Computer Specs

Page 1 of 1 (6 items)
This post has 5 Replies | 0 Followers

Posts 76
Philip Gurgel | Forum Activity | Posted: Sat, Dec 18 2010 12:11 PM

I'm looking at buying a new desktop computer sometime in the next year or so to serve as my primary office/study computer.

Now I should clarify.  I have read the minimum/recommended settings for Logos 4, so I understand where those are set at.  My question is more in line with, what type of improvements (if any) am I likely to see by upgrading in the following areas: 

Processors: 

Intel i3 dual core

Intel i5 7xx series quad core

Intel i7 8xx series quad core

What difference if any am I likely to see in performance between the listed processors.  Is there a point where spending more on processing power doesn't impact the performance of Logos?  Or impacts it so minimally that it wouldn't be worth spending $150 more for an upgrade?

Memory:

4 GB DDR3-1333 memory

8 GB DDR3-1333 memory

16 GB DDR3-1333 memory

Essentially same question.  How much performance do I stand to gain in going from 4GB to 8GB?  From 8GB to 16GB?  

Hard Drives:

7200rpm drive/ 125 MB/s

Intel X25-M  SSD (Solid State Drive)

Same question.  Would there be a significant performance boost in going from a regular hard drive to a Solid State Drive?  

Video Card:

I'm currently looking at ATI Radeon HD EyeFinity, as it supports three screens 

Is there another multiscreen video card that would be a significant upgrade?  How much more would it cost/improve performance?

Obviously, I probably won't be able to afford the top option under every category.  What upgrades would provide the best improvement to performance?  What upgrades would provide only minimal or negligent upgrades in performance? 

Posts 15805
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Dec 18 2010 1:34 PM

Tom's Hardware has Buyer's Guide section with many comparison charts, including graphics, and system builder configurations => http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Special,6/Buyers-Guides,24/

Philip Gurgel:
 Is there a point where spending more on processing power doesn't impact the performance of Logos?

Personally not know point of diminishing returns - some Logos items benefit more from faster processing than others (e.g. indexing).

By the way, Intel planning to officially announce Sandy Bridge processors at CES keynote on Jan 5, 2011.

Philip Gurgel:
Essentially same question.  How much performance do I stand to gain in going from 4GB to 8GB?  From 8GB to 16GB?

On a laptop with 8 GB installed and 64 bit Windows 7, running Logos 4.2a Beta 2 and couple web browsers uses 2.18 GB - suggest starting with 4 GB Ram and monitor memory usage.

Philip Gurgel:
Same question.  Would there be a significant performance boost in going from a regular hard drive to a Solid State Drive?  

Yes - OWC has SSD comparison => http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/turnkey/iMac_2010_27/benchmarks/ (striping across SSD's faster than single SSD)

All-in-one possibility: Apple's 27" iMac with Quad Core i7 - screen resolution 2560 x 1440 with optional external display up to a 30-inch display (2560 x 1600).  Apple's 27" LED Cinema display also has 2560x1440 resolution.

Keep Smiling Smile

Posts 1639
Allen Browne | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Dec 18 2010 5:20 PM

Re processors, try to get one of the new processors (codename "Sandy Bridge") that are due to be released 5 Jan. Typically you pay a premium of you buy immediately, so if you can wait a few months they will be better value.

Re memory, 4 is adequate; 8 might be better if you are running lots of programs simultaneously; 16 is probably unnecessary unless you are planning to use it as a server.

Re hard disks, the SSD drive is faster (particularly for Logos searches), but have some disadvantages: early ones were less reliable, they are considerably more expensive, and they tend to be an order of magnitude smaller. I'm considering having one of each if the price is right when I'm ready to buy.

Re video cards, sounds like you have already researched these and started to define your needs. I take it you're talking about a desktop here, as most laptops don't support 3 screens.

Posts 25032
Forum MVP
Dave Hooton | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Dec 18 2010 5:29 PM

Philip Gurgel:

Processors: 

Intel i3 dual core

Intel i5 7xx series quad core

Intel i7 8xx series quad core

What difference if any am I likely to see in performance between the listed processors.

