I'm shopping for a new computer. I have been an avid AMD user for quite some time. It was mostly because my older cousins who were in computer college always told me to go with AMD because their CPUs where more stable, more efficient and faster. I'm starting to doubt that. My laptop that I have right now (and am in the precess of selling) has and AMD 2600+ processor and it seems kind of slow. I'm hopefually going to sell it soon. After I sell it, with the $ from my job, I will have about $4000 Canadian to spend on computers. As a student who will be attending University soon, I am unsure what would be best for school. THere are my options:

1. Get an full out awesome laptop for gaming, mobile use and all my apps. It might look similar to this one: http://global.acer.com/products/notebook/fr3200.htm

2. Get an awesome Mac Desktop and a crappy laptop.

3. Get an awesome MAC Laptop, no desktop, probably the 15 inch power book. THe problem with Macs are that all my pirated software won't work, so I am straying away from Macs.

4. Get an awesome gaming computer and buy a laptop that is just for word processing (probably a 600 Mhz IBM off of eBay)

5. Get a super desktop and no laptop.

6. Ge tthe Mac G5 and a crappy laptop

7. Get a tablet PC: http://viewsonic.com/products/desktopdisplays/tabletpc/ and a mediocre Pc

8. Get a mediocre PC and an OK laptop.


Many of you on tis forum are students. Do most students have laptops? What kind seems to work best on campus? Will my pirated games work on MAC? Would a super laptop work just as well as a super desktop?

I'm not sure if I should get an AMD-based LAptop and desktop or Intel systems. Intel and AMD are better at different things... I suppose. Would one chipset work better for a desktop than a laptop? Are MACs really that great?

I'm kind of confused, as you can tell. Maybe someone could help me out.

Intel is more stable and needs less cooling (from my experience)
I have no laptop so I can't help you more

p.s. you won't be able to play any non-mac games on a mac (there are such mac games?! I know of none!)

p.p.s. with Cedega (www.transgaming.com) you can play many Windows games on Linux.

I have a AMD 2600+ processor on my desktop and I find that the AMD processor is more stable than Intel but as Avatar stated, Intel requires less cooling and thus the fan for AMD built computers runs longer ... sometimes it runs continuously all day.

I may already have a desktop, but I'm searching for a laptop computer (either a AMD or an Intel model) for its mobility, not for gaiming ... especially the models that are between 3 and 6 pounds. With Wi-Fi spreading everywhere and with most major university campuses (like mine) with a Wi-Fi network already set up ... a laptop is tempting as you don't have to search for a computer to write up a paper.

If you are more interested in gaming, then a laptop is not the best solution unless you buy a 3000$ and up model and you're willing to have a 8 - 12 pound machine to carry around.. However, they don't quite match the power of a desktop when it comes to gaming.

It really depends what you're into. If you see yourself as a gamer most of the time ... then get a powerful desktop and an average laptop if there is enough money. If you see yourself on the word processor and prefere mobility most of the time ... then get a powerful laptop with an average desktop.

As for processors, as I said ... AMD runs hot most of the time but is very stable ... Intel runs cooler but isn't as stable than the AMD ... MAC is from what I heard the best of the three but is incompatible with most games and some popular software. Also, when it comes to laptops, the best kind of processor are the ones designed for mobility ... like the Intel Centrino and the AMD - M chipset. They are designed to run longer on one charge than the Intel Pentium 4 and the AMD/AMD 64 desktop chipsets ... which is better suited for gaming oriented laptops.

i always run intel never had any problems with stability on the other hand it is my experiant thats its first in the later years AMD have become stable,

I had a intel 2.4 processor running with the boxset cooler at 3 Ghz without any problems, the cpufan was not even running at full speed.

Going mac will lock you up in a small little world imo.

personly i would go for a powerfull PC and the best laptop the remaning money can buy, if a laptop is needed, Intel processors ofcause :).

If I were to go all out on a laptop, I would get this one: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/searchtools/item-Details.asp?EdpNo=1019704&sku=S334-1002 it weighs less than 7 lbs. and it costs less than a mac 15-inch with middle specs. If I were to get a G5 Mc, then I would have power, but nothing to run off of it. I might get a middle Tablet PC: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1010630&Sku=N122-1089

and a good desktop: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=770406&CatId=114

I don't plan on doing that mucjh gaming in University, but when I DO game, I want it to be efficient and enjoyable. I will probably build a better desktop for less. I love recieveng all my components in pieces and putting them together, it's also about $100-250 cheaper.

Does it look like I am making a good choice?

