Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: discussion: September 2002:
[aclug-L] Re: Rating CPU's rant..; was Re: Re: Walmart $200 PC

[aclug-L] Re: Rating CPU's rant..; was Re: Re: Walmart $200 PC

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: <discussion@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [aclug-L] Re: Rating CPU's rant..; was Re: Re: Walmart $200 PC
From: "Koji Hayakawa" <sylf@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2002 21:41:29 -0500
Reply-to: discussion@xxxxxxxxx

> -----Original Message-----
> From: discussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:discussion-bounce@xxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Chris Owen
> Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2002 8:10 PM
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, Jonathan Hall wrote:
> > There's a lot more to "addons" when it comes to comparing engines,
> > just as when it comes to comparing CPUs.
> >
> > Just think of all the factors _within_ the engine... number of
> > cylinders, displacement, type of fuel, etc.
> >
> > A 200hp 6-cylinder gasoline engine will be much different in
> > performance than a 200hp 2-cylinder steam engine, for instance.
> >
> > Is this to say that the term "horsepower" is meaningless?  No.  Nor is
> > the term "Mhz."  It's just important to remember that neither term is
> > an all-encompasing measure of a thing's performance.
> I would say that Mhz was even less meaningful though.  "Mhz" is closer to
> "RPM" than it is to horsepower.  Just like 3,000 RPM in a VW isn't the
> same as 3,000 RPM in a Porse, 400 Mhz in my PPC CPU isn't even in the same
> neighborhood as a 400 Mhz Pentium.
> Chris

Of course, if Lindows on that box run as good as it should, then it may give
"impression" of it running faster than regular M$WindowsXP running on PIII
800MHz.  Much faster, depending on how crappy of setting you can put on
Windows and how good of setting you can put on Linux.  (Oh, wait...  isn't
that one of the big reason why we all love Linux so much!?)

-- This is the discussion@xxxxxxxxx list.  To unsubscribe,

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]