Electronics & Computers Deals here!
Community Newsletter: Q&A: Ugh! I need help deciphering all those PC processor names and speeds
- 7/20/07 11:31 AM
Software processing capability
by fredwbrown - 7/15/07 6:23 AM In reply to: New Computer Choice by ZouchThe part of your reply that caught my eye was, "Remember that to use a multi core processor, you need a workload that can run on more than one "engine". This might be a single application, written with multiple threads or may be separate applications that can run side by side, for example a word processor and a web browser."
If you have a computer that has multiple processors, how do you know whether your software is taking advantage of them? Do you have to install a certain OS, such as Windows Vista, to do this or does Windows XP Professional provide this capability?
I'm asking because I don't want to spend the money for a dual processor and then find out that all my software is running on just one of them. Thanks.
Do a Test Drive
by cnetmessageman - 7/15/07 3:34 PM In reply to: Software processing capability by fredwbrownNo, you don't need Vista but unless you are going to customize, you are going to get Vista anyway. The dual core will help anyway by sharing the total load across both processors especially if you run security apps. If you can get your hands on a box that's still configured with XP and has a dual core Intel E6300 or AMD Athlon64 X2 4600+ just give it a test drive. I don't think you'll be disappointed. A local computer vendor may be your best option to do this.
answer for your question!
by karthivestry - 7/7/07 9:18 PM In reply to: Ugh! I need help deciphering all those PC processor names and speeds by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
The AMD and Intel are both manufacturer for the processors.
Listing by performance:
AMD:.......................................Intel:
Sempron.................................Celeron D
Athlon.................................Pentium 4 HT
Athlon X2.................................Pentium D
Athlon 64-bit X2............................Core2Duo
Phenom X4(In progress).......................Core2Quad
For Hertz (Hz). The higher the better. But for Intel Core2Duo, the Hz maybe low but it is 2 times higher than the Hz listed. Meanwhile, for Core2Quad, It is 4 times than the printed Hz. Pentium D is better than Celeron D. Each processor type differ in FSB, For Celeron D, it comes with 800Fsb.
For AMD, Athlon X2 is more poerful than Pentium D, but loses with Intel Core2Duo technology. But the performance still great. Athon X2 is best for playing games. Same as Intel, the higher the GHz the better.
For comparing price, AMD processor is cheaper than Intel processor. For average use I recommended to buy Athlon X2 than Pentium D....
Athlon X2 losses performance to Core2Duo... If you wanna do multi-tasking*(open alot of program in once)* to your computer without lagg. Intel Core2Duo and Core2Quad is the best. But the price is quite high..
You can get Core2Duo at 3.0 GHz*(If times with two you get approximately 6.0GHz)* at USD$999. For AMD Athlon64 X2 (gaming processor) at 2.1 GHz (+- 4.2GHz), you can get only +- USD$ 100.
SO, the speed of the processor is more important than its name but the company should also be a reputed one !
NEED HELP WITH PROCESSORS
by bountyhunter41 - 7/8/07 8:31 AM In reply to: Ugh! I need help deciphering all those PC processor names and speeds by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU NEED THE COMPUTER FOR. AND SOMETIME PROCESSORS LIKE AMD AND INTEL MAY HAVE THE SAME SPEED PROCESSORS, JUST DIFFERENT WAYS OF SAYING THE SAME SPEED. A 64 BIT PROCESSOR MEANS IT CAN DO STUFF DOUBLE THE SPEED OF A NORMAL PROCESSOR. WHICH IS 95% PERCENT OF THE TIME A 32BIT PROCESSOR.
WHILE 32 BIT ONES CAN DO NORMAL EVERYDAY STUFF, BUT A 64BIT ONE DOES IT ALOT FASTER. FOR INSTANCE COPYING DVD MOVIES, YOU WOULD WANT A PROCESSOR WITH A SPEED OF AT LEAST 2GHZ OR MORE. I WOULD RECOMMEND A AMD ATHLON 64X2 DUAL-CORE. I AM A COMPUTER GEEK AND THIS IT WHAT I DO FOR A LIVING. I HOPE THIS HELPS YOU.
