|
#2
December 5th, 2007, 03:58 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
Well, it's obvious that if you just look at processor speed, then the CPU that's 3.06 GHz would be faster than the one running at 1.6 GHz. However, in the real world you have to account for various other things such as system bus speed, RAM speed, CPU cache, overall OS speed, etc. This is why clock speed only is not the best determinator for how fast a computer is.
__________________ • Apple iMac G5 17" (2 GHz G5) - Mac OS X 10.4.11/Ubuntu 9.10 • Asus Eee PC 901 (1.6 GHz Atom N270) - Ubuntu Netbook Remix 9.04 • Apple Macintosh Quadra 650 (33 MHz MC68040) - Mac OS 8.1 • "JHVH-1" (2 GHz AMD Athlon XP 2400+) - Slackware 13 • "Kidbuntu" (2.8 GHz Celeron D 335) - Ubuntu 9.04  |
|
#3
December 5th, 2007, 04:04 PM
| ||||
| ||||
|
3060MHz = 3.06 GHz. I'm guessing these two systems do not use the same kind of processor. Comparing different kinds of processors directly based on clock speed is not generally useful. For instance, a 2GHz Core 2 Solo would be much faster than a 2GHz Pentium 4. AMD's chips are generally faster MHz-for-MHz than Intel's (or at least they used to be).
__________________ Mac mini — 1.25GHz G4, 1GB RAM — OS 10.5.8 Useful programs: Privoxy, Butler, ffmpegX, VLC, Perian, Tofu, Wcalc |
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:16 PM.
