The Meanest, Fastest Machine on the Block Isn’t for Everybody
The last time I bought a car, I paid only cursory attention to the engine and other under-the-hood components. I know how many cylinders it has, but I have no idea how much horsepower it delivers, the displacement of its engine or how many seconds it takes to get from 0 to 60. All I know is that it will exceed the speed limit on any road I will drive and manage to get up any hill I’m likely to climb.
Back in the ‘50s and ‘60s, people used to pay a lot more attention to their car specifications. They also replaced them every year or two, and there was a status associated with having the fastest, meanest and biggest car on the block.
Sound familiar? Many of today’s “power users” have the same obsession when it comes to their personal computers. They want the latest, greatest and fastest, and the companies that make microprocessors, including Intel, Advanced Micro Devices and Motorola, are only happy to oblige.
Last week, Intel introduced 15 new microprocessors, the most unveiled in a single day in the company’s history. Naturally, they included the fastest and most powerful central processors that Intel has ever made for PCs, including one version of the Pentium III that will run at a whopping 733 megahertz.
*
Most of the major PC makers are shipping, or will soon ship, desktop PCs with the faster processors. And several companies--Compaq, Gateway, Hewlett-Packard, IBM and Toshiba--have already announced notebook PCs featuring the new CPUs, which include the first Pentium III chips for that segment of the market.
But just because PC companies are offering faster machines doesn’t mean you should rush out to buy one.
The computer I used to write this column employs an older-generation Pentium II processor running at 400 MHz, and I considered it to be a screamer when I got it about a year ago. For all practical purposes, it still is. Machines based on the newer CPUs may be more powerful and even a little more versatile than the one I’m using, but like most people, I’d hardly notice the difference. That’s because I mostly use my PC for word processing, e-mail, Web surfing, personal finances and basic photo editing.
For me, a faster processor would be like adding a bigger engine to my car. It might give me the feeling of power, but it wouldn’t get me where I’m going any sooner.
Nevertheless, the introduction of faster processors is important for the industry and relevant for anyone considering a new PC. The key: Think about your needs and plans before spending extra for top-of-the-line performance.
*
There are three reasons to buy a machine with a top-of-the-line CPU--and one good reason not to.
One reason to aim high is if you’re running highly demanding applications. Anyone who spends several hours a day editing large photos or who designs buildings or is involved in video editing is a good candidate for the fastest PC he or she can afford. These applications can be demanding, and more processing power can get you through your workday a bit more quickly.
Another reason is if you want to use the absolute latest, greatest and coolest applications out there. Before Intel announces a new CPU, it works with application developers to create programs that take special advantage of the new chip. Now that we live in the Internet age, some of these “applications” are Web sites designed to give users a richer and more media-intensive experience than the average site.
(Intel is using its site to promote 3-D online shopping, arguing that more processor power will enable users to explore products in more depth. I find that a bit preposterous. When I shop online, the last thing I need is the ability to render my potential purchases into 3-D images. All I want is a description, the price and maybe a basic photo. Nevertheless, there are some applications--most notably games--for which incredible speed and 3-D rendering make a lot of sense.)
The third, and most compelling, reason for the fastest processor is that the machine will take longer to become obsolete. If you buy a state-of-the-art machine today, it will be closer to mainstream a year or two from now. By comparison, today’s lower-end machines might look pretty sluggish by that time. But before you succumb to that argument, consider that it could be cheaper to buy a low-end machine today and then in a year or two buy another low-end--which by that time will be more powerful than today’s high-end machines.
On the other hand, the money isn’t the only “cost” to consider. Having to move your data and reinstall software can be a major time sink, so there is some merit to the notion of buying systems that will last longer.
*
The reason not to buy state-of-the art machines: They’re more expensive. A new 700-MHz Dell Dimension XPS T, for example, will cost you $2,731. For that price you could buy three PCs with a Pentium Celeron processor, an approach that in the long run could improve productivity. (To be fair, the XPS T in question offers 128 megabytes of memory, a 20-gigabyte hard disk, a 19-inch monitor, a fast graphics card and a CD-ROM drive--features you won’t find on sub-$1,000 systems.)
At the end of the day, it’s important to remember that there are important factors other than processor speed. Upgrading the memory is likely to pay more dividends than a modest increase in processor speed. I’d rather have a 500-MHz Celeron machine with 128 megabytes of memory than a 733-MHz Pentium III with only 64 megabytes. Improving your graphics card can also have an effect, especially if you play games. If you’re cramped for space, a larger drive will do more to improve your life than a faster processor.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the real bottlenecks in computing have nothing to do with processing power or even memory, graphics or hard-drive speed. If you spend a lot of time on the Internet, then you’ll get far more bang for the buck by getting the fastest connection you can. That means getting a 56K modem or, even better, subscribing to a cable-modem or DSL (digital subscriber line) service that boosts Internet performance dramatically.
A faster printer is yet another way to get more for your money. For less than $400, you can buy a Hewlett-Packard 970 printer that will deliver up to 12 pages a minute in black or 10 pages a minute in color. If you now have a slow printer, you’ll get an appreciable boost in performance as well as better-looking documents.
Finally, there is that one peripheral that you can’t buy via the Internet or even in a brick-and-mortar store. It’s the user. If you really want to get more done in less time, stop tinkering so much, stop spending all night surfing the Net and start using your PC as a tool, not a toy. If only I could take my own advice.
*
Technology reports by Lawrence J. Magid can be heard at 1:48 p.m. weekdays on KNX-AM (1070). He can be reached at larry.magid@latimes.com. His Web site is at https://www.larrysworld.com.
