Laptop Question:

[Sleeping in EQ]

Will a faster processor (2.2 or 2.4 instead of 2.0) run any better if I still have the same amount of ram (2 gig)?

I'm looking at laptops, and while a 2.4 processor is tempting (the base is a 2 gig), if I go with 4 gigs of RAM (my choices being 2 and 4 gigs), only 3 gigs will be used unless I go with a 64 bit on my OS and then everything gets pricey.

There ends up being almost $700 worth of difference between my choices (as I've narrowed them down--I'm intending to buy a customized HP dv6500t. I've done some research and it will meet my needs nicely).

In short, is it worth it to spend $75 (2.2) or $125 (2.4) for a faster processor if I don't go for the whole enchilada with 64 bit OS and twice as much RAM? (The faster processors also have 4MB L2 caches instead of the 2 gig's 2 MB L2 cache)

How's that for amateur tech babble?

[MikeWaters]

don't get a 64 bit OS.

I have one.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

don't get a 64 bit OS.

I have one.

That's nice and straightforward!

[MikeWaters]

i have a dual xenon with 4 gig RAM with 2 15k SCSI drives in RAID 0.

[hyrum]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

Will a faster processor (2.2 or 2.4 instead of 2.0) run any better if I still have the same amount of ram (2 gig)?

I'm looking at laptops, and while a 2.4 processor is tempting (the base is a 2 gig), if I go with 4 gigs of RAM (my choices being 2 and 4 gigs), only 3 gigs will be used unless I go with a 64 bit on my OS and then everything gets pricey.

There ends up being almost $700 worth of difference between my choices (as I've narrowed them down--I'm intending to buy a customized HP dv6500t. I've done some research and it will meet my needs nicely).

In short, is it worth it to spend $75 (2.2) or $125 (2.4) for a faster processor if I don't go for the whole enchilada with 64 bit OS and twice as much RAM? (The faster processors also have 4MB L2 caches instead of the 2 gig's 2 MB L2 cache)

How's that for amateur tech babble?

You don't say what you're planning to do with it. For general personal use, I put money in the RAM before a slightly faster processor. Nowadays, applications, including web browsers tend to use a lot of memory. That said $75 bucks is not a lot for a bit of upgrade. Personally, I would compromise and go with the 2.2. If you go with 2 GB RAM is it configured in such a way you can upgrade to 3 or 4 GB later? Assume prices will fall with RAM, and 3rd party SIMMS are often cheaper.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

don't get a 64 bit OS.

I have one.

Amen to that. Very few applications have been ported to run in native 64-bit mode. And it will be a long time before it happens. It is not easy (speaking from experience here).

And for a guy like you in the soft sciences (no offense), why would you need 64-bit computing anyway?

[FMCoug]

Go with 4GB of RAM and whichever processor gets you to the 4MB L2 the cheapest.

[MikeWaters]

send user Fish a PM. He is expert.

http://cougarguard.com/forum/member.php?u=4

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

send user Fish a PM. He is expert.

http://cougarguard.com/forum/member.php?u=4

Thanks. I'll do that.

[non sequitur]

It completely depends on what you're using your laptop for. Getting more RAM won't help you unless you're currently exhausting the RAM you have. Personally, I'd go with 2GB of RAM and go with a dual-core processor. If you find you find you're using all that memory and are swapping out, then look into adding more memory.