English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I am using a 3ghz Pentium 4 but looking to build a new computer. Most of the 3ghz chips now are too expensive for me and I don't want to change if its going to be slower. My question is, since the new chips are dual core, are they faster at lower ghz than my current one? (for photoshop work and gaming) What would I need to at least match my current speed?
Thanks

2007-04-20 20:01:44 · 5 answers · asked by Bulldogg 3 in Computers & Internet Hardware Desktops

I know they run at their marked speed. What I mean is, if I'm only gaming, or only photoshopping, Am I better off with a high speed single core, or a lower speed dual core?

2007-04-20 20:12:18 · update #1

5 answers

one thing should be clear- the speed of your processor is determined ONLY by its clock speed!!

the fact that a processor is dual core does NOT make it faster.
BUT, the fact is that applications such as PHOTOSHOP and 3DS MAYA and other media and graphics extensive usage tools WILL perform better on dual cores.

However, games won't. Games performance is completely independent of dual core processor or not. Games will perform better when u have:-

1. High clock processor speeds
2. High Front Side Bus speeds.(motherboard dependent)
3. Good video/graphic cards
4. Sufficient RAM.(preferably DDR 2 type RAM)- again, the type of ram you will be using is motherboard dependent.

2007-04-20 20:12:37 · answer #1 · answered by kool_dude_0_9 2 · 0 1

One thing should be clear - the speed of a processor is NOT NOT NOT only determined by its clock speed. That statement was SO far from correct its hard to even describe. The magic term that no one here has brought up is Intructions per Cycle (IPC). This is how many instructions a processor can do each clock cycle. AMD has been doing this for years, have a much higher IPC, which is why they could outperform Pentium 4s with higher clock speeds. Intel has now turned to this idea with their Core 2 Duos, so simply looking for a big Ghz number is pointless now.

So to sum up, they are not faster because they are dual core, they are faster because of better IPC, and a few other architectural improvements.

2007-04-21 18:37:19 · answer #2 · answered by mysticman44 7 · 0 0

Exactly. So a 2.4Ghz x 2. I use my pc for photoshop and stuff and big difference man. I have a 2.8Ghz but my new core 2 duo 2.4Ghz e6600 is killing my old pc. anyway, if you are into overclocking get the 1.8Ghz but to tell you the truth I didn't even bother overclocking my thing since I don't need to.

I spent around 1K but you see I have a nice video card too so that explains too bad I'm not really using it for games... Hehehe. But anyways. 2.4Ghz core 2 duo is selling like $300 something now. i bought mine for like $380... check out newegg.com. Goodluck!

The people above this post are correct but still it is a big difference switching from p4... if you want to play games get a good pci express video card. I paid like $300 plus something for my video card now it is a lot lower. and get a 1GB or 2GB memory.

2007-04-21 03:14:42 · answer #3 · answered by aplus 3 · 0 0

In theory a AMD 3000+, in reality probably a 3500+.

It depends a lot on your motherboard and the pin configeration of the chip. A lot of AMD 939 chips run faster than same speed rated AM2 configered processors.

Another major factor is the RAM frequency you are going to run.

2007-04-21 03:08:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

They run at the speed that they say they run at. EG: 2.8ghz, but the thing is is that they can run two commands simultaneously, which gives them a HUGE upper-hand in applications especially things like Photoshopp which are programmed to better support dual core or multiple CPUs.

2007-04-21 03:08:18 · answer #5 · answered by .PANiC 5 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers