Quote:
Originally Posted by cody
So fast processors spend less time at 100% than slow processors? But I shouldn't cite how often my CPU is pegged as evidence that my CPU is fast enough?
I understand that you're trying to make a point, and that's great, but when you choose to be an ass about it, at least nail me for something I said, not something your read into what I said.
|
Less time at 100% CPU != less frequency of hitting 100%. I thought I was responding pretty directly to what you typed:
Quote:
|
It's funny the Cnet calls that processor a "dog". I have the 1.7 GHz version and it hardly ever hits 100% usage.
|
The frequency of your processor hitting 100% usage has
nothing to do with the speed of the processor, and everything to do with the particular apps you're running, therefore using that as evidence regarding your evaluation of that processor's performance is invalid.
And I wasn't really trying to be an ass... or at least I wasn't intending to pick a fight... I was just being the normal amount of snarky that flys around here, you read more tone into my post than indended and I guess it confused my point regarding what 100% CPU actually means.