Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Have I got what I paid for ?


  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 zargo

zargo

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:02 AM

Posted 21 December 2004 - 05:40 AM

:thumbsup: Hi, Everybody, I recently bought a new computer - which was highly rated in a number of computer buyer magazines. A few programmes seemed slow compared to what I expected so I did a 'computer checkup' on AOL. This told me that the processor speed was 2.41 Ghz. This was a bit of a suprise as I thought I had bought 3.4 Ghz. I finally worked out how to check the 'system properties' and this shows the following : SoftThink Software Demo, Master SDK/Master CD, AMD Athlon 64 processor 3400+ 2.41 Ghz, 512 MB of RAM.
So, have I bought a 64 bit 3.4Ghz processor - or what ? Any advice on this would be greatly appreciated.

Edited by zargo, 21 December 2004 - 05:43 AM.


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 Mr Alpha

Mr Alpha

  • Members
  • 1,875 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Finland
  • Local time:09:02 AM

Posted 21 December 2004 - 06:58 AM

In

AMD Athlon 64 processor 3400+

the 3400 isn't Hz at all. It is rather AMDs own way of measuring how effective (as in how much work it can do in a certain timeframe) the processor is, which Hz doesn't tell you. But a AMD 64 Athlon 3400+ is about the same as a Intel processor running at 3.4 GHz. And yes, it is a fast processor.
"Anyone who cannot form a community with others, or who does not need to because he is self-sufficient [...] is either a beast or a god." Aristotle
Intel Core 2 Quad | XFX 780i SLI | 8GB Corsair | Gigabyte GeForce 8800GTX | Auzentech X-Fi Prelude| Logitech G15 | Logitech MX Revolution | LG Flatron L2000C | Logitech Z-5500 Digital

#3 LoLucky

LoLucky

  • Members
  • 331 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:02 AM

Posted 21 December 2004 - 09:43 AM

Mr Alpha is right but I just want to add a thought I had
First off I haven’t kept abreast of how the 64 Bit architecture works but I’m thinking if programs seem slow they might not be optimized for the 64 bit and still using 32/16 which would make seem sluggish compared to the Operating System which is probably the 64 bit version

But that’s just my thinking with my $.02

If anyone sees fault in what I said please let me know because I’m just trying out logic.

#4 zargo

zargo
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:02 AM

Posted 21 December 2004 - 12:31 PM

Thanks Mr Alpha. Thats a relief - I think. I'm a total novice, as you've probably guessed. But if logic applies to computers, LoLucky's would help explain. Suppose I had better get some 64 bit software to check it out. Greatly appreciate the advice from both of you.

#5 LoLucky

LoLucky

  • Members
  • 331 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:02 AM

Posted 21 December 2004 - 12:40 PM

Not a Problem but like i said I'm not sure

Oh and i forgot

:thumbsup: to BC!

#6 jgweed

jgweed

  • Staff Emeritus
  • 28,473 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Il.
  • Local time:01:02 AM

Posted 21 December 2004 - 01:30 PM

There isn't much out there yet that really takes advantage of the 64 functionality. If your computer seems "slow" the cause may be in your running too many applications in the background---start up items---or malware. Your processor should allow most applications to run quite fast....
Regards,
John
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one should be silent.

#7 Grinler

Grinler

    Lawrence Abrams


  • Admin
  • 43,504 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA
  • Local time:02:02 AM

Posted 21 December 2004 - 01:31 PM

I did read an article today that Microsoft will soon be releasing a Windows XP 64 bit version, so it may not be a waste.

#8 zargo

zargo
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:02 AM

Posted 22 December 2004 - 03:41 AM

After years of internet connection, this is the very first time I have joined a discussion/forum site. I've wasted too much time being a soloist !
This is all a great help and I'm impressed that people are willing to spend time helping others. Thanks again - and have a great Christmas, or if not, a great weekend or two.

#9 LoLucky

LoLucky

  • Members
  • 331 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:02 AM

Posted 22 December 2004 - 10:27 AM

jgweed could be onto something. since allot of PC builders add all kinds of startup junk. But with that speed and that memory wouldn't it have to be like 15 Programs running to make it noticeable? 5 if your into computer Generated art (Photoshop, Bryce, Pinnacle)
Did some research on this last night and there is a number of people saying things seem "Slow". Some same its the Mobo, some say its the Programs, some say its the User "I feel its Slow so it is Slow i'm right your wrong". <- Kinda like that

Grinler i thought Microsoft already had a 64 Bit OS?
My mistake its only out in Beta

Edited by LoLucky, 22 December 2004 - 10:28 AM.


#10 JEservices

JEservices

    helping hand


  • Members
  • 1,700 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Texas
  • Local time:12:02 AM

Posted 22 December 2004 - 03:05 PM

Here is yet another view on it. This is just an example~brand names may have been changed to protect the innocent :thumbsup:

Some processors has instruction sets embedded on the chip. Athlon may have some that AMD does not. When Athlon advertises that it works best with Windows XP, then that means that the instruction sets on the chip work in conjuction with XP better. It could be as simple as less instructions that XP has to find on the hard drive, or as complex as XP allowing the chip to do on-the-fly encryption. How this relates to processor speed and in some cases an "emulated" speed is because Athlon uses a lessor processor chip but with extras. According to Athlon, it will post an emulated speed so that it has "fair" numbers to compare another manufacturer with.
We are all curious like a cat. We wonder, we ask, we learn.
Please post back when a suggestion works, so that others may learn.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users