having 'upgraded' from an Athlon 64 3500+ (single core )
to a new Pentium D Presler dual-core 3.4ghz, I was expecting the system to fly
however, it is SLOWER on any single application, I expected that to be about the same speed , as Athlon was rated at 3500, and Intel is 3400mhz.
the system loads in data noticably slower, there is definately a lag to doing everything, that wasnt there with the Amd
the Intel IS better, at multi tasking, as I expected, BUT remember, that all this talk of multi tasking, no one seems to mention, that data being read of the hard disk, can only be read so fast
IE hard drives dont read any faster, so thats the bottle neck
most of the time when I multi task, I open up a browser, copy and paste some text, or photos, open up word, or psp, etc etc I open up what I need at the time
THIS IS NO FASTER with the dual core system
sure, once the apps are loaded, than the system does run smoother in multi tasking, but its smoother and slower per individual app......
the one area where I notice an improvement, is on video encoding, seems about 50% faster than the AMD, so a big plus in this area.........
my point is really, if you have an existing AMD 64 system, and fancy more power, get a x2 64 chip...............thats what I wish I had done now.............
went through a lot of hassle changing board etc, for a system that boots slower, runs slower, but multi tasks faster ( once apps are loaded in )
I went for the Intel, due to great spec of the chip and price was good
the x2 amd was more expensive, but I think it would have been the better choice by far
just thought anyone with AMD 64 should know !!