3d studio max,
my daily day with my computer which includes:
several IE6.0 windows opened AND TV(i have the AIW radeon) AND AIM AND anti virus checker AND burning cd's
AND running various apps from office 2000 and a programming language (pick on of these: prolog, ml, scheme, erlang, visual C++) at a given time. PLus command prompt to telnet to check the news groups from UB.
it gets a bit slow there.
Some games i run could use a faster processor like diablo 2. we all know how CPU hungry that game is. 750 duron and runs slow when there are a lot of things goin on.
so i recently bought a athlon XP 1600+ (1.4ghz) i'm sure that will relieve the bottleneck for the most part of what i do.
and most of the people who are hobbiest that are on here use the computer either close to how i use it or more intense then that. (servers, databases, video captureing and editing)
see not all of us use our computer to run word and use AOL
Neither 3d studio max nor photoshop need 1ghz cpu's. They are just able to take advantage of whatever you have. A modest setup with enough ram would run those programs fine. It's not so much wether a program needs a 1ghz cpu because there are none that really do, it's the question of 'can the program take advantage of my 1 ghz cpu' and most large professional programs and newer games can. Also music production or video editing needs a good system.
<i>Run along now little amd zealot, you're not wanted here...</i><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Intel_inside on 12/02/01 12:32 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
if you want to say is there any ONE program running at a given time, then ya a 200 mhz would do the job. BUT that isn't realistic as we arn't running DOS anymore. windows alone has several processes running before you even start up a program.
so the assumption of the total amount of processes that would need the > 1ghz cpu as thats more realistic, not one program.
NO one runs only one program. There is not one person in the entire computer world that runs only one program at a given time.
considering windows itself is a system program. unless you're still running DOS.
I need a fast CPU for the 3D RTS games I like to play: "BattleZone II", "Earth 2150", "The Moon Project", and "World War III: Black Gold" to name a few. These are all SSE optimized.
New machine I'm building: MSI K7N420 Pro nForce 420 with integrated NIC, Audio, and Graphics; Athlon XP 1800+; 2x Crucial 256MB CL2.5 DDR PC2100; Antec PP403X 400W PSU; Plextor 24/10/40A CD-RW; IBM Deskstar 60GB 7200RPM ATA/100 hard drive; and In-Win Q500 Full Tower Case (replacing the 300W PSU). Graphics will be upgraded later (probably to a Gainward GF3 for color coordination with my MB :smile: ). Should be a solid performer.
no it's not the same. i know plenty of people that are chuggin along on a 733 or dual (sub 1ghz) pIII setups. of course they would get better rendering times and truer previews. also windows is loaded into ram, i could've sworn that windows doesn't eat up 50% of the cpu usage at all times, so i don't understand why that's even a point. when did IE become such a bandwidth hog? i don't know i just see a lot of people lately, that think they need fastest cpu out or even a dual cpu setup cause they want to have an IE window open and say ms word. cracks me up.
December 2, 2001 6:56:23 PM
I see your point.. and agree sort off.. I friend of mine was compaining his P2-400 was becomming too slow. When I asked what he did, he said basic office stuff, email, internet. That was it. I went over, defragged his harddisk and that was it. No need for >1Ghz whatsoever.
On the other hand, if you're into gaming, it does help you know. Especially with games like Return to Castle Wolfentstein. Photoshop will run just fine a P2/P3 style computer. Even a lowly celeron with enough ram will do nicely if its just editing screen size photo's. When working on 100+Mb files, its another story.
= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =