Which is a better choice for either a laptop or a tower, a 1.6 dual core or a regular 3200 speed processor?

Better for what - either of them will play Solitaire AFAIK, might help if you elucidate ;-)

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

Ok mr Sabertooth. Better for anything taxing. IE: videos, mp3. Which one is better for bench testing. I mean the better one period.

You still need to fine-tune you inquiry, seems to me like you are not sure what you are trying to compare here, is it a 1.6GHz Core Duo vs an AXP 3200+ or Sempron 3200+ or A64 3200+ (S754) or A64 3200+ (AM2) or even an A64 3200+ (S939).

How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

I guess it is more complicated than I know. All I know is the programs require either a 1.5 dual core or a 3+ gig processor. They don't say anything more.

I'd choose the single 3200.
Running single-threaded apps, the single 3200 would be, well, twice as fast as the dual 1600 (since only one of the two 1600 cores would be working).

And while running multi-threaded apps, the single 3200 would run at the same speed as the dual 1600.

This is of course assuming that you're comparing MHz to MHz, and not MHz to PR-rating, etc.

Which processors are you comparing exactly?

Pentium III--Descendant of Intel Core.
Pentium III-S 1400 @ 1.63GHz, 512K L2
X800XT AIW OC 580/600
2GB of RAM
250GB HD
SB Audigy 2
QDI Advance 12 mobo
Smugly running Vista

jackbomb, the answer is not as simple as that.

If, by saying 3200, mjz55 means a Sempron or even Athlon / Athlon XP 3200, then the 1.8 GHz C2D will beat the life out the 3200s even with single threaded apps.

(which 1.6 dual core are we talking about?, AFAIK, the dual cores start at 1.8GHz per core)

The answer to his question depends on::

Which 1.8 (or 1.6) Dual core Vs Which '3200' as he calls it
and,
Which applications particularly,
If reviews of Vista being a better OS for handling multicore CPUs, then we will have to add the "which OS" question shortly.

Mind you, the 3200 rated AMD processors are NOT running at 3.2GHz! While a P4 @ 3.2GHz is running at 3.2GHz (and hot! :P ). So, unless we know what CPUs are in question we cannot say "better processor period".

If the program says 1.6 dual or 3200 single, I'd go for a dual core as the software developer himself is saying that the program benefits for a second core.

hope this clears some air

Kailas Shastry

3000+ Venice, A8N-E, 768MB DDR266, 160GB Barracuda, 380W Cooler Master

(which 1.6 dual core are we talking about?, AFAIK, the dual cores start at 1.8GHz per core)

Ok, I forgot the Opterons :)

Kailas Shastry

3000+ Venice, A8N-E, 768MB DDR266, 160GB Barracuda, 380W Cooler Master