What type of processor do you have?

[aridzone]

AMD Phenom 8400 Triple Core Processor

[RTK]

I have Q4 in my main box and my back-up (spare) one. I also have a later generation P4 in the cupboard...

For Xara stuff (the silly and simple things I draw) -- the "difference" is negliable. I can however see the difference in PS and Apophysis. At the time of purchase -- the options added up to a $50 difference (or so) compared to a dual-core. Graphics cards was the main difference at the time. As much I used to enjoy 'shooters' I just don't have the time anymore, so I went with perceived 'best bang for the buck' / 'processing' (for me).

It was a good choice I think. There is always the Nintendo Wii when my daughters want to dance my arse off.

Risto

[raynerj1]

I have at least 10 6502's does that count as multicore? It'll still run circles around most systems.

[handrawn]

is that the 6502 of the same era as Z80/1 and motorola 6800 John? - because if so I have great difficulty understanding where you are coming from on this one...

[RTK]

I have at least 10 6502's does that count as multicore?.

No, unless you have them on the same die, and I have never heard about one of those using 6502s. You can learn more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-core

It'll still run circles around most systems.

Are you sure you are not talking about cockroaches?

Sure the 6502's were cheap (and cute) and made computing fun/available to most people. Still... the 6502 compared to today's processors, it's like comparing the front wheel of a T-Ford to a Ferrari. Put it in a box and hang on a graphics cards and they are not even from the same galaxy.

What do you mean, quote: "It'll still run circles around most systems."?

Curious... What do you use your ten 6502s for? You play one of the most fun games ever: M.U.L.E? Oh, wait... that was for the 6510.

Risto

[RTK]

I stand corrected... Thanks (A.M.) Wow! So, I wasn't the only one here that played M.U.L.E with my friends. It was actually originally written for the Atari 400/800 (6502). Ported later.

Here's the high-end part of the graphics of M.U.L.E No matter the graphics, the game play kicked butt. It was sooo cool and endless fun.

Risto

[raynerj1]

I never said the graphics where fantastic. For what it was designed to do, it was an awesome processor.

One thing it got right was booting... MS never did learn how to do that right.
How about viruses? Only MS has a large worry with that.

[RTK]

For what it was designed to do, it was an awesome processor.

In perspective, sure, the 6502 was great in the way it changed computing. I guess in that way it was "awesome". However, "it runs no circles" around any contemporary processors or systems. The technology was rather benign back then...

How about viruses?.

They weren't "invented" yet. The first one was Elk Cloner, written for Apple II (6502) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elk_Cloner Still, any virus would have to be rather simple as the systems were so rudiementary. I never saw one until the C64 (6510).

Sorry for the slight off-topicness of the last couple of posts.

Risto

[geminiguy]

I have
1- P3 @ 750 Mhz in an old IBM T21 laptop
1- P4 @ 1.5 Ghz in an old IBM tower
1- P4 @ 2.50 Ghz in a Compaq tower with hyper-threading
1- AMD 64 @2.40 Ghz in an HP tower (had I known 64 bit software was going to take so long to come to market I would never have bought it

I also have an older HP which is hooked up to my hampster's running wheel.... now that really runs circles.. If I want higher output, I tape a picture of a cat on the side of the cage

[woolyloach]

I just have a wheezy 3.0Ghz P4 in my main system. My second computer (Linux box) is a 2.8Ghz P4 with 1GB. For what I do (mainly writing with some light illustration) it's more than fast enough.