Recent content by jonmcguffin

Checked on the 80Gb Intel offering and it seems to be around the $225 mark.. What about these other two drives are so sub par? Theoretically speaking, all these drives should basically blow the doors of a traditional HD, what different does it really make to have one just a little faster than...

Looking for some help deciding what SSD to purchase between the two I list above... Both drives seem to retail for between $140 - $150 delivered. Both drives are 64Gb drives which I think is plenty for a good Win7 64-bit boot drive along with all my applications. Both are MLC drives, both...

I must have offended you somehow HeatMiser.. It wasn't my intention and I'm sorry. I have no idea on how to post a screen cap and like I said, I typed everything that shows up there in my original post. Sorry.. Jon

Ooohh.. Excellent suggestion.. I hadn't thought of this but I did check the "power saving" settings in control panel and everything is turned off there so I woulnd't think the CPU would be doing any throttling activity.

Thanks everybody for the interest. Here is the link to the original forumn in which I am talking about... http://www.sonycreativesoftwar...mID=4&MessageID=529827

Not sure if I follow you here Blain. I think if I want to make sure my system is performing up to or near a "standard" comparing my results versus others with very similiar configurations is in fact a very WISE thing to do, isn't it??? Rendering times on this particular test doesn't involve...

The CPU-Z scores are all listed in my original post. There's no point to do a screen print and post because I stated them exactly as above. Jon

All systems are running at stock speeds, that has been confirmed. My drive subsytem should not be an issue as this "task" is not drive intensive, it's CPU and RAM intensive though. I have 3 - WD hard drives, all 7200rpm 16Mb drives and two of them are in a RAID 0 configuration.

I do video editing work and I'm comparing my results rendering a file to many other users in a forum who are posting their timed results. They are able to render the same particular file in about 240 - 260 seconds, while my machine is taking in the 300 second range. There are about 20 or so...

I have what I thought was a pretty good performing system until I did a little benchmarking and it seems my system is about 30% slower than comparable systems with the same processor/memory configuration. My systme spec's according to CPU-Z. Runnong on a Gigabyte DS3 i965 motherboard...

You know, I'm all for things that are better for the environment, but these regulations coming out of the EU are just plain dumb. Trace elements of lead in the casing of power supplies is such a non-threat their attempt to regulate such things is just plain dumb and a waste of time. These...

I'm not so sure though that Toledo marks a "step up" in terms of processor design and performance, particularly when dealing with heat disapation, etc. Look at this article http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/amd_x2-3800+/ It clearly goes on to show the manchester ccore to be the coolest...

Well, I'm not sure why one would order the part from TangGuys when they are $10 more than mwave.com and evidently $8 more than NewEgg and they don't have them in stock.

Actually, I've bought from mwave many times and prefer them. They have the X2 Toledo for $350.50 and I woudl presume shipping would probably run $10 or less. So that's a better deal anyway. Jon

Sweet! Thanks for the quick answer... So let me ask you this... If you were to buy one, which one would you buy, and also, power consumption is important to me, do you think the Toledo is every bit as good in terms of efficiency as the Manchester? Better.... Worse?? Thanks! Jon