Laptop Help!

[Fobby]

The Centrino is dual core... not dual processor. It doesn't have 2 processor.

As for the laptop, the toshiba one is pretty chunky IMO. It really depends on what you are using it for. If it's always on the move.. i would invest a little more money and get the HP one. Like this one.

http://www.bestbuy.ca/catalog/prodde...om_Flyer_Pages

Lenovo also makes a really nice laptop, and the prices are comparable as well. If you are a Visa card holder, you can get 20% off certain laptops.
http://www.visaperks.ca/visaperks/of...TOKEN=90259674

Here's the Lenovo website if you are interested.
http://www.lenovo.com/ca/en/
http://www.lenovo.com/us/en/

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

You've lost me. This is what was said:



So that implies to me that you just went 1.6 x 2. You don't/can't add them together. It is better thought of as a highway that goes 100km/h, then you add another lane. The speed limit isn't 200, it can just handle more traffic (or programs) at 100km/h before bogging down.

Not true. Processors aren't measured in tearms of velocity. It's how many instructions per clock cycle you can get through.

If you have a road that can allow 100 cars through in one minute and you have 400 hundred cars, It would take four minutes to get through.

If you add another road for those cars to travel on at the same throughput as the first. Combined, they will each have to pass 200 cars at 100 cars a minute taking only 2 minutes to pass all 400 cars.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Not true. Processors aren't measured in tearms of velocity. It's how many instructions per clock cycle you can get through.

If you have a road that can allow 100 cars through in one minute and you have 400 hundred cars, It would take four minutes to get through.

If you add another road for those cars to travel on at the same throughput as the first. Combined, they will each have to pass 200 cars at 100 cars a minute taking only 2 minutes to pass all 400 cars.

I think we said the same thing, but "It's how many instructions per clock cycle you can get through" is incorrect. That is the most important thing, true, but I was only indicating wht you can't have 2 processors at the same rating, and just add the values together to say "My computer is twice as fast".
The numbers mean very little anyways. With Intel it was initially the cycles per second. But AMD came up with a better/cheaper architecture that would do a similar amount of work in fewer cycles. AMD saw they weren't going to win any marketing battles saying "Yeah, we're only 1.8Ghz, but we do the same work as our competitor's 2.5Ghz" so they came up with the marketing number 2500+

But if you are encoding a movie with a divx compressor, it won't matter a rats ass if you have one processor/core or two (I agree that this statement is dependant on if the app is SMP aware). If you try encoding 2 movies at teh same time, then the dual core will be a benefit (although it won't be twice as fast because of the memory that will be shared).

So, I think we were saying the same thing, but I kept my analogy simple (perhaps too simple).

[Flash Walken]

it seems pretty heavy for not being a widescreen laptop. Weight is def. something to consider.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I think we said the same thing, but "It's how many instructions per clock cycle you can get through" is incorrect. That is the most important thing, true, but I was only indicating wht you can't have 2 processors at the same rating, and just add the values together to say "My computer is twice as fast".
The numbers mean very little anyways. With Intel it was initially the cycles per second. But AMD came up with a better/cheaper architecture that would do a similar amount of work in fewer cycles. AMD saw they weren't going to win any marketing battles saying "Yeah, we're only 1.8Ghz, but we do the same work as our competitor's 2.5Ghz" so they came up with the marketing number 2500+

But if you are encoding a movie with a divx compressor, it won't matter a rats ass if you have one processor/core or two (I agree that this statement is dependant on if the app is SMP aware). If you try encoding 2 movies at teh same time, then the dual core will be a benefit (although it won't be twice as fast because of the memory that will be shared).

So, I think we were saying the same thing, but I kept my analogy simple (perhaps too simple).

Keeping in mind I live in a Windows free world, most of my apps are smp aware so I see both cores in action.

I know all about marketing mhz/Ghz. I'm a Mac user. G3/G4 vs P3 arguements a plenty in those days.

I have a G5 and Intel based mac right now and am loving the Intel (except it burns my nads if I put it on my lap). Love to see the graphs of both processors jump up when I render a video transition.

Back on topic, this looks like a great system for the price. I would assume the specs meant to say core duo.

[cheung31]

That laptop is the exact one that's caught my attention recently. The Centrino Duo, 1G ram, and that integrated video card is about as good as you can get for the 1000 dollar price range. I believe this one was on sale ($200 off).

