GHz diff?

[rhinoman08]

Is there really that much of a diff between 3.0 and 3.2GHz

 

[Praetor]

Well if you think 200MHz is a lot then yes. If not than no Depends on whether you intend to OC or not

 

[Sebouh]

Not much, but there is, u can feel it a little if you use heavy programs like 3ds max....

 

[Rambo]

It wont dramatically increase the system performance, but there will be a little boost. I suppose it's better to have 3200 Mhz rather than 3000 Mhz...

200 Mhz is only 1/15th of 3000 Mhz though.....

 

[Praetor]

200 Mhz is only 1/15th of 3000 Mhz though.....

Yes but the end-impact of that 200MHz depends on the core (i.e., Pressy's will benifit much more from them)

 

[jeamourt3]

i dont see any difference after i replaced my 3.0 to 3.2...........(samecore)

 

[Praetor]

Most people wont with 90% of the apps out there It really does depend on what you're doing with it

 

[Geoff]

if its only a 200Mhz diffrence, most likely you wont even see the difference, unless your using a program that creates dvd's or something, cause then it will go a little faster. If your thinking of upgrading from 3.0 to 3.2, dont do it (unless its REALLY cheap)

 

[OS Dragon]

200Mhz difference might just help a full system scan like Norton to finish faster, specially when it uses 100% CPU power (and stops the user working for an hour or so)

 

[dave597]

200Mhz difference might just help a full system scan like Norton to finish faster, specially when it uses 100% CPU power (and stops the user working for an hour or so)

run all ur programs overnight, thats what i do, eg. virus scanner, MS antispyware, defrag.

 

[Praetor]

200Mhz difference might just help a full system scan like Norton to finish faster, specially when it uses 100% CPU power (and stops the user working for an hour or so)

Not wanting to get off track too much but:
- Norton is HDD bound, not CPU bound
- I scan just under 300,000 files and certainly didnt take an hour