--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anonymousff > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Well, it just arrived via Fed Ex. I going to fire that > > > baby > > > > > up.>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that 4,400 MHZ !??? > > > > > > > Is that a Mac? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OffWorld > > > > > > > > > > > > Its 2.2 GHz. ADM tends to double the MHz for its model > > numbers > > > > > because > > > > > > an ADM CPU at .5x MHz, tends to equal the performance of > an > > > Intel > > > > > CPU > > > > > > at x Mhz. Due to its architecture. Its hard to swallow at > > > first, > > > > > but I > > > > > > have used both ADM and Intel CPUs for some time, and it > > > appears > > > > to > > > > > be > > > > > > true. And many benchmarks back it up. My current 1.6 GHz > (ADM > > > > 3200) > > > > > > ADM single core runs about the same performance in my own > > > > > benchmarks > > > > > > as another 2.8GHz Hyperthread Intel machine. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, this new CPU is dual core, so there are two CPUs > on > > > one > > > > > > chip!. So it actually is is running 2 x 2.2 GHz. (Not to > be > > > > > confused > > > > > > with a dual processor mother board with two CPUs) > > > > > > > > > > > > Its a self-built PC. I happen to have a 939 socket > > motherboard > > > > > with a > > > > > > slower single core adm processor at present. So I am > popping > > > that > > > > > out > > > > > > and inserting the new dual core. > > > > > > > > > > are you into heavy image or graphic processing, that you > need > > it? > > > > > > > > You need faster memory bus to really use such a beast > properly. > > My > > > > dual-G5 Mac has a 1Ghz bus, for instance.>>> > > > > > > > > > Macs suck. > > > (from a former Mac believer...now Toshiba alpha male) > > > > > > OK.>>> > > > C'mon , you can do better than that! Hit him back !
It always depends on what you want to use a computer for anyway. The top-of-the-line PC beats the top-of-the-line Mac for computer graphics right now, speed-wise. If you're using a computer for a single task that requires great speed, than obviously you go with whatever is fastest that you can afford, so... ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
