Computer Nerd Question

[gaming_mouse]

I'm getting a new computer with essentially the single goal of fast computing power. One thing I'll be doing with it is performing complex queries on PT databases.

Theoretically, which will be faster:

2G of RAM and a 2GHz CPU

OR

1G of RAM and a 3.2 GHz CPU

I'd also appreciate an explanation of any other factors that come into play, and the reasons behind your answer. Nothing too fancy, but just the broadstrokes on how the parts of a computer interact to determine speed.

Thanks,
gm

[BusterStacks]

In strictly a PT environment, both of these systems would perform the same.

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
In strictly a PT environment, both of these systems would perform the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you explain why? Also, under what circumstances do they begin to differ and in what ways?

[BusterStacks]

Well, PT maxes out neither the CPU nor the RAM, so going overboard on either end would not help. The biggest thing you can do to boost actual performance is get a fast HD. It's tough to say exactly where the cutoff is in terms of noticable performance gains via CPU/RAM, so I can't say for *sure*, but other factors beyond clock speed are going to have a much more profound effect such as FSB speed and L2 Cache.

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, PT maxes out neither the CPU nor the RAM, so going overboard on either end would not help. The biggest thing you can do to boost actual performance is get a fast HD. It's tough to say exactly where the cutoff is in terms of noticable performance gains via CPU/RAM, so I can't say for *sure*, but other factors beyond clock speed are going to have a much more profound effect such as FSB speed and L2 Cache.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you misunderstood me. It's not to improve the performance of PT. I will be running complex queries on the PT databases themselves (PT will be closed), and want them to execute quickly. Does this change your answer?

Also, what is FSB speed? And L2 cache?

gm

[Tboner7]

I would go for more GHz.

[jason_t]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well, PT maxes out neither the CPU nor the RAM, so going overboard on either end would not help. The biggest thing you can do to boost actual performance is get a fast HD. It's tough to say exactly where the cutoff is in terms of noticable performance gains via CPU/RAM, so I can't say for *sure*, but other factors beyond clock speed are going to have a much more profound effect such as FSB speed and L2 Cache.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you misunderstood me. It's not to improve the performance of PT. I will be running complex queries on the PT databases themselves (PT will be closed), and want them to execute quickly. Does this change your answer?

Also, what is FSB speed? And L2 cache?

gm

[/ QUOTE ]

FSB speed = front side bus speed. It determines how fast the CPU can talk with the memory and other hardware.

L2 cache = level two cache. This is memory in the processor itself used to store data the CPU is accessing frequently.

[CORed]

The hard drive is still the most important factor, whether you are using poker tracker itself, Access, or Visual Basic programs to access the database. Even a complex database query will not tax the CPU or memory. CPU's are so fast now, that unless you are doing someting extremely processor intensive, the processor is usually not the limiting factor. Databases are disk intensive. The seek time and data transfer rate of your hard drive will be the limiting factor in the performance of your queries. If your queries are returning large datasets, memory might be an issue, but it will not be nearly as important as hard drive speed.

[Richter]

A question like this might be better answered over in the forums at anandtech.com

[gaming_mouse]

[ QUOTE ]
A question like this might be better answered over in the forums at anandtech.com

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for this reference.