Laptops

[Reality]

Reality Intel Core Duo chips

  are these Core Duo chips still the latest greatest?

westkoast Nope..all the blu ray players play older DVDs.  They just don't play HD DVDs.  You can however buy a combo drive that plays both formats of HD movies.   VHS...well I dont know anyone who still buys those lol.

I still think the core duo chips in the laptops and the desktops are still the best.  However they are not technically the latest and greatest as both Intel and AMD are working on new processors as we speak.  There are quad core chips out there right now.   The technology is always moving in that sector so there really is no such thing as latest and greatest.  For 98% of the people who purchase PCs the core duo is the best to go with if you are looking for higher end desktops or top of the line laptops. 

Streaming media around the house wirelessly is very cool btw. 

westkoast, the latest please.
core duo still plenty good?
quad core now available and are they much better then core duo?  (Realize for the average user core duo is plenty good, still i'd like to know.) 
Also, friend was all set to buy a very good deal on an HP laptop, but did not when they saw AMD 64 instead of Intel Core duo.  Uneducated overeaction?

[Reality]

What is this, Geek Day Off Monday?
Where are you people?

http://vancouvercomputers.info/policies.htm

[westkoast]

Reality Intel Core Duo chips

  are these Core Duo chips still the latest greatest?

westkoast Nope..all the blu ray players play older DVDs.  They just don't play HD DVDs.  You can however buy a combo drive that plays both formats of HD movies.   VHS...well I dont know anyone who still buys those lol.

I still think the core duo chips in the laptops and the desktops are still the best.  However they are not technically the latest and greatest as both Intel and AMD are working on new processors as we speak.  There are quad core chips out there right now.   The technology is always moving in that sector so there really is no such thing as latest and greatest.  For 98% of the people who purchase PCs the core duo is the best to go with if you are looking for higher end desktops or top of the line laptops. 

Streaming media around the house wirelessly is very cool btw. 

westkoast, the latest please.
core duo still plenty good?
quad core now available and are they much better then core duo?  (Realize for the average user core duo is plenty good, still i'd like to know.) 
Also, friend was all set to buy a very good deal on an HP laptop, but did not when they saw AMD 64 instead of Intel Core duo.  Uneducated overeaction?

Quad core is not twice as fast as the dual core is.  While it sounds like since there is 4 as oppose to 2, that doesn't make it twice as fast.  It's only a small step faster.  Which makes it not worth it.  The core duo chips are still plenty fast for most users.  They've also dropped in price since the newer proc have been announced.

[Derek Bodner]

Quad core is not twice as fast as the dual core is.  While it sounds like since there is 4 as oppose to 2, that doesn't make it twice as fast.  It's only a small step faster.

Well, kinda, sorta.

As with everything, it's all dependent.  Mainly dependent on the application, and whether it's multi-threaded.  For a single threaded process, you won't see any speed increase.  For a true multi-threaded process (with a kernel that supports SMP), you will see close to double the performance.  And even for processes that are single threaded, you can use process affinity to achieve vast performance boosts.

Now, you might not get double the performance during your desktop computing tasks, but that doesn't mean the quad core processor is only a small step faster, it just means you're not fully utilizing it.

[westkoast]

Quad core is not twice as fast as the dual core is.  While it sounds like since there is 4 as oppose to 2, that doesn't make it twice as fast.  It's only a small step faster.

Well, kinda, sorta.

As with everything, it's all dependent.  Mainly dependent on the application, and whether it's multi-threaded.  For a single threaded process, you won't see any speed increase.  For a true multi-threaded process (with a kernel that supports SMP), you will see close to double the performance.  And even for processes that are single threaded, you can use process affinity to achieve vast performance boosts.

Now, you might not get double the performance during your desktop computing tasks, but that doesn't mean the quad core processor is only a small step faster, it just means you're not fully utilizing it.

I didn't get into the application part because I didn't want to confuse Reality....

But Quad Core proc have only been bench marked 25% faster then dual core proc's from what I've read.  I consider 25% increase a small step faster.  Not a huge amount.

[Derek Bodner]

But Quad Core proc have only been bench marked 25% faster then dual core proc's from what I've read.  I consider 25% increase a small step faster.  Not a huge amount.

Well, I've used servers with up to 8 quad-core CPU's (32 total cores), and I can tell you that we've bench marked quad core at much more than a 25% improvement.

It would be interesting to see the benchmarks, as there are a lot of other potential bottlenecks outside of just CPU speed.  it's possible that the benchmark isn't correctly isolating CPU performance.

Here's a pretty good set of benchmarks comparing two quad-core's vs a dual-core.  There are some tests less than 25% of a performance gain, some with over a 50% performance gain.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quad-core-xeon-clovertown-rolls-into-dp-servers,1376-7.html

(and 25% is substantial imo)

[westkoast]

But Quad Core proc have only been bench marked 25% faster then dual core proc's from what I've read.  I consider 25% increase a small step faster.  Not a huge amount.

Well, I've used servers with up to 8 quad-core CPU's (32 total cores), and I can tell you that we've bench marked quad core at much more than a 25% improvement.

It would be interesting to see the benchmarks, as there are a lot of other potential bottlenecks outside of just CPU speed.  it's possible that the benchmark isn't correctly isolating CPU performance.

(and 25% is substantial imo)

Not for double the price and the amount of applications for regular users that don't use two, let alone 4, cores.

[Derek Bodner]

Not for double the price and the amount of applications for regular users that don't use two, let alone 4, cores.

Well, worth is a different argument than discussing speed.  I agree for most desktop users it's overkill.  But that doesn't make it only a small step faster.

[westkoast]

Not for double the price and the amount of applications for regular users that don't use two, let alone 4, cores.

Well, worth is a different argument than discussing speed.  I agree for most desktop users it's overkill.  But that doesn't make it only a small step faster.

If Reality was to have a dual core and run the normal apps, then jump up to a quad core and run the normal apps...there wouldn't be a huge speed difference.

[WayOutWest]

The apps most people use are not written to take advantage of the hardware so IMO the difference between the two chips is not noticeable, ultra tiny step difference.

[Reality]

Okay so the HP lap with the AMD chip?

[westkoast]

I don't have a problem with AMD, in fact I had an AMD chip in my desktop.........but I honestly feel that the Intel Core Duo chips are the best bang for the buck.

[Reality]

What's your take on the Toshiba "Qosmio" game laps line?

[westkoast]

What's your take on the Toshiba "Qosmio" game laps line?

Bulky and over priced.  So it has better speakers and a nifty keyboard,  it's not worth the cost IMO.   Maybe WOW and DB will disagree with me but I've always said if you want a large screen then you should get a desktop.  If you want a machine to be portable then don't go for a 19 inch screen.  Find a laptop that has a smaller screen because it's easier to transport. 

If your computer is never going to leave the desk in your house and you want a big screen then go pump money into a nice monitor.  The tower, for a comparable speed to the Qosmio's laptop, is going to still be cheaper with a nice monitor.