On Mon, Dec 17, 2007 at 09:13:28AM +0000, Kirrus wrote: > The technical stuff behind multi-core processors mean that more processors are only really useful if you're going to be running a number of cpu-intensive tasks on your computer simultaneously (as each one will use just one CPU core, leaving the others free to be used elsewhere).
Not just intensive tasks, anything where you are doing multiple things at the same time, which can happen with something as simple as viewing a java applet in a web browser. > > >From what you've said, you'd probably find a dual-core sufficient, which > >would save you some money. > > Personally, I tend to prefer AMD processors to intel, if just 'cos intel is a big evil corporation, who's cpu's tend to get matched with ATI graphics chips (when they're done on-board), and ATI graphics chips are aweful for linux drivers. :( Not sure you can say Intel is evil. They are an awful lot better (with respect to open sourcing code/drivers) than a number of other vendors such as NVidia and ATI. Of the Intel machines I have, two have NVidia GPUs and five have Intel GPUs. None have ATI. Cheers, Al. -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.kubuntu.org/UKTeam/