The desktop you linked:

Microsoft® Windows® XP Home Edition
Intel® Pentium 4 - 3.2GHz HT Processor Learn More
800MHz FSB Hyperthread
1GB (1024MB) DDR PC3200 Memory Learn More
Dual Channel DDR400
160GB SATA150 7200 RPM Hard Drive
Chieftec Dragon 400w Tower (Green)
Clear Gamer Side Panel
8X DVD+-RW Drive w/Software (Black)
16X DVD-Rom Drive w/Software (Black)
3.5" 1.44MB Floppy Drive (Black)
256MB DDR NVIDIA GF FX5600 AGP 8x Video
Intel Gigabit 10/100/1000Mbps Ethernet NIC
US Robotics 56K Fax/Modem
Dolby 5.1 Surround Sound Audio
Wireless Internet Mouse (Green)
Wireless Internet Keyboard (Green)
1-Year Limited Manufacturer Warranty
Monitor & Speakers Sold Separately

.. is top of the line pretty expensive at CA$2072. I don't understand why "gaming" computer cases have to look like this:
http://images.tigerdirect.ca/SKUimages/medium/v133-2832main.jpg

and video cards have to look like this:
http://www.tigerdirect.com/images/itemDetails/v133-2836images.jpg

well, it is very common that when you don't have the functionallity you have the design :)

those flameballs look like causing much trouble to my cooling setup :eek:

i have an alternative theory about those flames!
Those disks are spinning so fast that the color has melted and have created a nice pattern.
So how about that ? :p

Whats wrong with wanting something that looks good. I have a kabinet like that green one, except mine is blue and with out a window, its a good kabinet things are well spaced and the disk bays use a swing out system so they are easy to attach ect.

If you only play rarely go for a powerfull laptop and a smaller pc, if you know how to put it together yourself you can get a good desktop for a fair abount of money.
In the end you should ask your self what you want and what you need, none of which we can really know :).

oh yea dont by mac, mac is evil, you want a PC... with a Intel CPU :)

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/images/comics/20040703.jpg

yeah kunax, me too, except mine is niether blue nor green, it is black and yeah it does not have those extra design features. But otherwise it is pretty much the same thing.

By the way, buy the Mac, then it will atleast work. Or buy the PC if you like challange. :)

nice one avatar :p

I was just showing that Gaming COmputer as an example of the kind of specs I'm looking for. I can configure something better for $1500 Canadian. I hate the way that case looks. I generally don't like fancy case mods and "gamer" styles.

A451-2130 :: Artec 52x24x52x CD-RW / 16x DVD / Black / CD Burner

B145-2040 :: BenQ / 4x4x12x DVD+RW / 16x10x32x CD-RW / Nero Express / DVD Burner

I800-3004 :: HiVal / 4x2x12x DVD±RW / 24x10x40x CD-RW / Dual Format / DVD Burner

P456-3100 BK :: Powmax - CP769PL - ATX Mid-Tower Case with Front USB and 400Watt Power Supply -Black

CP2-P4-530 C :: Intel Pentium 4 530 3.0Ghz / 1MB Cache / 800 FSB / Socket 775 / HyperThreading / Processor

THD-1600HH8 :: Hitachi 160GB / 7200 / 8MB / ATA-100 EIDE Hard Drive

S450-5200 :: Soyo Multi-Media Keyboard & Optical Mouse Combo

A455-1054 :: Asus P5GD1-VM Intel Socket 775 Motherboard / Integrated Video / 8-Channel Audio / 10/100Mbps Ethernet LAN / USB 2.0 / Serial ATA / RAID

C44-5020 OEM :: Creative Labs Sound Blaster Live! 5.1 PCI Sound Card (OEM)

P450-8511 :: XFX GeForce FX 5700 LE / 256MB DDR / AGP 8X / VGA / DVI / TV Out / Video Card

K24-5200 :: Kingston Dual Channel 1024MB PC3200 DDR 400MHz Memory (2 x 512MB)



Total:$1,462.83 Canadian

AMD: Cheap: highest performance for your money ratio

Intel: Not so cheap, but if your will to spend like crazy you can get the best performance available.

Apple: for stylish geeks, stubborn nerds and idiots with money, only.

My computer is a heavily overclocked Barton 2500, 512MB DDR400, Kt600 motherboard, Radeon 9800 Pro 128 video card, all home assembled off newegg.com, price tag.... oh about ~$500 maybe, I did use my old case, keyboard, monitor, ect from my Athlon 1200

I guess I'll have to see hwo much gaming I will actually be doing when I get to University...

hehe :D you'll have your time ;)

Get a mediocre PC and an OK laptop. You can always upgrade as you go with the PC.

As for processors, as I said ... AMD runs hot most of the time but is very stable ... Intel runs cooler but isn't as stable than the AMD ...

Isn't heat the enemy of electronic boards? If Intel boards runs cooler, doesn't it mean that it is more efficient and therefore more stable? What about durability?

