[Elecraft] OT: Attn CPU gurus - one more thing

Dave Andrus dave at daveandrus.com
Sat Feb 23 19:20:10 EST 2008 

Oops, one more thing I should add.  You didn't mention anything about  
any other parameters, such as disk speeds or types, or the amount of  
memory you'd buy, so I'll just make a quick comment about them.

If you're running Windows, I'd recommend 2 GB of RAM as a minimum.  4  
GB isn't considered outrageous if you're going to run Vista.  I know  
that sounds crazy if you haven't run Windows XP or Vista, but believe  
me, the amount of RAM you have in your system can make a bigger  
difference than a doubling of clock speed.  It's waaay different than  
the old DOS-based days.  Windows Vista starts to get really sluggish  
on 512 MB or less.  XP will run OK-ish on 256 MB or 512 MB, but it  
also will run faster with more RAM.

Disks:  These days, with disk capacities having grown by leaps and  
bounds, you do not save hardly any cash by specifying "only" an 80  
gigabyte disk compared to, say, a 250 GB disk.  Some of the bigger  
disks will also run faster than the smaller disks due to increased  
caches and internal geometries.  Many base-model systems now come  
standard with a 200 GB or larger disk.  500 GB disks are getting close  
to the "sweet spot" price-wise.  1 terabyte drives are very common.   
One of the new products we just designed at Apple includes a 1 TB  
drive, just for backups!

73,

Dave K7DAA
http://www.k7daa.com

On Feb 23, 2008, at 4:02 PM, Dave Andrus wrote:

