240Knightrider wrote:Little testy with your reply...but my comments were not directed at you.
Oh, sorry, I was not upset at all ... I was mostly agreeing with you - at least, I thought that is how I said it! Tough to show the tone of voice in written text.
240Knightrider wrote:Also, I already know Gregs internet connection is cable, no way he would run a forum without it. Therefore my statements still stand.
Okay. Not much disagreement on your comments there either, but I think that the perceptible difference between 1.8GHz and 3.6GHz for web-surfing will be not that high - even for cable-speed surfing, I would think. For slower-speed access to the Internet, the processor speed would be not relevent.
For example, my house access is via relatively slow 768kbps SDSL ... so, even my son's ancient Celeron laptop, with 256MBytes of memory, does fine when web-surfing. And, of course, on disk or memory intensive stuff, his 2.8GHz desktop and my wife's Apple MacBook pro with a 2.2GHz dual-core are much, much faster than that old laptop!
I suspect (and I am speaking without really knowing what he has, etc.) Greg would probably be way better off increasing things like RAM first ... for example, if the computer has 1GBytes, increasing it to 2GBytes. Or, if it is a desktop, changing any 7200 rpm drive to 10,000 or 15,000! Or changing the graphics card for a high-performance one that off-loads the processor.
Etc., etc., etc.
Again, without knowing specifics, it is tough to say anything more than that really.
Z