About the names
by krysovolk - 7/8/07 10:05 AM In reply to: Ugh! I need help deciphering all those PC processor names and speeds by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Fredrica,
A 2.0 GHz dual-core processor is quicker than a 2.0 GHz single-core processor when it comes to managing more programs (on the dual-core some run in one core, others (like the OS) in the other). The Celeron D is an old type of processor, and not suitable if you need to calculate lots of stuff. I do not know very much about the AMD Athlon, but the Athlon 64 X2 dual-core is a 64-bit processor, as opposed to the others, which are 32-bit. But seeing it as for maximum performance on a 64-bit (otherwise it's not worth the money), you will need a 64-bit system, and they are quite expensive, a 32-bit will suit all the usual tasks you will need. If you just need a usual processor to run many tasks, I suggest the Intel Core 2 Duo (it's better than the Core Duo, and not too expensive). I personally have the Core 2 Duo on my computer, and am pretty happy with it. If you really need to calculate lots of stuff and crunch lots of numbers on your computer, it still won't be worth it even with a 64-bit Dual-Core if you are looking for a laptop, because laptops are far not that powerful as desktops, and especially servers.
Relative Power
by jymmsom - 7/14/07 2:20 AM In reply to: About the names by krysovolkGenerally speaking, the list of power goes Celeron D (which is not truly a dual chip at all), Pentium D (primitive with some dual core functionality), Core Duo, AMD X2, Core 2 Duo, Quad Core, Core 2 Extreme.
All the intels listed are socket 775 motherboards so if it's a decent system you can upgrade later (here it is important to look at front side bus and supported CPU's). You cannot move between all intels as a general rule (Recent pentium 4s were socket 478, literally that the CPU had 478 pin connections). You cannot move between AMD and Intel without getting a new motherboard.
The Duo's are capable of receiving 64 bit instructions (string of command code 1's and 0's to 64 places) but they are not true 64 bit processors (they will break the instruction into 2 32 bit pieces and use take one chunk at a time). People have lots of issues with 64 bit Operating Systems, especially if you do a lot of different activities with your computer.
Any of these chips will be fine for doing general tasks. Most computers are drastically over powered for what the average user needs. If you're looking to surf the net, do some word documents, print some photo's it's not going to make much difference. Even a pentium 4 (socket 478) will give you more power than you need. Vista stock will give you slower boots but if you get into its' guts and rip out everything you dont need, you'd be suprised what vista will run on. I've gotten vista working on a 650 mhz pentium mmx proc with 288 megs of ram. There is no real reason for the general user to even need anything more than windows 98se (basic home networking functionality) except most people buy computers in the stores and never get a copy of the OS (driver issues but many companies still have older drivers available).
You need power for hosting any server/web content, graphic rendering, using several tv tuner cards, and specifically video gaming.
You can build some really cheap machines these days (really cheap if you already have a monitor and OS), unfortunately that's not going to be available in a store. Outside of video gaming, for the average user, nearly every computer in every computer store is more powerful than you need (minus with all the preinstalled garbage and self installing garbage which slows you down).
People get the mindset that they are incapable of dealing with basic computer upgrades themselves, or even worse- dealing with basic computer problems. It is getting easier everyday (for computer problems/tweaking always back up your computer first).
If you never want to get your hands dirty, go with Core2Duo or AMD X2 (at least a gig of ram), just because out of the box, it will be easier. You are unlikely to have the option to go with an older OS and stores are unable to modify OS installs (even buying windows in a store and reselling it unopened on ebay can land you a law suit).
It's all a scam, 90% of home users would be more than happy with an under $500 PC (or less). $60 proc, $40 MB, $60 worth of ram, $60 hdd, $25 mouse and keyboard, $150 monitor, $100 windows OEM, $50 case/psu combo and some change, $50 graphics card, etc. Old parts drop in cost fast. But windows pressures companies to sell their latest versions and doesn't allow people to modify the OS for resale so out of the box the computer is more demanding so requires more powerful hardware installed to run it.
-dis
princ answer
by mimidavenshi - 7/8/07 1:51 PM In reply to: Ugh! I need help deciphering all those PC processor names and speeds by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
i don't agree
Athlon 64 X2 dual-core
by aegumilar - 7/8/07 2:27 PM In reply to: Ugh! I need help deciphering all those PC processor names and speeds by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Hi Fredrica C,
I want detail information about the processor Athlon 64 X2 dual-core,
because i'm very interest this processor..
