|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Posts: 976
|
Performance of the lower end
Not sure this is the right place for this thread.
I keep hearing (reading) about how everybody is buying much more computer power than they need/use. I have no idea how the lower end computers perform. How do the celeron and sempron based pre-built systems perform in regular (non-gaming, non-video editing) tasks? what celeron/sempron speed is decent for office applications (not for my grandma but also not for encoding)?
__________________
If you remind me of my dog... we'll probably get along. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Wx geek
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 6,638
|
Celeron/Semprons are excellent for basic tasks...
Not sure of any specific CPUs, just whatever is within budget.
__________________
"It is the way of man to make monsters and it is the nature of monsters to destroy their makers." |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member (9 bit)
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: pittsburgh pennsylvania
Posts: 329
|
most low end systems will be able to do everyday tasks very well
interenet office stuff like that getting something with any sempron or celeron should be fine |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Shiro Usagi
Premium Member
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Kaneohe, Hawaii
Posts: 34,002
|
For a perspective on how today's low end systems perform: I still use a PIII 600MHz with 512MB of RAM, Matrox G200 video card and WinXP Home for stuff like MS Office 2000, photo editing, burning CDs, surfing the web and it handles those things fine. This computer would have been brand new in late 1998 or early 1999. For everyday stuff it works fine. I'm not a gamer so I don't need a up to date powerhouse.
Today's low end system with a 2.0GHz processor (Celeron or Sempron) would have no problem hanlding everyday tasks. Cricket
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|