processor speed

Discussion in 'Hewlett Packard' started by davidJlin, Sep 5, 2005.

  1. bryank

    bryank Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    23
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    How much difference will in notice between 1.73,1.86 and 2 GHz? Really I am deciding between 1.73 and1.86.
    will adding more ram and faster (7200rpm) make more of a diference?

    Thanks

    Bryan
     
  2. Brian

    Brian Scribbler - Standard Member Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,305
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Depends on what you're going to be doing. For most users the CPU upgrade is a bad idea because of the higher heat and less battery life. The HDD and RAM upgrades will lead to a more noticeable bump in performance.
     
  3. davidJlin

    davidJlin Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    You pay a premium for higher processing speeds, and if you don't need it, it goes to waste. Also, I think a 7200 rpm harddrive has no business being in a battery-powered laptop, as it's going to generate a LOT of excess heat.

    Perhaps the "coolest" way to effectively speed up your machine is to get as much RAM as possible. Sometimes there's a night/day difference in performance by simply adding more RAM and changing nothing else. A tip: don't buy more RAM when you're configuring the tablet for purchase from the manufacturer or vendor. They charge you more than twice as much as if you get your own chips from a trusted memory specialist, such as Crucial Memory (www.crucial.com).

    On the other hand, one advantage of getting a faster processor speed up-front is to be able to enjoy OS upgrades in the near future. Your machine will stay current longer. It might be worth the extra couple hundred bucks to have a more up-to-date platform for an extra year or two.

    Best,

    David
     
  4. willmtran

    willmtran Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    5
    how much of a difference is there between the 1.86 and 2.0 processor?
     
  5. Brian

    Brian Scribbler - Standard Member Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,305
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    56
    Very little. You'd really only feel it with things like video encoding.
     
  6. davidJlin

    davidJlin Pen Pal - Newbie

    Messages:
    98
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    15
    It's funny - I still remember when I got the first Pentium at a blazing speed of 100 MHz, which was a tremendous milestone at the time. The thing cost me $2500 and had a mega-fan to keep the chip from burning a hole through the casing. Not too long later, they released the Pentium II at 256 MHz ... wow, nearly 2.5x faster!! What had taken 20 minutes on my 100 MHz machine now took less than 10.

    What's funny is that in terms of clockspeed, the raw difference between a 2.0 GHz and 1.86 GHz machine is roughly equivalent to that between the 256 MHz and 100 MHz dinosaurs of ages past. But, of course, the percentage difference is very different: only about a 10% improvement between the GHz chips, versus over 150% between the MHz chips. That is, a 20 minute job for a 1.86 GHz machine will take (roughly) 18 minutes for the 2.0 GHz machine, everything else being the same.

    It just tickles me that nowadays, we take a 200 MHz increase in proecessing speed as pocket change, but that it once was a doubling leap forward.

    I can't wait until we get to the THz (1 TeraHz = 1000 GHz) regime!! :D

    (BTW, I think the theoretical speed limit for solid-state chips is about 100 THz. After that, we have to parallize processors to realize effectively faster speeds, or go to an enitrely new technology, such as optical computers.)
     
Loading...

Share This Page