Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 21 Apr 2012 16:12:04 +0200
From:      Christian Baer <christian.baer@uni-dortmund.de>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: recommendation(s) for new computer
Message-ID:  <jmuf7k$sct$1@dough.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <CA+tpaK2AdQSb+7sD5_PjSQ558k=FYD4z-oV5mtZGge_z7icEjQ@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <4F917E90.9000205@uni-dortmund.de> <CA+tpaK2AdQSb+7sD5_PjSQ558k=FYD4z-oV5mtZGge_z7icEjQ@mail.gmail.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On 21.04.2012 02:06, Adam Vande More wrote:

> I'm not sure where the power/performance/price ratio is at currently, but
> it wasn't that long ago purchasing an intel was a much better deal long
> term.  It was something like it took a year and half of an AMD and intel
> cpu idling to draw even in total price all the while having a much greater
> performance potential with Intel.  I say this as someone who hopes AMD will
> succeed.  There is much more to it than just raw upfront cost.

I know that I will probably get a lot more "bang" from an Intel CPU (in
terms of raw power, especially per CPU-core). However, this computer
will be used in a way where more CPU-cores will actually help more than
fewer cores with more raw power per core. This is partly because full
disc encryption is in place.

I also know that the cost of power is something to consider in the
longrun. This is however a personal computer, the one I use in my spare
time. If I were to worry too much about power, I shouldn't get a
graphics board like the one I am considering. :-) They outweigh the CPU
threefold - even if not constantly. This is a machine that will not run
24/7. Besides, the cost upfront is my main concern at the moment,
because my budget is very limited. ;-)

Regards,
Chris




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?jmuf7k$sct$1>