|
|
#1
10-17-2004, 07:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor?
Should the speeds matter much for a multi-tabler? Am I being paranoid in thinking that within a year or two the poker clients might evolve hoggishly enough so that it may eventually matter?
Insp. 
|
|
#2
10-17-2004, 07:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor?
1.8Ghz is really on the low end for a new desktop... Are you talking about notebooks? If so a Pentium 1.8M is on par with a 3.0Ghz desktop
|
|
#4
10-17-2004, 01:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor? [/ QUOTE ] 1.2 [/ QUOTE ] damn, I was all prepared to give my little witty answer, and some bastard beat me to it! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
|
|
#5
10-17-2004, 01:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor? [/ QUOTE ] 1.2 [/ QUOTE ] me too. MicroBob needs to learn how to sleep in. cheers! damn, I was all prepared to give my little witty answer, and some bastard beat me to it! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#6
10-17-2004, 04:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor?
I have a 1.7 and things can slow down a good bit when I'm importing hands on Pokertracker. As to simply running poker sites themselves, a 1.6 should be fine. I have not the slightest slowdowns on Party or Pokerroom or Pokerstars with my 1.7.
Sounds like you're buying a used system? Or a Pentium M 1.6 laptop. The Pentium M's are very good chips. They have a lot of cache on the CPU, and a Pentium M 1.7 is equivalent to a regular Pentium 3.0. You would be quite happy with the speed of a PM 1.6, if you get it in a notebook that holds up in other ways -- often you get stiffed with really raunchy components on notebooks, like very low memory and miserable video cards. Or very low resolutions. But either way, a 1.6 cpu will not be a bottleneck.
|
|
#7
10-17-2004, 04:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor?
Yeah, it's slow, I'm having a friend hang some parts together for me and call it a pc. I can have the 1.8 chip for $200 cheaper than a modern p4 so I'm wondering what the performance issues might be now and near term.
Insp.
|
|
#9
10-17-2004, 06:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor?
[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, it's slow, I'm having a friend hang some parts together for me and call it a pc. I can have the 1.8 chip for $200 cheaper than a modern p4 so I'm wondering what the performance issues might be now and near term. [/ QUOTE ] If your friend is ordering new parts rather than scavenging from other PCs, just have him/her order a motherboard that can accept CPUs that run at 1.6 to 2.8 Ghz or more. By the time performance issues come up, the 2.8 Ghz CPU should cost less than your 1.6 Ghz. Assuming you don't have any bus or memory bottlenecks, you can just pop in a new processor and get a cheap instant upgrade when the time comes.
|
|
#10
10-18-2004, 02:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Diff. between 1.6 and 2.8G processor?
A 1.6 is fine. The things people posted about needing more is silly. PT runs slow when you have a big database not because you dont have enough CPU cycles but because you don't have enough memory and memory bandwidth. When you making a ton of database queries its not CPU intensive, you are just moving data from ram and back. The speed of your HDD can be important too, only if your database isn't cached in RAM.
Bottom line a 10k RPM SATA drive and _dual_ _channel_ memory that has been _properly_ installed and configured will help you a LOT more than a faster processor. RAM is most important here. If you get a lap top (which it doesn't look like you are) the pentium M will do a lot of good too due to the added cache. ~CT11
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
