[SGVLUG] wikipedia datacenter, firefox3 uses less mem, + a deal on ram

[Emerson, Tom (*IC)]

> -----Original Message----- Of Michael Proctor-Smith
> <Tom.Emerson at wbconsultant.com> wrote:
> > >From the webpage:
> >
> >   "800MHz: Boost your desktop's run time, allowing you to ...
[do everything faster, but cites examples where the hardware is already
slower than memory]
> 
> Just remember this is a modern computer which means some type 
> of multi-tasking OS is running on it. So fast ram could lead 
> to faster "load, print, download" time sense tasks will be 
> pulled in and out of cpu cache (which all ram is massively 
> slow in comparison).

Even with multitasking going on, the computer is "waiting on hardware"
more often than "waiting for memory" (and "waiting for the human at the
keyboard" is a long way off...)  If the "idle" process is at 0%, then
yes, I'd say there could be a memory limitation...

> Now "print" time could be effected by 
> ram speed because it is not the actual time it takes to put 
> ink on paper but how long it takes for the computer to 
> generate the data to send to the printer.

Oh, yeah, I forgot -- are we still dealing with "win-printers"?  [where
the printhead control circuitry is controlled by the CPU of the computer
rather than dedicated electronics in the printer where it's supposed to
be?]
 
> Now as for "download" the actual task of downloading is not 
> going to be effected by ram speed, but if ram was really slow 
> that same Multi-tasking OS might not be able to keep up with 
> interrupts generated by the crap mostly software "name 
> generic comm device". Again the total experience could be 
> faster, it will be more positively effected by adding more 
> ram then faster ram.

Heh heh heh -- see win-printer comment above, apply to -modems and
-network-cards :)

> Just remember that they are talking user time faster not 
> actual task faster, remember most people will think that all 
> the time between the time they click a link and the web page 
> is displayed is "download" time, when on some systems and 
> pages most of that time could be render time.

Ahh yes, the one point that isn't hardware-limited: compute-time.  (of
couse, a faster CPU makes a bigger impact) but here's the gotcha: is
there any point to putting in 800mhz memory when the "front-side-bus" of
the CPU is 400mhz?  (and presuming the current memory is 400mhz)  or
does that simply put more money in the pockets of the memory
manufacturer...

[I was once "talked into" buying memory faster than the CPU needed on
the premise that "when (not if) I upgraded my motherboard and CPU, I
wouldn't need to upgrade the memory" -- silly me, I didn't realize that
"when" I upgraded the cpu and mainboard, "SIPP"s would no longer be
viable...]