Pentium 4 v quad core advice please

cargo

I am looking to buy a new small pc for downstairs.
I have seen this pc http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/document?docname=c01576325&cc=uk&dlc=en&lc=en&jumpid=reg_R1002_UKEN and would like to know if this will run photoshop cs2 ok.

I have a pc at the moment which as this spec:

Board: Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. 8I915P Duo Pro
3.67 gigahertz Intel Pentium 4 3.4 "overclocked apparently"
1024 Megabytes Installed Memory

My current pc does everything ok, it is just that my daughter is on it all the time.
Can anybody tell me if the Hp computer in the link will run at a similiar speed to the pc I have at the moment.
I use the pc for genral surfing the net and photoshop.
Burning discs.

The quad core thing is confusing me as the Hp as 1.8 quad and my single core is bigger so I cannot work out if the new one is slower or not.

Please help.

[Deleted User]

It will run much, much faster than what you have got at the moment. Newer processors don't have to run at such high frequencies due to advancements in manufacturing processes, not to mention 2 cores is better than 1 core, and 4 cores is (in certain conditions) better than 2.

samhale

Quad core, hypothetically, means it is 1.8 * 4 , resulting in 7.2.
I'm not sure how true it actually is though.

[Deleted User]

samhale wrote: »

Quad core, hypothetically, means it is 1.8 * 4 , resulting in 7.2.
I'm not sure how true it actually is though.

That's not quite right.

The cores can only run at 1.8ghz, so the overall processing speed is still 1.8ghz, but it's more efficient to be able to split tasks to other cores

asininity

Thats not really true either. The architecture is more efficient so can do more at lower frequencies. Most software is not written to take advantage of multiple cores as of yet some games are mutli-thread. But when running two applications at the same time you'll see improvements as one can use one core the second the other core.

No current software/games can take advantage of four cores.

Tallymanjohn

Couple of small points - these slimline units are usually very difficult to upgrade should you want to add extra cards, though this one seems well specified. Also, this model is designed with the optical drive mounted vertically (you shouldnt lie them on their side because of the colling vents)and on the ones I've seen there are no tabs to keep the disks in place whilst you're loading them - if you do a lot of cd/dvd burning then this may well become irritating. Suggest you check out the model first - PCWorld stock a similar one.

DatabaseError

samhale wrote: »

Quad core, hypothetically, means it is 1.8 * 4 , resulting in 7.2.
I'm not sure how true it actually is though.

Ouch - you r edwud and I claim my £5

I gotz mah 12 Ghz intel PC here (4x3ghz) and aint nobody tellin' me no dif'rent

samhale

DatabaseError wrote: »

Ouch - you r edwud and I claim my £5

I gotz mah 12 Ghz intel PC here (4x3ghz) and aint nobody tellin' me no dif'rent

Excuse me?

DatabaseError

samhale wrote: »

Excuse me?

Edwud (edward1983) answered a comment on the yahoo answers board about 8 months ago, asserting that quad core CPUs are the equivalent of 4x clock speed, plus a bit extra due to optimisations...he also made some other 'techie' comments and answers, all wrong, and I seem to recall a list of qualifications to back up his mad claims.
There was a fairly long running thread on his exploits over at OCN, where a group was formed in his honour, and laws defined, "the laws of edwud". Very funny at the time (though probably not for edward)...I can't find the original posts..yahoo seem to have deleted them..probably too much traffic

samhale

Oh- the forum's private, so I couldn't see the post.
And I did say it wasn't completely true!

cargo

Tallymanjohn wrote: »

Couple of small points - these slimline units are usually very difficult to upgrade should you want to add extra cards, though this one seems well specified. Also, this model is designed with the optical drive mounted vertically (you shouldnt lie them on their side because of the colling vents)and on the ones I've seen there are no tabs to keep the disks in place whilst you're loading them - if you do a lot of cd/dvd burning then this may well become irritating. Suggest you check out the model first - PCWorld stock a similar one.

Apparently these can be layed on there side as "one side only"
Yes I agree you cannot upgrade so much but we will still have a tower system in the house.
I was just concerned that the machine would be to slow and not run photoshop which I like to play with now and again.
There still seems to be disagreement with the quad core replies but none says that the pc will be any slower than my old one.
The new one will be running on vista.