CPU = encoding power! encoding takes forever.

For me I will probably rip DVDs more, as it gets much quicker to encode them.
For the majority of consumers, buy the most powerfull chip they can afford, to use word with.

Check if 42 is the real answer.

Computer processors are continuing to provide a rapid increase in performance, but we ask, what else might you do with that extra oomph?

Good question. Very, very good question.

I can't think of anything I currently do that really requires even the power of today's mid-range processors, let alone high-end ones or even more powerful future iterations.

So I'd do what I do now when replacing any current machines. I look at the price differential, and opt for something relatively modest. Currently, that would be at about the £100 mark, so it's Q6600, E8400/E8500 level …. and that's for a machine where my usage is relatively demanding, like digital imaging or voice recognition. For a basic office machine, I'd go in a lot lower than even that.

I'm not interested, personally, in processing power for it's own sake, or in bragging rights, or in benchmark performance. If an increase in performance is such that I need a benchmark suite to tell the difference, it's not worth paying for. The ONLY performance that's worth paying for, in my view, is one where I can tell a real world, practical difference. If it means Photoshop filter runs in 30 seconds rather than a minute, it's worth it. If it changes from 1.000002 seconds to 1.000001 seconds, it ….. erm …. isn't worth it. To me.

Increase the size of my epeen.

I would probably spend more time messing with photos i've taken. I hate playing with settings in lightroom and the results not being very responsive. Like wise for creating panoramas from some of them, takes ages to stich together a dozen 8mp images on my laptop.

Oh, and a lot more video encoding too :)

Kicking out renders realtime would be nice :) - then again that may put me out of a job Arghhh!dichotomy of power :D

I'd get around to turning all the TV programmes I've recorded in MPEG into DivX files. That's an area where every increase in processing power yields immediate and tangible benefits.

methinks i'd get further up on the F@H chart :p

sell it on to folding addicts

I think it would start to fall down on the programs we use to be multi-core efficient. Atm I can't render something in Video Vegas and play a game without lagging about everywhere in the game.

I would definitely use it to do more things at once, and quicker!

Encode video…..











……… and fold for Hexus, of course.

I would crush Lowe at the top of the Hexus Folding Leaderboard - and once that had been achieved: SkyNet, anyone?

I'd admire it's beauty.

with more processing power i would play games at the same time as encoding ipod videos and running itunes and surfing the internet

Personally I don't encode video and I'm not involved in folding (I know I should be, I know I'm a bad person… I'll get around to it some day…) so for me the only reason to want more processing power is to keep up with advancements in gaming.

Hence if I had more processing power I would buy more advanced games. This explains why my next upgrade is more likely to be dual-core than quad - because no game (that I know of) can effectively use all four cores.

I'd enjoy being able to comfortably edit very high resolution video as well as more intense multitasking.

multi tasking and gaming