> I'd pretty much agree.  Keep in mind, though, that a dual-core or  
> quad-core CPU, whether it's Intel or AMD, is not often going to help  
> you with much of the software out there that is not specifically  
> written to take advantage of both cores.
>
> That's not to say that I wouldn't buy one--in fact, I'd definitely  
> recommend any dual-core CPU over a Pentium D or single-core AMD if  
> you're trying to buy something that will serve your general needs  
> for the foreseeable future.  If you're trying to stay on the cheap  
> side, any of those you mentioned will run PSK31 or the other sound  
> card-based programs for ham communications, dual-core or not.
>
> If any thing, I'd try to make sure that the box I buy has a decent  
> "name brand" sound card in it, like a Sound Blaster Audigy or  
> similar card, especially one that advertises more capability than a  
> basic 16-bit A/D converter, which is what most Windows-type sound  
> cards use.  They'll all work fine, but a 20-bit card will give you  
> some edge if you get into SDR (software-defined radio) designs or  
> maybe next year's newest sound-card based ham decoders.
>
> As far as front-side bus goes, the higher speeds, of course, will  
> give you better performance.  The downside is that you will pay more  
> for the faster memory sticks that are required.  Generally, you  
> don't need the fastest front-side bus unless you're using software  
> that really needs it, and it doesn't sound like you are.
>
> If I were you, I'd probably opt for a mid-range 2+ GHz Intel Core 2  
> Duo-based box that advertised its quietness.  I hate fan noise in  
> the shack, and the older CPU's often run hotter than some of the  
> newer dual-core stuff, requiring faster, noisier fans.
>
> I'm sure that the advice to use a 3 GHz processor was assuming the  
> "old" single-core technology.  Even though a dual-core CPU running  
> at 2 GHz won't run twice as fast as a single-core, you will  
> definitely see a benefit compared to the "faster" single CPU.  Some  
> of the operating system overhead (presumably Windows in your case)  
> can be handled more efficiently by the dual-core structure, giving  
> the appearance of a faster overall CPU "experience" to whatever  
> program you're running.
>
> Generally, I'd stay away from anything called "Celeron" these days.   
> In earlier times it was Intel's code word for "cheapest chip with  
> less capabilities than the others."  Even if the clock speed is  
> higher.
>
> Bottom line: 2 cores at 2.0 GHz will generally run as fast or faster  
> than a 3.0 GHz Pentium D with less heat.  A quad core box is great  
> if you want to drop the money on it, but it won't be twice as fast  
> as a dual-core unless you're running very specific software or an OS  
> that can take advantage of it (like Mac OS X).  For front-side bus  
> speed, go with whatever your pocketbook allows.  Faster is always  
> better.  And I'd generally recommend Intel over AMD, but that's a  
> personal preference only.
>
> Hope this helps a bit.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave K7DAA
> http://www.k7daa.com
>
>
> On Feb 23, 2008, at 2:30 PM, Hisashi T Fujinaka wrote:
>
>> I work for one of the companies in question, so it's hard for me to  
>> be
>> completely objective.
>>
>> CPU frequency isn't the only thing because there are multiple  
>> internal
>> clocks on the CPUs and one big number isn't going to tell you
>> everything about how fast things are running internally. The  
>> Pentium D's
>> with higher clock rates aren't as fast as the Core 2's with lower  
>> clock
>> rates in every case I've benchmarked (keep in mind I have only a very
>> minimal set of benchmarks to go on here).
>>
>> You should also look at power consumpution (the fans are going to  
>> drive
>> you nuts sometimes). I have noticed that the Core 2 processors are
>> faster but seem to run the fans a lot less than the Pentium Ds.
>>
>> Multi-core processors are going to do well fo you if you need to do
>> multiple processor-intensive things at once.  I'm not sure how much
>> processor it requires to do PSK31 while also running all the Vista
>> nonsense in the background; someone else will have to vouch for that.
>>
>> So by now you can probably tell which company I work for. My basic
>> suggestion is to go with a Core 2 system over a Pentium D system  
>> because
>> there was a significant architecture change and it helps the  
>> computers
>> run cooler and quieter. And that's just me talking, not the company.
>>
>> Oh, and it's usually true nowadays that the computers are fast  
>> enough to
>> do whatever you need, unless you're processing video in the  
>> background
>> while you're trying to run the rig.
>>
>> On Sat, 23 Feb 2008, Robert Tellefsen wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Doug
>>> You've got some real legitimate questions that a
>>> lot of us "non-gurus" would like to hear the answers
>>> to.  If you get a lot of your replies direct, could you
>>> summarize them in a post to us "masses"?
>>> Thanks and 73
>>> Bob N6WG
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL" <dougzzz at gmail.com>
>>> To: <elecraft at mailman.qth.net>
>>> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 3:49 AM
>>> Subject: [Elecraft] OT: Attn CPU gurus - help me
>>>
>>>
>>>> I want to hook my K3's up to the latest skimmer software along with
>>>> computer control of the rig, etc. and of course via the LP-Pan when
>>> it
>>>> is available (soon).
>>>>
>>>> My query is about the computer processor and associated elements.
>>>>
>>>> Currently, I am reading that the way to go for skimmer (192kc
>>>> bandwidth - not that I need that), is to use a machine with a 3G
>>>> processor.
>>>>
>>>> But that seems to only account for one element of the system
>>> "rating."
>>>>
>>>> My current ham radio computer is a fossil on which I run DOS stuff.
>>>> But my "home" computer (this one) is a Pentium 4, 3.0 Gig.  Sounds
>>>> right, but......
>>>>
>>>> When I look at the new machines (which seem relatively cheap for
>>> what
>>>> you get), I see:
>>>>
>>>> Core 2 Quad Q6600
>>>> Core 2 Duo
>>>> Pentiuim Dual Core
>>>> Celeron
>>>> Athlon 64
>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Then I see speeds for each of the above, NONE of which goes up to
>>> 3.0
>>>> gig.  Just because my current processor has the "3.0 gig label," I
>>> am
>>>> assuming that these newer releases are even faster, despite the
>>> lower
>>>> clock rate.
>>>>
>>>> For the app's that I'm looking at, DOES CLOCK RATE RULE or does  
>>>> this
>>>> other stuff count too?
>>>>
>>>> I also see big variables on the L2 Cache: 2MB, 4MB, 8MB -  
>>>> relatively
>>>> speaking, how important are these compared to the other factors?
>>>>
>>>> And then there is the Front Side Bus speed:  800, 1333.  Weird that
>>>> the Core 2 Quad (which sounds like "the best" to me) has a FSB of
>>> 1066
>>>> (not the fastest).
>>>>
>>>> And finally, there is the clock speed, which for most of the above
>>> is
>>>> 2.2, 2.33, 2.66 gig (again, not reaching 3.0).
>>>>
>>>> How do I put all this together?  Again, for MY apps, which figure  
>>>> of
>>>> merit is most important?  Or do I just multiply them all together?
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> Reminder:  "CPU gurus" only need respond.  I prefer direct replies,
>>>> but I assume that this topic might be of wide interest to the
>>> Elecraft
>>>> group...YOUR CHOICE if you respond to the list or just to me.
>>>>
>>>> THANKS A TON!
>>>>
>>>> de Doug KR2Q
>>>> "Expert on DRGs, not CPUs"
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diagnosis-related_group  <this page is
>>>> rather outdated>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>>> Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
>>>> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
>>>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>>
>>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
>>>> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
>>> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
>>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>>
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
>>> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Hisashi T Fujinaka - htodd at twofifty.com
>> BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 =  
>> latte
>> _______________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
>> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
>> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
>> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Post to: Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
> Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
> Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

More information about the Elecraft mailing list