Thanks.
cpu info
by dirtfarmer - 7/11/07 9:22 PM In reply to: Athlon 64 X2 dual-core by aegumilaraegumilar
try this site for all the info on CPU you need
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K8/TYPE-Athlon%2064%20X2.html
i have a AMD athlon 64 x2 dual core 3800+, but it only run a t 2.00 GHZ
Athlon64 X2 - some answers
by cnetmessageman - 7/17/07 1:25 PM In reply to: Athlon 64 X2 dual-core by aegumilarThe former speed champion in Consumer level computers (up to about a year ago), AMD Athlon is still an excellent value when compared to pricier Intel Core 2 Duo processors. But your best choice (as has been stated so ofter on this thread) is determined by your needs. For most average users the Athlon64 X2 offers significant processing power at a great price. Unlike the lower end Core 2 Duo processors (such as the E4300 and E4400) it can be used with a motherboard that supports a system bus speed of 1Ghz or higher. And in most cases these motherboards are also compatible with the NVIDIA video cards that have been outperforming their equivalent ATI competitors (cheaper and faster).
At the current pricing, don't get any Athlon lower than the Athlon64 X2 3800+ (desktop ... laptop CPU are called Turion X2 T..)
The "sweet spot" is the Athlon64 4600+ but system configured with these CPUs are now difficult to find. However, Both HP and Dell have reasonably priced systems (costing around $700 if the monitor is not included) that are configured with the Athlon64 X2 5000+.
AMD vs Intel the saga continues
by ldsaint - 7/8/07 3:54 PM In reply to: Ugh! I need help deciphering all those PC processor names and speeds by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I am afraid you are slightly wrong if you only consider clock speeds as a guide to processor choice. Your choice of chip is mostly dependant on what applications you will run and your available budget.
Intels tend to have higher clock speeds and the motherboards allow for the use of faster ram, but the slightly cheaper AMD's are comparable despite having slower clocks speeds because they allow more data to be processed at any one moment and most motherboards will allow for . In raw terms, if you are trying to fill up a pool with water and it's taking too long you either pump faster(intel) or get more pipelines and pumps(AMD). clear as mud???
Personally i am an AMD fan and a nice x2 chip can do anything well but if all you are going to do is surf the net and email get the cheapest sytem you can, intel or AMD.
If money is burning a hole in your pocket and your a gamer then you can even get a motherboard that takes dual processors!
To advise a system without knowing what you need it for I would be very wrong, so my advice is this, if you aren't building it yourself and you are looking for an off the shelf PC then get the shop to start it up and see if it's nice and quiet, find something that uses SATA2 hard drives and has PCIe graphics if you like games or multimedia. write a list of things you want it to do and check it has them built in such as card readers and plenty of USB2 sockets. The mine field of RAM speeds and Processor speeds will then fall in price. I would guess that you will find Intel PC's quieter so just get the fastest one you can afford. If AMD seem equally quiet then you may find them cheaper.
Whenever I build I only ask two questions, what do you want it for and how much can you spend. (I can only beat dell on gaming systems so maybe use Dell as a benchmark) Words like celeron and sempron mean its good for basic processes. Athlon and core are more capable multitaskers. At the end of the day it's all down to money.
Sempron basic??
by seafm - 7/14/07 3:42 AM In reply to: AMD vs Intel the saga continues by ldsaintMy main pc is a sempron and I am more than happy with it's performance.I have seen what a celeron performs like and I'm sorry to say it's like comparing the tortise with the hare.While it is probably fair to say that sempron lies at the lower end of the market at least it is not at rock bottom like a celeron.I would not have one even if I got paid to take it away.Let's face it,you get what you pay for.
quiet!
by Morisot - 7/14/07 4:38 PM In reply to: AMD vs Intel the saga continues by ldsaintI bought a great computer a couple of years ago -- it did all that I needed (graphics and gaming and more.) And when I got it home and set it up in the family room I cried. It was soooo noisy.
My husband and son cried when I returned it to the store.
After that I listened very carefully to the display models and we got a very nice, very quiet machine. (Not quite as good at gaming though. *sigh*)
M.
Most of it is hype
by Robocoastie - 7/8/07 9:32 PM In reply to: Ugh! I need help deciphering all those PC processor names and speeds by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
Hi Fredrica,
Most of those terms are little more than marketing hype. I haven't seen a computer with less than a 2GHz proc in years so as long the proc is 2GHz you're good to go. As for "speed" is concerned the CPU is only half of the equation; the other half is the video card. Nearly every brand name computer will have a cheap video chip on the motherboard sharing your system RAM for it's memory. So I recommend NOT something off the shelf but rather a configured one from your local screwdriver shop or online store with configurators like Dell, Newegg, or even Apple to name a few.
