kony <spam@spam.com> wrote
> Adam Russell <adamrussell@sbcglobal.net.invalid> wrote

>> Im thinking of getting a new computer sometime in the next
>> 3-4 months. Looking at what's new I see duo core and quad
>> core extreme on websites, but on tv Im seeing ads touting
>> the duo cores as "the latest thing". Should I consider getting
>> quad core with the thinking that it will have a longer lifetime
>> (time till new games run slow)? Or is quad core something
>> too bleeding edge (may have infant mortality issues)?

> You have not mentioned your specific computing needs.

> For some people, even single core is still the best alternative.

Not many, just those that dont plan to keep the system long.

> You have not mentioned the budget either.

> Don't buy anything trying to see into the future,

That is just plain silly. It makes a lot of sense to
avoid motherboards with AGP slots while those are
still being run out. ATA hard drives currently too,
particularly when so few motherboards are available
with more than a single ATA port and when that will
be used for the optical drives for quite a while yet.

> nor spend extra thinking it'll have a
> longer life as that is almost never true,

Depends on how much more you are considering spending.
It makes quite a bit of sense to go for a low end Conroe
based system knowing that you can put in a better Conroe
cpu later if you end up needing that extra performance than
it does to save a little on a non Conroe system with no future.

> paying more tends only to gain a few months on the
> treadmill of ever-increasing system performance.

That would have been just plain wrong if a PCIe based motherboard
had been chosen over a slightly cheaper AGP based motherboard.
The PCIe based motherboard has a lot better future video card wise.

> Buy what you know for certain is the best benefit towards
> what you are already using your system to do, or had
> wanted to do but were limited by present hardware.

No thanks, I'll consider which way things are headed too.