[Hakan]

buy a used ibook 12 inch off craigslist or something if all you want is basic computing

4 lbs and six hours of battery life

that can't be beat

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

You've lost me. This is what was said:

So that implies to me that you just went 1.6 x 2. You don't/can't add them together. It is better thought of as a highway that goes 100km/h, then you add another lane. The speed limit isn't 200, it can just handle more traffic (or programs) at 100km/h before bogging down.

Right, so the laptop is rated at 3.2 Ghz, but probably will never run that fast.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Azure

Right, so the laptop is rated at 3.2 Ghz, but probably will never run that fast.

It is NOT rated 3.2. Did you read the Futureshop description?

Toshiba Intel Centrino Duo T2050 1.6GHz Laptop

It has 2 1.6 Ghz cores. If can never process a stream of information faster than 1.6 Ghz. If the program has the ability to utilize both cores at the same time (and most current Windows programs do NOT) then it will be able to split the work up into to 2 parts(threads) and work on them at the same time, and will get more work done in the same amount of time, but NEVER will it run a single threaded program any faster than 1.6Ghz.

For 90% of people in the Windows world, dual processors will not make the system any faster. Since dual processor chips have started to become common, new software probably will start taking advantage of the power. But multi-threaded programming can be tricky as hell, and you can't just install a program and have it run faster, not unless it was programmed to be able to take advantage of the exra cores.

[Azure]

If can never process a stream of information faster than 1.6 Ghz.

And I never said it will.

What confuses me is that you say above that it will never run faster then 1.6ghz. What is the point of the double processor, if you can't run the computer any faster anyways?

[Barnes]

This computer uses CORE DUO not Centrino at 1.6 Ghz.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Azure

And I never said it will.

What confuses me is that you say above that it will never run faster then 1.6ghz. What is the point of the double processor, if you can't run the computer any faster anyways?

It's a Windows and programming limitation.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by ken0042

The Dell Latitude laptops we get into work here have both touchpad and the eraser head.

It's the Latitude D6XX series that have them.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Barnes

This computer uses CORE DUO not Centrino at 1.6 Ghz.

Centrino is just Intel marketing speak for mobile Core Duo, Intel chipset and Intel wireless solution. Intel put a lot of money into marketing "Centrino" so they could sell more cpu chipsets & wireless chipsets.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Azure

And I never said it will.

What confuses me is that you say above that it will never run faster then 1.6ghz. What is the point of the double processor, if you can't run the computer any faster anyways?

What I understand they are saying is, If you are downloading a movie and it is taking up most of your computers resources, you can still surf the net or download another movie easily on the other processor. Can anyone correct me?

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

What I understand they are saying is, If you are downloading a movie and it is taking up most of your computers resources, you can still surf the net or download another movie easily on the other processor. Can anyone correct me?

The operating system should task that correctly. One of the programs I'm developing performs some hardcore tasks on the processors. We can use a multi-threaded approach and perform more operations faster by utilizing the dual core nature of the Intel Duo, but we also run some aspects that take up the full bandwidth of one "processor" and I can still surf the net, use other programs etc...

The Duo acts like two processors operating at 1.66GHz and to some programs I run on my laptop the system is considered to be a 3.2GHz machine. PRince of Persia for example thinks my laptop is running at 3.2GHz.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Centrino is just Intel marketing speak for mobile Core Duo, Intel chipset and Intel wireless solution. Intel put a lot of money into marketing "Centrino" so they could sell more cpu chipsets & wireless chipsets.

Gottcha.. very confusing.

Originally Posted by Fotze

What are you computer nerds jibbajabbering about now?

Just discussing how the speed of your muffler bearings affect the throughput of data nodes when they are cooled via hydropandemic gels and accelerated by electro kinetic froces proportinate to the J factor of the central processing station. Gosh. Try to follow.

[Shazam]

Don't forget to reverse the polarity of the neutron flow.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by kermitology

The operating system should task that correctly. One of the programs I'm developing performs some hardcore tasks on the processors. We can use a multi-threaded approach and perform more operations faster by utilizing the dual core nature of the Intel Duo, but we also run some aspects that take up the full bandwidth of one "processor" and I can still surf the net, use other programs etc...

The Duo acts like two processors operating at 1.66GHz and to some programs I run on my laptop the system is considered to be a 3.2GHz machine. PRince of Persia for example thinks my laptop is running at 3.2GHz.

You're talking about a dual processor with each one rated at 1.6 right?

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Azure

You're talking about a dual processor with each one rated at 1.6 right?

I'm talking about the Intel Core Duo, the processor in TOTF's laptop of inquiry. I've got basically the same processor in my laptop. It ACTS like a dual core machine, but it only has one true processor.