Is the mHz myth finally working?

satchmosatchmo
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Is it just me or have i been hearing more lately from the media that mHz isn't the most important issue in a computer.



Perhaps it's also to do with AMD and the success of Apple Stores, but is this megahertz myth starting to get through to people?



Are people starting to realize that a computer is more than just raw power, but a complete user experience?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 8
    mcqmcq Posts: 1,543member
    Don't know if you've seen this article, but it sounds like AMD is trying to make up another way to "accurately" gauge a PC's power.



    <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1001-954783.html"; target="_blank">http://news.com.com/2100-1001-954783.html</a>;



    Also, I think computers are beginning to get to a point where they're fast enough for just about anything the average consumer wants to do... probably still a year or so from being comfortably in that range. Once it occurs, then it should become a matter of ease of use rather than speed. Then again, we always say that the latest batch is powerful enough for anything, so maybe I'm wrong. Blah.
  • Reply 2 of 8
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    actually, i think chips just got so damn fast that the speed isn't really an issue anymore.



    do you word process any faster on a 2.4Ghz machine than a 1.4Ghz machine? no, not really.



    toss onto that AMD's new naming scheme, which bases the model number on how fast it is compared to a P4, not the actual Mhz.



    i think for the vast majority of people the speed threshold has been reached.



    at that point you're more concerned with how things work together than how fast the processor is.
  • Reply 3 of 8
    brianmacosbrianmacos Posts: 548member
    I would say if you want the overall best Consumer lvl computer Apple takes it in every catagory, they have proven that you don't need a 2.6ghz machine to do a lot of this stuff. The wintel side yeah the hardware is faster but when it comes down to it, your not going to save yourself all that much time. I had my 1ghz p3 laptop before this 700mhz g3 iBook and I don't notice any speed difference, it feels the same to me. Photoshop 7 seems faster and the software is much better. I think it will come down to the OS and software more than mhz and ghz, we have already seen that happen big time on the Mac side. Many people will say the only reason is because Motorola is having problems making faster processors and even though that is probably the main reason Apple is doing a good job of making every thing work fast and reliably.
  • Reply 4 of 8
    xmogerxmoger Posts: 242member
    Speed is okay for consumers... for now. New features are always over the horizon. For instance, I bet nobody's computer here can manage all incoming and outgoing media for the household. I bet you can't access any information or program on your home machine from your cell, pda, laptop, airport kiosk, etc. I bet your computer isn't capable of much anything else while your son is playing a video game on it.



    AMD's new naming scheme is based on theoretical performance of a thunderbird at the same clockspeed. It wouldn't make sense to try and compare to the p4. Theres a willamette, northwood, and xeon core. Along with rambus or sdram or DDR, and different fsb speeds all affect a p4's speed.
  • Reply 5 of 8
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    [quote]Originally posted by MCQ:

    <strong>Don't know if you've seen this article, but it sounds like AMD is trying to make up another way to "accurately" gauge a PC's power.



    <a href="http://news.com.com/2100-1001-954783.html"; target="_blank">http://news.com.com/2100-1001-954783.html</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;



    That's a great article. I wouldn't be surprised if Intel doesn't join this party since it has the most to lose at this point.



    I really hope this trend catches on. The same problem exists in the automotive industry where many focus on horsepower. But that's slowly changing too.



    With the iApps and integrated approach, I can't help but think Apple's headed for a winfall when the economy turns around. I even dream of Apple soon having a market share of 20%.
  • Reply 6 of 8
    mcqmcq Posts: 1,543member
    Too bad I don't think there's a way to accurately reflect "overall ease of use" in one benchmark number
  • Reply 7 of 8
    blablablabla Posts: 185member
    [quote]Originally posted by alcimedes:

    <strong>



    i think for the vast majority of people the speed threshold has been reached.

    </strong><hr></blockquote>





    So, I got a good long-term memory. I remember reading reviews of the 6500-300 Mhz. Wasnt it macworld or something who claimed "This thing is so fast, we really dont need symmetric multitasking", noting the fact that you almost never waited more than a few seconds to switch app <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />



    I remember people claiming the G3-350 is fast enough for just about anything. But I got news: Its just dog slow now and totally useless now. Try running OS X on such a thing...



    On the other hand, the average lifespan of a (wintel) computer is probably increasing, because even a 450Mhz P3 is still fast enough.
  • Reply 8 of 8
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Chip speed will always matter with regard to MHz vs chips in the same family. Even though almost every other component (I/O) is lagging behind the CPU severely, many apps are I/O agnostic.
Sign In or Register to comment.