Apple dual 1Ghz vs 1.42Ghz Mercury Extreme...


Apple dual 1Ghz vs 1.42Ghz Mercury Extreme...

> Okay people - I need your advice and thoughts on the following:

I have a Quicksilver 867mhz. (I know it's starting to get a bit old skool- but I love it.) Best Apple Mac I've ever had. I spent an enormous amount of time (and money) setting it up just the way I wanted it. It has the following attributes:
• 1.5 MB of CL2 Crucial SDRAM
• Radeon 8500 mac edition (300/300)
• Adaptec 39160 SCSI card (RAID)
• x2 10K rpm SCSI drives (stripe RAID / startup disk)
• Aluminum fans + fan controller (very cool)
• Apple Pro Speakers
• Keyspan USB 2.0 card.
• Panther 10.3.9
• 21-inch Sun flat screen monitor.
(It's perfect, but I would like it to have a bit more grunt...)

I use the Quicksilver mainly for graphic design work and illustration. I often have many applications open at once - switching between them. I always use Microsoft Office, Adobe Creative Suite, Macromedia Studio MX, iTunes, and Safari.

I've been planning to upgrade the processor - was thinking of going with the OWC 1.42Ghz Mercury Extreme that operates at 1.67Ghz on my system. I was going to choose this one because I've found (thru experience) having an L3 cache quite necessary (as opposed to getting the 7447 processors) and it fitted into my budget - $400. However, I'm in a delema because an opportunity to purchase an original Apple dual 1Ghz processor with heaksink for $300 has come my way.

> So, my question is this.

Should I go for the Apple dual 1Ghz or the OWC single 1.42Ghz?

I wasn't thinking of getting a dual processor upgrade due to cost. Furthermore, I've never used a dual before and generally was under the impression that the programs I use don't really take advantage of a second processor anyway - unless I was multitasking, which I sometimes do. Then again, I've been told that OS X flies under dual processors...

Argggh, please help! I want to make the right decision...
I personally would go for the dual-processor since I am into multi tasking. Having a 2nd processor really helps the responsiveness of the system when under load. Even if your application isn't threaded to use more than one processor at once, dual processors will still be beneficial for the reason I've stated. YMMV of course.
Thanks Viro - that's kinda my leaning (and understanding) at the moment also...
But of course, having never experienced dual processors - I don't know what the benefits are? Like I said, 867Mhz (at the moment) is not too shabby - but I do want more "grunt". If responsiveness is a main consequence of dual processors, well, that certainly fits my description of 'grunt'.