I gave up trying to stay current with all the CPU stuff a couple
years ago. A PC is so much more than a CPU speed rating. Bus speed,
disk speed, size of caches, etc... video refresh gets more important
the older you are.
tom's hardware should have a definitive guide on what the true comparisons are.
At 07-09-2005 at 16:43, Shakespearean monkeys danced on
firstname.lastname@example.org's keyboard and said:
>and we are now far afield, but I'm asking anyway, since y'all know
>everything and you aren't trying to sell me something:
>dual-core (pentium-d) or p4ht?
>I've googled enough to understand what's going on, and I've seen the
>reviews, I'm asking more like is dual-core going to be the sony
>beta, and I should stick with p4ht or not? am I better off with
>p4ht, dollar-for-for dollar, etc.?
>the p-d seems to run slightly slower (2.8 vs. 3.6) but I don't game
>that much and when I do it runs fine on the old 1.9 ghx machine, so
>that really shouldn't be an issue. I do multi-task all the time, though.
>overall, if you were buying the machine, what would you get?
>don't see pentium 4 on the dell website, and the circuit city beat
>most of their prices. the dual-core machine is a gateway for $850, fwiw.
>thanks, y'all. my cable is still broken, though so haven't needed
>to actually purchase yet...