Taking only the raw computation power (processor
and ram intensive jobs, not graphics) in
_computations/sec per dollar_, the current cheapest
machine curve, that they hit occasionally this week,
would go (core 2 duo)
Of course you may want a premium for getting it done
faster favoring the high-end a bit. The curve would be
as stated if you wanted to buy a hundred machines and
set them all to work on a different piece of some
problem, and so were indifferent to how fast any
particular machine was, only how fast you can do the
whole job for your dollars.
Ron Hardin wrote:
>
> Taking only the raw computation power (processor
> and ram intensive jobs, not graphics) in
> _computations/sec per dollar_, the current cheapest
> machine curve, that they hit occasionally this week,
> would go (core 2 duo)
>
> 1.4 GHz $392
> 1.6 GHz $411
> 1.8 GHz $431
> 2.0 GHz $447 (2MB L2 Cache)
> 2.0 GHz $529 (4MB L2 Cache)
> 2.2 GHz $581 (estimate)
>
> Of course you may want a premium for getting it done
> faster favoring the high-end a bit. The curve would be
> as stated if you wanted to buy a hundred machines and
> set them all to work on a different piece of some
> problem, and so were indifferent to how fast any
> particular machine was, only how fast you can do the
> whole job for your dollars.
>
> In case you want a reference.