I Hate Computers

Anonymous Poster · Aug 13, 2001

Pete,

For a couple dollars investment, you can perk up your current machine...

Memory prices are at an all time low... especially if the wife manipulates large graphics or does lots of multi-tasking... the more memory, the merrier and dirt cheap...

Max out your current motherboard from PII-500 Mhz---> Max? {possibly not cost effective now}

With a newer/faster video card {assuming AGP}, you may not notice that much of a difference on a older motherboard that won't take advantage of the 4X increased video bandwidth...

Remember it's as fast as the slowest path/device/etc.

More memory at this stage will give you the most bang for the buck on an older machine.

Going to new is a no-brainer... P4 1.3 GHz is only a few dollars difference in price over PIII, but the performance difference is day and night.

Of course, by the time I press this send/continue button... everthing I've said will be history/old news and we'll be talking P5 or K8... /w3tcompact/icons/blush.gif

Bird · Aug 13, 2001

Yeah John, I first intended to get a Pentium III at 1Ghz, 133Mhz bus, but after we got all the system configured, the salesman said, "Now just to complicate things - nothing's ever simple. It's up to you, but I can give you the same configuration with the Pentium 4 at 1.3Ghz and the 400Mhz bus for $120 more, if you want it."/w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

Bird

Anonymous Poster · Aug 13, 2001

Yes sir... $999. 1.3Ghz. P4... great price! /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

GlueGuy · Aug 14, 2001

Bird,

Like John is saying, the fastest you're going to go is as fast as the slowest component. I looked at the specs of this machine, and it's not bad. Last I checked (correct me if I'm wrong on this guys) the DDR memory has a data rate of 266MHz, and that's on a 128 bit path, so it can retrieve instructions at an effective 266 X 4 rate (1.064 GHz). Not counting I/O (which is a lot slower), that is probably the controlling factor on this machine.

That said, we've definitely reached the point of diminshing returns. For example, take a machine that can execute 500 million instructions per second. Assume that it has to execute a million instructions to do some simple task. That means it will take 1/500th of a second to complete the task.

Then take a zoomer that is running twice the speed at 1,000 million (1Giga) instructions per second. That same million instruction task is going to take 1/1000th of a second.

Now you're going to tell me you can "see" the difference between 1/1000 of a second and 1/500 of a second? For most of us, it doesn't make much difference. The machines will be burning cycles up the wazoo while we drink our coffee.

The GlueGuy

GlueGuy · Aug 14, 2001

<font color=blue>What's your feeling on the PIII vs PIV offerings?</font color=blue>

Pete,

I think the PIV is mostly a bunch of hot air. There are so many bottlenecks in the current PC architecture, that I think you'll spend more money than you need to by going to a PIV.

One area that this may not be true is in video editing. That is one application that can eat cycles for lunch.

That said, see my response to Bird. Fact is, memory is dirt cheap these days. I just saw an ad in the paper offering 256MB of memory for $29! /w3tcompact/icons/shocked.gif It's so darn cheap that it is the single most effective way to upgrade a system these days (turning off that disk light). If your machine can handle it, you can upgrade to 1GB of memory for less than $150. Sheesh. that ought to speed things up beyond all recognition (STUBAR /w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif).

The GlueGuy

GlueGuy · Aug 14, 2001

Bird,

Things are getting way confusing for the average consumer. Don't let the MHz of the CPU fool you though. It's not the best determinent in figuring out which machine is "faster" or "better". For a fact a 1.3 GHz Athlon can outperform a 1.5 GHz PIII doing "most things". Great time for a consumer to heed the advice "buyer beware".

I think we're actually moving beyond the point where pure performance makes any difference any more. Pay attention to other factors, and make the best decision for yourself. Kind of like buying a tractor /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif.

All that said, if you can afford the $1K that you spent on that machine; it's a fine machine. Ought to go plenty fast. Ought to wait on the modem a whole lot more than your current machine does. Ought to be good to go for several years to come.

