Moved from 10 year old to 6 year old computer. From dual to quad core. No noticeable difference in speed.

[carum carvi]

I learned on this forum, that the amount of RAM is most important for speed and longevity for your computer. Wanna be sure your computer will work efficiently 10 years from now, buy a lot of RAM memory.

But I always thought the same was true when it comes to cores. More is better. Right? Wrong? Dual core, Quad core, we have 8 and even 10 cores available now. But I noticed that the individual clock speeds of these multi cores computers were NOT increasing. They were sometimes DEcreasing. Hmmm...

Now I recently moved from a 10 year old dual core computer to a 6 year old quad core computer. Same amount of RAM (4gb) in both of them. And I havent noticed any increase in speed.

I did some googling, this is ofcourse old news for any experienced user on this forum, but perhaps other newbies are not aware of this:

While the concept of multiple-core processors sounds appealing, there is a major caveat to this technology. In order for the true benefits of the multiple processors to be seen, the software that is running on the computer must be written to support multithreading. Without the software supporting such a feature, threads will be primarily run through a single core thus degrading the efficiency. After all, if it can only run on a single core in a quad-core processor, it may actually be faster to run it on a dual-core processor with higher base clock speeds.

Source: https://www.lifewire.com/multiple-core- ... ors-832453

[rene]

Quite. Try e.g. transcoding video with ffmpeg: you'd definitely notice the advantage of doubled number of cores...

[KBD47]

Probably the best way to increase the speed of a computer, if it doesn't already have one, is replace the hard drive with a SSD. Second best thing is increasing ram. Do both and it's like a new computer.

[kyphi]

A computer will only run as fast as its weakest link will allow.

There have been significant changes in technology, hence DDR2 RAM is not the same as DDR4 RAM and mechanical drives are significantly slower than SSDs.
Burning an ISO to a DVD and using that medium to install an operating system is much slower than burning the same ISO to a USB3 stick and using that medium to install via a USB3 socket.

It is all about data transfer rates.

Ideally, I would like a computer so fast that it provides the answers I seek before I have asked my question. While I am waiting for that to becomes a possibility, I will have to rebuild my current computer if I ever come to think that it is slow

[carum carvi]

A computer will only run as fast as its weakest link will allow.

Is there a way the program system monitor or another program can pinpoint the weak (slowest) part of a computer? Since Spectre and Meltdown lots of security measures could have slowed things down...

Probably the best way to increase the speed of a computer, if it doesn't already have one, is replace the hard drive with a SSD. Second best thing is increasing ram. Do both and it's like a new computer.

I hear a lot of people on this forum praise SSD, but I always thought that a SSD only increased booting time at start up. Is there any noticeable speed difference in general use while writing a document or surfing the internet? That's what I mostly do.

Quite. Try e.g. transcoding video with ffmpeg: you'd definitely notice the advantage of doubled number of cores...

Yes, I read that for those more consuming processes, like video editing, it will be of advantage.But I cant think of any other program than video edting (maybe programming?) that uses so much process power.

Does an SSD increase the general speed of opening a browser or the speed with wchich a menu opens? My "new" quad core computer seems to have made no increase in general speed when opening programs compared to my 4 year older dual core computer, which has HIGHER Ghz individual cores. Feel like I am being conned by the producers of these quad cores. Like being sold a ferrari to drive to the supermarket around the corner. No use whatsoever or am I overexagerating?

[lsemmens]

It will depend on the speed of your HDD whether an SSD will show any improvements in daily use. The speed of a SSD is in its access time. so if you have a huge file on your drive, you will notice a difference if, of course you only have small files, Not so much. The only reason boot times improve significantly is because you are accessing lots of files on the drive to give you a working OS. Once loaded into memory, many will not need to be read from the drive again for the session.

[carum carvi]

The speed of a SSD is in its access time. so if you have a huge file on your drive, you will notice a difference if, of course you only have small files, Not so much.

Thanks for explaining that Lsemmens!

[DAMIEN1307]

i now also have an SSD after holding out for years (it was given to me as a gift)...not only does my system "cold boot" in 3.5 to 5 seconds, but everything else works instantaneously such as launching music and video players, launching browsers etc...no more time lags which were all due to time it takes to access "spinner" HDDs versus the "instant" nature of SSD drives...DAMIEN

[lsemmens]

The speed of a SSD is in its access time. so if you have a huge file on your drive, you will notice a difference if, of course you only have small files, Not so much.

Thanks for explaining that Lsemmens!

You are most welcome.

[michael louwe]

Now I recently moved from a 10 year old dual core computer to a 6 year old quad core computer. Same amount of RAM (4gb) in both of them. And I havent noticed any increase in speed.