The i5-7xx is quad core without hyper threading ie. you have 4 CPU's with i5 vs 8 CPU's with i7-8xx. The i5-7xxx will be fine unless you run highly threaded apps Note: Logos4 will use 4 CPU's intensively only when indexing, whether you have an i5 or an i7! If you can afford it then go for an i7-8xxx (see my specs below).

Philip Gurgel:

Hard Drives:

7200rpm drive/ 125 MB/s

Intel X25-M  SSD (Solid State Drive)

Same question.  Would there be a significant performance boost in going from a regular hard drive to a Solid State Drive?  

If you want affordable all-round performance then go for an 10 000RPM WD Raptor (300 GB) because you can also afford an i7 processor! Good SSD's are still expensive and an Intel X25 is yesterday's SSD (prices are Australian, but see http://apcmag.com/ssd-roundup.htm)

If you want a small (c. 80 GB) SSD then you need an 7200 RPM HDD but it will still be more expensive than the 10K Raptor.

Dave
===

Windows & Android

Posts 76
Philip Gurgel | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Dec 18 2010 5:53 PM

You are correct that I am looking for a desktop.  I have a laptop which should hopefully last me another year or two, but it struggles with Logos 4.   I'm not really looking for a Mac, however.  I'm just much more comfortable with Windows.

Thanks for the heads up on the processor.  I'm probably going to buy the computer this summer, so it sounds like I'll have it timed pretty well as far as getting a good deal.   If anything, having a new set of processors come out might make some of the current i7s a bit cheaper (I hope).  

As far as the SSD drive is concerned.  One thing that has been frustrating with Logos 4 on my laptop has been the time it takes to search, run the exegetical guide, working with linked books, etc.  Since SSD drives are expensive, perhaps it would be best to get one large enough for Windows/Logos, while getting a larger HDD for other less intense programs, photos, movies, music etc.

Posts 15805
Forum MVP
Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :) | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Dec 18 2010 7:57 PM

Philip Gurgel:
I'm not really looking for a Mac, however.  I'm just much more comfortable with Windows.

Understand comfort level - also experiencing ongoing result from Apple suing Microsoft many years ago about Look & Feel - Microsoft tends to tweak user interface with every Office and Windows release.

On a Mac have a couple options for Windows: Boot Camp partitions hard drive into 2 bootable partitions - Mac OS X and Windows.  Also Apple provides hardware drivers for Windows - can use Windows USB keyboard on Mac.  Other option is running Windows in virtual machine(s) - could dedicate a virtual machine to Logos, change IE home page to www.logos.com - optionally turn off Microsoft updates and not install anti-virus software.  Both options need genuine Windows license.

Bit of computer history: in 2007, the fastest Windows Vista laptop was a MacBook Pro (according to PC World benchmarks).

Apple uses good quality hardware - typically lasts many years.

Have used dual 1920x1200 monitors (effectively 3840x1200 with split in middle) - like single monitor 2560x1440 resolution on 27" iMac - Logos 4 Mac and Logos 4 PC (with 64 bit Windows in virtual machine) - do have 16 GB Ram installed.  Wiki page has Logos 4 Mac example with 13 open panels => http://wiki.logos.com/Logos_4_Mac (saved layout also opens in Logos 4 PC).

After upgrading to 27" iMac, observed myself not using external 1920x1200 monitor much - one BIG screen nicer to use than dual monitors - easier to follow mouse movements.

Dreaming: 27" iMac - Intel's Sandy Bridge 3.4 GHz Quad Core i7 plus SSD RAID 0 for boot partition and Logos 4 with large hard drive for other stuff (and eSata external drive for Time Machine backup) - not know God's plan for my finances.

From cost perspective, a RAID of SSD currently same or less expensive than single larger SSD - pair of 100 GB's @ $ 299.99 is a penny less than 200 GB @ $599.99 while a pair of 200 GB's @ $ 599.99 is $ 450.01 less than one 400 GB @ $ 1,649.99 (yet striping across pair of SSD's has same capacity of larger SSD with transfer rate nearly doubled).

Keep Smiling Smile

Page 1 of 1 (6 items) | RSS