On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 19:53 +0000, Rob Beard wrote: > Steve Cook wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 17:01 +0000, Rob Beard wrote: > > > >> ...you should really aim for a dual core CPU nowadays > >> > > Why? > > > > Steve > > > > Well the cost difference is so small now and with software demanding > more power, why not get one now and not have to upgrade again. Plus it > does make a considerable difference if you're hammering the machine* > > You can even get a dual core Celeron now (based on the Core 2 but with a > lot smaller cache) for about £25 to £30. Plus there's the advantage > that the board may take a quad core CPU. Or if you prefer AMD, you can > get a dual core Athlon X2 quite cheap, and if you go for an AM2+ > motherboard there's the option there to upgrade to triple or quad cores > (just don't do what I do and leave it running with the fan not working > by accident - it didn't like it). > > Rob > > * Unless you're running HD video, then it only uses single core, then > you can't get a quick enough CPU! > > I most admit they are getting quite cheap, to the point where it's very hard not be able to justify them.
steve -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.kubuntu.org/UKTeam/
