Most powerful computer and slowest computer can process MS Word at the same pace????

[325i]

I heard somewhere that a really fast computer and a really slow computer can or do process MS Word at the same time....Is this actually true?

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

No.

 

[325i]

thanks...thought so

 

[kayvee]

I heard that a Ferrari and a VW Beetle wait the same amount of time at the red lights. Similar analogy, really.

 

[undesign]

:wtf:

I've read somewhere that powerful large computer can be slower than a small much less powerful computer. Has something to do with MFLOPS per kilogram divided by computer dimension.

 

[Mike Hoxbig]

:wtf:

I've read somewhere that powerful large computer can be slower than a small much less powerful computer. Has something to do with MFLOPS per kilogram divided by computer dimension.

A computer isn't a black box though. There are many components that are capable of being a bottleneck.

 

[encrypted]

It's actually true, on the fastest computer you need to take into account the time spent doing **** besides typing, like going "OOOOH" at the graphics in the latest games and Watching the latest high def 3D porn. Where as on the slow pc your probably just going to be typing so you can stop using it.

 

[undesign]

A computer isn't a black box though. There are many components that are capable of being a bottleneck.

I think it is safe to assume that the more a computer weighs the slower it will be.

 

[Synaesthesia]

I heard somewhere that a really fast computer and a really slow computer can or do process MS Word at the same time....Is this actually true?

These days it's pretty much true. It's getting harder to find a PC these days that's so slow that MS Word is slow on it. It's certainly true for new PC's.

 

[GardenGnome]

I agree somewhat with this sentiment, because on a modern Pentium 4 ( yes its not the latest anymore) I still find Windows XP running Word to give the same performance that an old P2 running Windows ME and Office 2000 gave. The modern P4 is leaps and bounds ahead of the P2.

Its only with the modern I5's and I7's that I see improved perfomance in MS applications.

That said its not fair to make this comparison becuase the newer OS's have so much more code running in the background to do all the new fancy things we need like HD UI's and also older OS's like XP are terrible at managing large amounts of memory performance is generally worse than say Windows 7. So its not like comparing apples with apples.

The one thing I do want to say though is that software in general could perform better and I think part of the problem is the modern way programming is taught. The modern programmer with his garbage collection and managed languages doesn't need to worry about optimisation of resources and can instead worry about more high level things like design patterns etc. This may allow for more functional software but can still result in sloppy programming especially when you look at some of the amazing things that were done in pure assembler back in the day. But at the end of the day its all about meeting deadlines

 

[koeksGHT]

 

[Arthur]

Yes, it's true - if by "process" you mean typing and general light editing.

As kayvee suggested, the reason is that the computer spends most of its time hanging about doing nothing, waiting for your input. While waiting for you, slow computers count in millionths of a second and fast computers count in billionths of a second. From the user's perspective it matters not a jot whether your engine idles at 1000 r/min or at 10 000 r/min while you're stationary at the traffic light - doing nothing takes just as long.

 

[Progenix Oj101]

I reckon it'll be quicker on the slower computer, as when a computer is moving really fast it becomes impossible to type accurately.

 

[vinodh]

I reckon it'll be quicker on the slower computer, as when a computer is moving really fast it becomes impossible to type accurately.

That's dependant on the location of the fast moving computer: if it's on a rocket sled moving at near-Mach speeds and the operator has no protection from the wind, then it will become quite tricky to type accurately. However, if the computer is on a very stable and protected platform, say for example a Boeing 777, it would still be moving at high speed but the operator would still be able to function as per normal.

If the computer was on a space ship travelling at light speed, it is theoretically possible that due to time dilation, the operator could be typing at over 200 words a minute but would appear to be typing at near governmental speeds to an impartial observer. This could be remedied by upgrading to Microsoft Office 365E=MC²

 

[Swa]

Yes it's possible. Your question relates to supercomputers and general pc's. To understand how it works you have to know how they are put together. The amount of processing power is rated as a product of its combined speed. The actual real time speed is no more than that of most high end pc's and is usually slower. You get the processing power by adding that of all the individual processors.

What this means is that they can crunch large amounts of parallel data but when it comes to dependencies they are quite slow. Whenever an instruction depends on the result of a previous one it takes just as long as on a normal computer. Everyday applications therefor won't benefit from the processing power. Besides for that any parallel computer data must be written to be executed on multiple processors in multiple threads.

 

[325i]

:wtf: about 2+ years and this thread is still active. I posted that question when I had just started with IT and had a *** teacher. Google was the best teacher ever in my case (and some forumers )

 

[MartyMarts]

Just goes to show. Never, ever, ever trust a teacher Oh and MS Word has the potential to be **** on slow and fast computers.