough speed and processing to do some heavy multitasking.

I've never bought the argument that Macs are better hardware wise because of the cost for them (often one to two thousand). I can build one of the fastest computers in the state from the ground up at that cost.

Have you every actually used a Mac? (I don't mean played on one at Best Buy, actually regularly used one)

 

[O'GodHowGreatThouArt]

Here is a slightly more expensive alternative that offers superior speed, power, usability, and luxury.

Apple - iMac - The ultimate all-in-one desktop computer.

Don't just take my word for it, check it out yourself.

Umm....forgive me. But how exactly does it "offer superior speed, power, usability, and luxury"? The PCs I linked can tear that Mac (and 99% of other Macs) to pieces and still have enough speed and processing to do some heavy multitasking.

I've never bought the argument that Macs are better hardware wise because of the cost for them (often one to two thousand). I can build one of the fastest computers in the state from the ground up at that cost.

Have you every actually used a Mac? (I don't mean played on one at Best Buy, actually regularly used one)

I did for a time about 7 years ago. We had a one semester Technology Education class at my high school in Phoenix, Arizona. All they had was Macs, and I was using them one hour a day, five days a week, for about four months. I couldn't stand working with them because of the excessive windows one had to navigate around. I personally find it to not be very user friendly.

 

[MLCOPE2]

Here is a slightly more expensive alternative that offers superior speed, power, usability, and luxury.

Apple - iMac - The ultimate all-in-one desktop computer.

Don't just take my word for it, check it out yourself.

Umm....forgive me. But how exactly does it "offer superior speed, power, usability, and luxury"? The PCs I linked can tear that Mac (and 99% of other Macs) to pieces and still have enough speed and processing to do some heavy multitasking.

I've never bought the argument that Macs are better hardware wise because of the cost for them (often one to two thousand). I can build one of the fastest computers in the state from the ground up at that cost.

Have you every actually used a Mac? (I don't mean played on one at Best Buy, actually regularly used one)

I did for a time about 7 years ago. We had a one semester Technology Education class at my high school in Phoenix, Arizona. All they had was Macs, and I was using them one hour a day, five days a week, for about four months. I couldn't stand working with them because of the excessive windows one had to navigate around. I personally find it to not be very user friendly.

That could be part of your present prejudice towards Macs. Since the introduction of Intel processor chips in 2006 there has been a signifiant increase in processing power and speed. Not to mention the huge improvements in both HW and SW development. In all honesty the best part of a Mac would have to be its operating system which is specifically developed to work hand in hand with every HW component installed (as both HW and SW are both developed and manufactured by the same company). If you haven't tried an intel based Mac you should at least consider it as a viable, and comparative, alternative to any pc.