im looking to get a new laptop. and looking into what to get myself. the quesion is what is the difference between, for example a 1.5Ghz dual core processor and a 3Ghz single core? is the dual core not just 2 processors both running at 1,5Ghz equal to one 3Ghz. or does it imporove performance as each core can be doing a different task at the same time? but wont the 3Ghz do two tasks twice as fast therefore completing it in the same time as the dual core? or have i just not got it at all? LOL any answers would be greatfully recieved
It improves performance as far as multitasking is concerned, but don't expect any ultimate performance boost in the time it loads up programs. It's hard to rely on ghz for how well something will perform. For example, an AMD A64 3700+ at 2.2ghz outperforms a 3.2ghz P4 Prescott. It's not about how many mhz there are, it's about how much work a cpu can do in a mhz. Mike
It also depends on the generation of CPU you are comparing. Clockspeed means jack nowadays. Dual core vs single core of the same generation single core CPU will give you more performance in multitasking, but not necessarily any more performance in games.
thank you both for your help, it makes things a bit clearer. What would you considder to be a good judge of performance whan comparing two processors? mhz, processes per cycle, cach,? what im getting at is, if i had two processors how would i tell wich one is faster? or is it dependant on what applications im running? I would be using it for normal word processing, listening to music and watching films. all pretty standard. BUT also Converting/ripping video files and music which would i guess take alot more processor power.
If you do word processing, listen to music, or watch films whilst converting/ripping music and video then dual core would be the way to go... The times you can rely on mhz is when you're looking at a particular SERIES of processors (For example, the Athlon 64 range from 3000+ to 4000+, the higher models have higher mhz) and L2 cache is also of importance. Some Intel processors have more cache than they even need so don't be tricked by the high numbers trap. Hope that helps, Mike
Core 2 Duo's destroy anything in its path, even the FX-74, FX-72, FX-70 i think there called from AMD which are coming out soon, or out now which one of them is quad core, and the high end Core 2 Duo's still beat them. I thought that Dual core did better in stuff like MultiTasking, enciding movies etc.., but in games doesent really increase performance over Single core, unless the game is designed to take advantage of Dual core, which i guess most games coming out now do so.
You can't really look at clockspeed, cache, or other specifics any more. A lot of the performance comes from entirely new architectures, which mean more than some specs on paper.