.
It will likely make a big difference if you run a Virtual Machine with many browser tabs opened and one tab doing video-streaming at UHD or other power-hungry tasks. Monitor the CPU performance with System Monitor or Task Manager.

AFAIK, 4 cores = 4 threads = can run 4 processes/tasks at the same time. CPUs with Hyperthreading enabled will add 4 virtual threads to the 4 cores = 8 threads = can run 8 processes/tasks at the same time. Only certain power-hungry software/programs/apps will make use of hyperthreading, eg constantly run 16 processes/tasks at the same time. IOW, most software/programs/apps do not need to use Hyperthreading.

[carum carvi]

It will likely make a big difference if you run a Virtual Machine with many browser tabs opened and one tab doing video-streaming at UHD or other power-hungry tasks. Monitor the CPU performance with System Monitor or Task Manager.

Yeah, I'll do that. I am gonna run the exact same videos on both computers and compare them with System Monitor.

not only does my system "cold boot" in 3.5 to 5 seconds, but everything else works instantaneously such as launching music and video players, launching browsers etc...no more time lags...

That sounds quite nice Damien. When my old harddisc gives in I will replace it with a SSD. I dont need much GB storage anyway, so I can buy a cheaper smaller SSD.

I also read about some forummembers running their LinuxMInt OS from an external SSD. That is something that I would like to do as well. It would be nice to have a LinuxMint OS backup instantly ready on an external SSD. People wrote that they only had to put in some other box, which then could be connected to the computer. Is this easy to do?

[DAMIEN1307]

Yep...shouldnt be a problem at all since boxes are made for this purpose...if mounting internally, (as i did), i first noticed the small size of the SSD that was given to me brand new by parents of teen im instructing in Linux...i went and purchased a "Corsair" dual SSD drive mounting bracket that easily adapts the SSD so as to be able to mount it internally into the same spot the previous HDD has occupied...this bracket has a space to mount an additional SSD to the existing one already there if i wish to expand my storage...DAMIEN

[michael louwe]

Yeah, I'll do that. I am gonna run the exact same videos on both computers and compare them with System Monitor.

.
Just to clarify, running a Virtual Machine = install VirtualBox or VMWare on a host computer/machine and use it to create a new Virtual Machine that runs an OS. ...
https://itsfoss.com/install-windows-10- ... box-linux/
....... The CPU, RAM and GPU resources will be used and shared by both the host machine and virtual machine at the same time, eg we can web-surf or video-stream on both machines at the same time.

[carum carvi]

Michael Louwe I think I misunderstood you. I thought you meant to say that IF I ran a virtual machine, everything would seem slow, because such a virtual machine uses a lot of processing power. But what I meant is that I have moved from an older pc to a newer one and I didnt notice any difference in speed between a dualcore and a quad core computer. But that assumption of mine was only based on my gut feeling. Every program seemed to openas slow as before.

BUT,... I just did a test with system monitor. I played a 4k video on youtube and with my "new" (6 year old Thinkpad) machine I can watch 4k fluently. Wow! That's the first time I can watch 4K and FULL HD without any stuttering. Before I could only watch 720p with stuttering. Now it looks Beautiful! Now I am really gonna connect my Thinkpad to my EIZO monitor. ONly have to buy a Displayport cable first, since my Thinkpad has no Hdmi connection.

Proccesor usage is much lower though on this "new" (2013) machine compared to my older (2009) one.
40% vs 99% processing usage, when watching a youtube video. And my Thinkpad T430 was still completely silent. What a joy to watch videos on this Thinkpad T430! I am a real movie lover and I could have never thought that a 6 year old Thinkpad could deliver such stunning fluent 4K videos. Amazing! I am in heaven again.

My initial complaints though were about opening programs. That still is as slow as before on my "new" (2013) Thinkpad. But other forummembers have already mentioned the fact that this slow opening of programs could be speeded up considerably by replacing my harddisc with an SSD. I will consider doing that...

[michael louwe]

My initial complaints though were about opening programs. That still is as slow as before on my "new" (2013) Thinkpad. But other forummembers have already mentioned the fact that this slow opening of programs could be speeded up considerably by replacing my harddisc with an SSD. I will consider doing that...

.
Opening programs usually only takes up 0.01% of our time on the computer. So, it may not be worth it to upgrade to an SSD just for that reason. Programs are stored in the disk/drive. When you open a program, the program that is stored on the disk/drive will have to be loaded onto the RAM by the CPU before the program can be run. A faster SSD will result in a faster opening of a program. Similarly for boot-up time.
....... But once the program is running, there is little difference between an SSD and HDD on how fast the program runs. How fast and efficient a program runs depend on the CPU and RAM(+ cache), not the disk/drive.

