|
#1
November 1st, 2002, 01:24 PM
| |||
| |||
| Which Mac to get? I need to get a new Mac and am wondering which one to get. Apple still has the Quicksilver single processor for sale in the education section. It's significantly cheaper than a dual. Should I save my money or opt for the faster dual? Is it significantly faster than a single processor machine? Am I going to see a big speed increase when encoding MPEG-1/2 video? Is the dual going to last a lot longer than the single in terms of speed? In the long run, am I going to be happier with the dual?  |
|
#2
November 1st, 2002, 01:29 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| I'd say just get a single-processor machine. The duals aren't really much faster at all due to poor design and the fact that you won't see a great increase in performace in apps not written specifically to take advantage of dual-processors. Basically a dual-procesor machine will let you run more apps without bogging down your system...kinda like buying more RAM, you're buying an extra processor. Not speed, but less bogging of the speed the system already has.
__________________ If it's a penny for your thoughts and you always put your two cents worth in, who's getting all these extra pennies?! The Home Network: iceBook: 500mhz G3, 384MB RAM, Mac OS X.II.II B&W Tower: 450mhz G3, 512MB RAM, Mac OS X.II.II Rev. A iMac: 233mhz G3, 256MB RAM, Mac OS 9.2.2 Mac LC III+: 33mhz 68030, 12MB RAM, NetBSD 1.5.2 Stupid PC: 233mhz Athalon K-6, 80MB RAM, Rhapsody DR2 |
|
#3
November 1st, 2002, 01:49 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Avoid QuickSilvers, get the newer systems instead. Believe me, it'll be worth it, just the oppertunity to stuff in another CD-ROM. As for dual processors, they will come in handy if you plan to multi-task. |
|
#4
November 3rd, 2002, 06:41 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Good point. Get a QuickSilver. Better expandability.
__________________ If it's a penny for your thoughts and you always put your two cents worth in, who's getting all these extra pennies?! The Home Network: iceBook: 500mhz G3, 384MB RAM, Mac OS X.II.II B&W Tower: 450mhz G3, 512MB RAM, Mac OS X.II.II Rev. A iMac: 233mhz G3, 256MB RAM, Mac OS 9.2.2 Mac LC III+: 33mhz 68030, 12MB RAM, NetBSD 1.5.2 Stupid PC: 233mhz Athalon K-6, 80MB RAM, Rhapsody DR2 |
|
#5
November 4th, 2002, 04:45 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Watch latest MacWold comparative study
__________________ My current machine is an iMac Core 2 Duo 2.16 GHz 24" with MacOS X 10.5. My Apples are here. My oldest Apple was born in 1977. GS/P/>SS d-(++) s+: a+ C+(C) U* P L+ E--- W++ N- o+ K? w O-- M++ V PS+ PE+ Y- PGP t+ 5 X+ R tv-- b+++ DI++ D+ G e+++ h---- r+++ y? Time is not changing, I'm just traveling through time. |
|
#6
November 4th, 2002, 10:39 PM
| ||||
| ||||
| Depending on your application, if you are intending to run apps like Final Cut Pro 3, you will appreciate the Dual... but if you are not going to run processor intensive stuff, might as well not get the Dual and save some money. Personally, FCP3 on a Dualie flies.
__________________ "Who started the word Boing?" G4s - 1.7Ghz Sonnet-ed Quicksilver iMac Rev B /AluBook12 G4-867 Apple Airport Extreme Base Station and a Sony VAIO VGN-S380P and a Rav4J that charges my PB and iPod on the move! |
 |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| A bit of nostalgia: A Salute to Mac OS X | simX | Apple News, Rumors & Discussion | 31 | March 24th, 2005 07:45 AM |
| HP Photosmart 1315 and USB Print Sharing | zwheeloc | Mac Classic System & Software | 12 | February 6th, 2003 09:20 PM |
| apps list | Mac Osxtopus | Mac OS X System & Mac Software | 7 | May 29th, 2002 12:31 PM |
| Apple: Forget XP, try the Mac | tagliatelle | Bob's Place | 1 | November 25th, 2001 07:12 AM |
| Netscape 6.1 Profile Transfer from Mac OS 9.2.1 to Mac OS X | chemistry_geek | Apple News, Rumors & Discussion | 0 | October 12th, 2001 06:42 PM |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:09 PM.