The GlueGuy

GlueGuy · Aug 14, 2001

Cancel my previous statement about DDR memory. I miss-read the specs. The DDR memory is used on the video card, and it uses RDRAM on the main memory. Dell claims 3.2GB/sec throughput for that memory. That translates into 800 Million (32 bit) words per second. Which means that even though the CPU is running at 1.3 GHz, it's still being starved by the memory at roughly the same performance level of an 800MHz machine.

The GlueGuy

Bird · Aug 14, 2001

GlueGuy, I've been "using" computers for about 30 years, but have very limited technical knowledge. My experience has been that whatever I use will be obsolete very soon. You know I usually say to buy the biggest tractor you can afford and have room to maneuver. I guess I tend to do the same thing with the computer; hoping that if I buy "big" enough, it'll be just a little longer before it's obsolete (and of course I could be entirely wrong).

I know that buying this new computer sure isn't the smartest thing I ever did./w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif But since I wanted to give this one to my grandson, I wanted to see if I can learn Windows ME (currently using 98 Second Edition) and the newest version of Microsoft Works (I've gone through several versions already), and I wanted a flat bed printer that copies and scans in color (the one I have prints in color, but only copies/scans/faxes in black and white), well, I jumped in.

And I do appreciate all your comments; I slowly learn a tiny bit more; even understand just a little bit now and then./w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

I was one of the first in the Police Department to have a desktop PC. I tried budgeting for one and my boss cut it from the budget; said police captains didn't need one of those things. So I bought my own (Radio Shack - remember those?), and took it to the office. Within a month my boss was sending other folks to my office to see it; thought everyone ought to have one./w3tcompact/icons/laugh.gif

Bird

Harv · Aug 14, 2001

As long as we're discussing computer buying philosophies ...

I've made my living with computers for the last 35 years or so and currently have 4 of the little buggers in the house, not counting the ones I've built, sold or given away.

Even during my financial peak (very comfortable income and lots o' money in the bank), I could never bring myself to buy the very latest technology, for the following reasons:

1. the first year of production of any new product is bound to have problems which will be solved and cleaned up by the manufacturer in subsequent production runs.

2. As soon as the "next generation" of computer is released, the previous version will suddenly be available at about half its original price.

3. In many cases, the "next generation" is mostly hype, not substance.

4. My "real" needs are generally being met by the model I have. A hard pill to swallow sometimes. /w3tcompact/icons/crazy.gif

Like I said, I make my living with these contraptions, mostly designing and programming software. The big demand on the computer comes at compile/link time. Even with the slower machines, this amounted to maybe 5 or 10 seconds for an average project. If I did 50 compiles a day, and I had a computer that was twice as fast, I could shorten my work day by nearly 4 minutes! /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

During my year-long stint in digital photo restoration (something that really taxes the CPU), rather than spring for the fuel-injected, overhead cam computer, I tried just maxing out the RAM on what I had. Just like GlueGuy says -- it sped things up enough that I was happy with what I had.

Just to belabor the point --

A married couple I know, who always used me as their computer service center, one day up and bought a computer that was 4 times as powerful as the one I was using for work. Tons o' disk capacity and megahertz up the wazoo. Disappointed with the results, they called me over to figure why their Netscape browser wasn't running any faster. I told them it was time to upgrade their 14K modem. /w3tcompact/icons/crazy.gif Also time to switch to Internet Explorer. /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif Concerned about this huge hard disk they now had, I asked if they were backing up their data on a regular basis. Other than surfing and email, the only thing they used the machine for was word processing, so they showed me the single floppy disk they used for backups. /w3tcompact/icons/shocked.gif

My only excuse for buying new computers these days is when the kids' computer can no longer handle the current run of games. That's when I give them mine and treat myself to something newer. /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

looch · Aug 14, 2001

<font color=blue>...who is into graphics...</font color=blue>

That small phrase can cost a lot of money. It just so happens that last week I was researching to purchase a new CAD workstation for our engineering department. We use PTC's ProEngineer software and the hardware requirements are similar to those of a good graphics station. Go to compaq.com and check out the EVO W6000; ibm.com and the Intellistation M Pro; or for a real shocker: hp.com and the i2000 workstation. Pricey to say the least, but with a specific application in mind, will probably not become obsolete as quickly.

Oh yeah, and NVIDIA has the nicest video cards right now, in my opinion that is.