In overall computer performance, an upgrade to the CPU and/or RAM is more important than an upgrade to the disk/drive because of the much longer amount of time spent on the computer not opening programs from the disk/drive but just using the CPU and RAM to run a program. In Windows, under Task Manager, when I am web-surfing with Firefox, disk activity is zero while CPU and Memory/RAM are constantly active.

[carum carvi]

Opening programs usually only takes up 0.01% of our time on the computer. So, it may not be worth it to upgrade to an SSD just for that reason. A faster SSD will result in a faster opening of programs.

In overall computer performance, an upgrade to the CPU and/or RAM is more important than an upgrade to the disk/drive because of the much longer amount of time spent on the computer not opening programs but just using the CPU and RAM to run a program.

Yes, that's a nice statistic to put things in perspective: 0,01%
But psychologically that fraction of a second of a pause when opening a program DOES bug me. But not that much that I will buy a new SSD immediately for that reason only. I'll wait untill my harddisc dies and then replace it with a SSD.

RAM memory is pretty cheap, so I thought. I could consider doing that, although everything is running pretty smoothly now and I am not gonna do any video editing or something similar process consuming...

[Moem]

RAM memory is pretty cheap, so I thought.

It is. And it's also VERY easy to install.

[rene]

Yes, I read that for those more consuming processes, like video editing, it will be of advantage.But I cant think of any other program than video edting (maybe programming?) that uses so much process power.

The main issue here is that multicore is not so much about "power" in the sense of, as you have noticed, not being able to add up cores to for a quad core end up with "four times the power" but in the sense of having more or less "four independent CPU's inside your one CPU". The CPU, the heart of your computer, is what executes all tasks and as such, doubling cores means doubling the number of tasks that can be simultaneously executed.

Or better, subtasks, in the sense of one single task sometimes being able to be split into concurrently running subtasks which then profit in that same sense --- and video decoding and encoding is one of the best current examples of "parallelizable algorithms" --- but generally doing so is highly nontrivial; many if not most tasks you launch will not be effectively parallelizable; will not be parallelised, period, effectively or otherwise.

What that means is that in current practice you feel most benefit if you in fact also use your computer in a modern manner: multi- rather than sequentially task it. However, that has definitively started to include e.g. gaming and "mundane multitasking" such as multiple open tabs in a browser and, as mentioned, video tasks. Virtual machines which I saw mentioned are another good example of multicore use: you can just assign N of your cores to a specific virtual machine, and still have Q-N cores of your Q-core CPU left to unimpededly process other tasks.

Does an SSD increase the general speed of opening a browser or the speed with wchich a menu opens?

First time? Tremendously. After that code that is to be loaded from disc for any such action will generally be cached in RAM and RAM is still faster than SSD anyway --- although with current PCIe SSDs we're no longer orders of magnitude apart.

The thing about SSDs is missing seek-times; the time a HDD needs to move the reading head from whatever position it's currently in to the position it needs to be in to read requested data. Seek times dwarve actual data-transfer times for anything but huge amounts of said data: yes, you will notice SSD over HDD tremendously. No, not in opening a new browser tab, but definitely in opening a new application. SSD is the type of thing you may not feel you need to upgrade to for a long time, and one you could not realistically downgrade from if you ever get used to it. Highly recommended as a very effective upgrade.

No use whatsoever or am I overexagerating?

Latter Noticed you by now experienced the video win: good, because, no, you are definitely not being conned. The thing is just that multicore advantages depend on doing more than one thing concurrently and if you're not too multitask-y yourself, therefore on things that can be and are effectively parallelised to be part of your workflow.

[carum carvi]

Does an SSD increase the general speed of opening a browser or the speed with wchich a menu opens?

First time? Tremendously. After that code that is to be loaded from disc for any such action will generally be cached in RAM and RAM is still faster than SSD anyway

...you will notice SSD over HDD tremendously. No, not in opening a new browser tab, but definitely in opening a new application. SSD is the type of thing you may not feel you need to upgrade to for a long time, and one you could not realistically downgrade from if you ever get used to it. Highly recommended as a very effective upgrade.

Noted. And your experience will be remembered when I start looking for a new disc to replace the old one.

[BigEasy]

Now I recently moved from a 10 year old dual core computer to a 6 year old quad core computer. Same amount of RAM (4gb) in both of them. And I havent noticed any increase in speed.

Task "Reading a forum" is very light for both. Try to run 4 heavy tasks at time and after that see what difference.