A few of the terms do mean something though and greatly affect the price:
dual core: this is basically two processors smashed into one. The advantage is you'll be able to multi-task much better than the previous standard (hyperthreading) and superior compared to single core/no hyperthreading. But at this stage dual core is very price. Other names for this are X2, and Core Duo, Core 2 Duo, they are really just marketing terms. One huge tradeoff to keep in mind though is that Intel has implemented hardware DRM that they cleverly disguised as "Viiv technology" in their "core 2 duo" line. That is just one reason why many hardcore techheads will recommend you to use AMD.
Athlon: that's just AMD's name for their equivalent of the P4 line. 64 means it's a 64 bit cpu. More than likely the software on the computer is all 32 bit anyway.
64 bit: briefly mentioned above. Many (if not all) of Intel's CPU's in rigs today are actually 64 bit cpu's even if the sticker or vendor doesn't say it is. You can verify that when you get it home by running the cmos (aka setup) when the computer boots up and look for a line that reports CPU type or extensions enabled or able to enabled. Intel even has a program on their site somewhere that will test your Intel CPU and tell you exactly what it is. I mention this in case you decide you need to make the jump to a 64 bit OS; which at this stage I don't recommend because one of the very things 64 bit is supposed to help, multimedia, still lacks 64 bit software anyway.
I hope that helps, try not to get information constipation.
Buying a PC
by Greg-G - 7/9/07 1:54 PM In reply to: Ugh! I need help deciphering all those PC processor names and speeds by Lee Koo (ADMIN)
I know the terminology, specifications and product options when purchasing a PC can be confusing to all but PC enthusiasts. As a bit of a PC enthusiast, I get similar questions from friends and relatives all the time. In response I have a simple system for helping them choose a PC.
1. Determine the platform and form factor
A. PC or Mac - If you know you need Mac compatibility, then you need to get an Apple. If you are primarily looking for PC compatibility, then any number of PC manufacturers will do.
B. Notebook or Desktop - If you need portability or have limited physical space then clearly a notebook is in order. If you are looking for maximum performance for the price, and have room for a computer desk or table, then a desktop is in order.
2. Set a price point
A. Because PC's can cost as much as you are willing to spend, select a price point first.
3. Select a System
A. If you need a Mac (see 1.A), then the process is over because you only have one choice of manufacturer/vendor and likely only one machine will be close to your price point.
B. If you are getting a windows PC, then its time to balance primary task, brand & support, and performance.
i. Primary Task. If your primary task is gaming, then you don't need this guide because you probably already know what you want. If it is web surfing, word processing, preparing your tax returns, and managing family photos, then keep on reading.
ii. Brand & Support. Brand can matter. If you are comfortable maintaining your own system or don't mind sending it out for repairs in the event of a break down, then mail order brands may be acceptable and you may get a better bang for the buck. If you think you may need help, or like the idea of brining it back to the store in the event the machine fails (or is a lemon), then clearly buying it at a local store makes sense.
iii. Performance. This is where it usually gets trickier, but because you have a price point, platform, form factor, and brand/support needs figured out, performance will generally work itself out. What you are likely to find is that at the price point (with the other factors in mind), the performance among systems for basic tasks is going to be somewhat comparable for your non-gaming tasks. Now that you have probably narrowed it down to a few machines, the performance attributes to look at are as follows:
- Memory - More RAM is better.
- Drive Storage - Generally more is better, but drive speed can
impact performance and here faster is better.
- Video - Dedicated video memory is preferable to onboard video
that shares system memory.
- Memory Card Readers - can make life easier for photographers, but
it is so minor it won't matter. An external USB memory card
reader will cost about $20.
- Networking - most PCs come with ethernet ports, if it comes with
wireless even better, but a wireless card or usb connector isn't
that expensive.
- Intel vs. AMD (Toyota vs. Honda) (Pepsi vs. Coke) - Intel appears
to be winning the speed wars but AMD is less expensive, thus it
usually becomes a wash when you pick out a price point. You
won't know the difference on a day to day basis anyway.
- MHz - Your millage may vary. Unless your gaming, editing video,
or getting heavy into image manipulation (photoshop), any modern
PC in your price range will be fast enough to get the job done.
4. Final Note
One last note, with PC's bloat ware (or as CNET appropriately calls it "crap ware") should be considered. This is trial or demonstration software pre-installed on a PC. If things are close between a few systems, choose the one with less pre-installed software. Usually this stuff is often difficult to un-install, is rarely wanted, slows performance, is accompanied with annoying pop-ups, and real versions of such software can often be purchased at retails stores for less than the "special offer price" for registering.
I hope this helps.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
