The Processor

What the heck is a...?
Also known as the CPU or "central processing unit", the processor is the brain of the computer. It's basically a little machine that processes instructions (the ones and zeros telling your computer what to do in order to bring up Microsoft Word or play a game) at a certain speed. This speed is measured in "cycles per second", or Hertz - which is the number of instructions the computer can process every second.

Latin prefixes, such as "kilo", "mega" and "giga" are used in front of terms like "hertz" to make it easier to describe extremely large numbers. Respectively, "kilo" means 1,000, "mega" means 1 million and "giga" means 1 billion (or 1,000 million). Modern processors can execute billions of instructions per second, so you will typically see terms like 3GHz associated with your computer's CPU. This means that this particular processor runs at a speed of 3GHz, abbreviation for 3 giga-hertz - or, in other words, a machine that can process 3 billion (3,000,000,000) instructions per second.

Since hertz is a measure of speed, it's true that the higher the number, the faster the processor - with a few caveats which complicate things, such as "hyper-threading" and the number of "cores", which we'll discuss later. However, buying a faster processor doesn't necessarily mean you'll have a faster computer. It is almost never true (in the modern PC designed for the average user) that the processor speed is the limiting factor. Almost always, it's better to focus on other parts of the computer to beef up your machine's speed.

Exponential Cost Curve
Combine this with the fact that, over certain thresholds, even small incremental changes in processor speed will cost you mucho denaro, and we come to the conclusion that the processor isn't where you want to invest. As long as a CPU runs in the 2-3 GHz range, it'll be just fine for the average user.

This concept of spending more and more for each incremental gain (hence the exponential curve) will apply to every hardware component we talk about. The 80-20 rule (at some point, enough is enough) definitely applies.

Modern Technology Curveballs
Hyper-threading? Multiple cores? What were those fancy terms? Here's the deal...

Let's start with the cores first. In the early 21^st century, processors have become so fast and so small (speed is actually a inverse factor of their size, believe it or not - the smaller they are, the faster they can move) that we're reaching the limits of what this fundamental design can offer us. "Limits", as in, what's even theoretically possible. You just can't make a processor go much faster than 3.5GHz using the current technology. So, Intel and others started creating processors with multiple "cores". This means that they started putting multiple processors into the same chip as the brain of your PC. Each "core" is a CPU unto itself, with a little traffic cop that sits in front of the set of cores directing traffic ("I'll have core 1 handing this batch of instructions while core 2 is handling this other batch"). This is how we can get faster and faster machines even though we're reaching physical limits on the speed of a single processor. Just throw in multiple processors that work in parallel.

So, an Intel "Core 2 Duo" processor (two cores) running at 1.8GHz will actually be faster than a single Pentium 4 (or other single core processor) running at 3GHz ... because 2x1.8 is better than 1x3, right?

Does that mean you should get a Core 2 Duo (or the AMD equivalent)? For the average user? It's not necessary for the average user. But the thing is that these spiffy new high-tech dual-core jobbers are actually not that much more expensive than their single-core predecessors. At the moment, you'll pay no more than $200 more to get one. So, you can get a "nice" single-core machine (from Dell or other credible manufacturer - see more on this later) for around $700, and a nice dual-core for $900. Yes, that's a 28% jump, but $900 is not a very expensive PC. So, your call, Mr. Average User. But you don't NEED the dual core processor.

What about hyper-threading? This was the precursor to multiple cores. It's even more geeky, though, so... In a complicated way that I won't go into, a processor that's hyper-threaded is faster than a processor that isn't. And it's relatively cheap, now that it's widespread. So, if you're faced with a choice of hyper-threading vs. no hyper-threading, go with "yes". But this only applies to single-core processors. As I said, essentially "dual core" was the upgrade to "hyper-threaded".

So, there's your cheat sheet...

Front Side Bus
I need to introduce one more term before we get to my recommendation. It's called the "front side bus", typically abbreviated FSB. This is the mechanism your computer's processor uses to pull information out of memory (NOT the disk drive; we'll talk about the difference shortly). FSB speeds range from 200 MHz and up (remember that hertz is "cycles-per-second"; the speed of the FSB is measured in how many millions of instructions it can fetch from memory per second, hence "mega-hertz"), but modern PC's are typically sold with 533, 800 and 1000 MHz FSB speeds. As with everything, you can get the FSB almost as fast as you want, but you'll pay a real premium for each jump in speed. Remember the exponential cost curve we discussed? I recommend the 800 MHz range for the average user. Definitely don't go below 533.

Brand
What about the brand? Well, with a lot of things in life, brand doesn't matter. You just get the cheapest one. In general, with computers, this rule does not apply. Brand DOES matter. Processors, however, are kindof an exception. There are really only two kinds out there when it comes to the PC: Intel and AMD. Lots of folks get religiously fanatical about brand loyalty to one or the other, and you can find evidence of that fact all over the web. But I'm here to tell you that they'll both get the job done. This is not where the average user should put his/her focus in buying a computer.

Upgradeability
Last point here... Unlike the good-ole' days, the modern processor can almost never be upgraded. What you get is what you'll have forever. Manufacturers are simply releasing totally new technologies too quickly. The chances are that it'll be cheaper and easier to buy a whole new computer in a few years rather than upgrade the processor. This is just an FYI, though. I still wouldn't recommend breaking the bank to get the absolute fastest processor you can. Get the next one down - 3 GHz instead of 3.2 GHz, for example. Save yourself the cash; I promise you won't notice the difference.

Let's cut to the chase...
So, to sum it up... I recommend a 3 GHz Intel Pentium 4 single-core, hyper-threaded processor.

Introduction
Overview

The Parts of the Modern PC:
Processors | Hard Drives | Memory | Other Hardware | Software

Smart Buyers Will Also Consider:
Manufacturer (Where to Buy) | Service Plans and Warranties | Prices (What to Pay)

Conclusion:
The Final Word

Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next »