DonC

"OhioGuy" <none@none.net> wrote in message news:fik9au$i1l$1@aioe.org...
> I've been looking at the various processors out there for nearly 6 months
> now, and in the past week became aware of a new release from AMD - the
> Athlon LE CPU.
>
> 45 Watts
> 2.44 GHz speed (may overclock to roughly ~ 2.8 GHz)
> $50 shipped from Newegg
> AM2 platform
> 1 Megabyte L2 cache
> 3 year warranty (full box version, with heatsink & fan)
>
> Anyone have any thoughts on this? I bought 3, primarily because:
>
> A) I don't need multi core support at the moment, since most of the
> software I use wouldn't benefit from it
>
> B) I leave my system on 24 hours a day to record HDTV programming. This
> will save me 1.1 Kilowatt Hours a day, or about $5 per month on
> electicity. That means the processor will be FREE (pay for itself) after
> just a year
>
> C) It's roughly comparable to an Athlon X2 3800 out of the box (but not
> after overclocking it)
>
> D) when I DO decide to upgrade to dual core in a year, or year and a half,
> the current $160 dual core processors will be dirt cheap, and I'll still
> be able to sell this thing for $35 with a 1.5 or 2 year warranty on it

I'm not sure you can answer my question but I'll ask it anyway.

I'm running an Athlon XP 3000+ at 2.167GHz (No OCing) with FSB= 333MHz.

I'm getting the itch to do a major upgrade to take advantage of SATA 3.0
drives, cheaper DDR2 memory, etc. I started out assuming a 64 bit
dual-processor CPU was the obvious way to go. But I'm running Win XP
Professional (32 bit) and don't think I'd currently realize much benefit of
a dual-processor. I am not a gamer. Adobe PhotoShop is probably my most
intensive application.

What performance both could I expect to see? I'm in no hurry to upgrade to
Vista; have it on my laptop and like XP much better.

Thanks