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/images/comics/20021126.gif

Fans make noise. I would prefer a cooler chip. I'm typing this on a computer that has an AMD thunderbird in it. back then it needed an extra fan to keep it cool even. But in general I don't like loud fans and the cooler the chip the more silent the fan can be.

Isn't heat the enemy of electronic boards? If Intel boards runs cooler, doesn't it mean that it is more efficient and therefore more stable? What about durability?

More efficient ... probably. More stable ... not necessarily. Just because something runs cooler doesn't always result in stability.

Heat is the enemy of electronics boards ... hence why the fan of a computer running a AMD chipset is virtually running all the time. Mine runs almost non-stop from 5 minutes after I turn the computer on till the the computer is shut off. But I haven't even experienced one hiccup from the machine since i bought it a year ago ... except for the hiccups that were my doing.

I'm not sure about the durability of either chip sets ... maybe the Intel chip is more durable in the long run just because it runs cooler. It does make sense.

Get on with Intel.Most Standards are because of Intel,Most Innovations are from Intel,Although AMD,Cyrix are also in the Market but Intel drives it.Pentium is almost a Brand Amassador today.If its a Pentium it"ll be fast...like that.

if you are looking for cheap alt,then AMD might be sufficient.If you are joining Stanford,you dont need to buy one.You"ll probably get all the required Facilities.Caltech i dont know,UCLA yes,MIT i dont know...Which university? Purdue,Rice,GATECH? which?

bye!

Does anyone think that there is an advantage (as far as reliability, and/or stability) to get an Intel brand Motherboard working with an Intel CPU?

I'm probably going to the University of Toronto. I'm hoping to get in the term after Christmas. I have to start saving my money now for my laptop and/or desktop. I want to have an idea what I should be saving for and how much I should save. My figure for technology for school is about $3500-4500 Canadian Dollars.

I might go to University in the United States next year is I can get a scholarship for playing hockey. I'm working on getting one this year.

ANyway, I'm thinking about getting one of the two potential computers right now, so I have to know that is the best quality.

The AMD Athlon 64 FX are the best for gaming, there not cheap though.

Does anyone think that there is an advantage (as far as reliability, and/or stability) to get an Intel brand Motherboard working with an Intel CPU?
Intel motherboards are pricy. From my experience though I greatly advice to buy a motherboard with Intel chipset.
They are cheaper than 100% Intel boards, but fit very good with Intel processors

I recommend to go to emachines.com then select one of their AMD64 laptops. After selecting your laptop, go to bestbuy.com or circuitcity.com to buy them. These online stores have about $250 rebate.

This to me is the best for your money. Good luck!

I heard that eMachines were really well priced, but are pieces of crap altogether. I guess you get what you pay for.

My new AMD FX 53 processor runs rather cool with only the fan it comes with and the two 120 mm fans in the Antec tower. The size of the new 939 pin processor is only about a silver dollar!

Emachines was currently acquired by Gateway. I've heard really bad things about Gateway computers. The company really wants to focus on home entertainment business rather than computers.

I've heard that both Gateway and eMachines are CRAP. They said that the specs look awesome, but the computers are poorly built and they tend to have cheap cooling systems, o the CPUs overheat.

eMachines is a company mostly geared toward people who wants the most out of a PC while not having to shed out a load of money. They generally build value PC's ... their performance is OK for the average person but not for people who will be using the computer almost every hour of the day.

Just to say for the heck of it ... Intel may make good chipsets and processors but avoid the Celeron base processor. They may have Celeron processors listed at the same clock speed as their P4 counterparts and the Celeron chipset is generally half the price as that to the P4 but I find (from experience) that the Celeron processor will make any computer experience a living hell ... especially if you expect alot out of your computer.

we have a name for Celerons: "the Celery processor"

That's funny. I will probably never buy a celeron, I heard that they are super slow.

yeah, i have an e-machines 800 or something, total junk, i stuck it in a ATX case and am doing a sort of rolling upgrade, just changing bits when they become the slowest part of my pc....

Ilikesalt ::: yes my cpu has about a 3" square heatsink with a tiny fan on it, no probs though, easy to fix take a look at this http://www.tweak3d.net/tweak/airflowtweak/5.shtml
just pages 5 and 6.shtml

I build my PC from the ground up for around 1700 bucks US.

2.8 p4 800 fsb with hiper threading
abit mother board
1.5 gigs of ram
2 72 gig 10,000 rpm STA drives in raid
costom all aluminum case with side window
a all copper thermalteck heat sink was the best at the time
gforce fx 5600 256 aka junk
5.1 dig sound system
gaming keyboard and mouse lighted pad
has 9 fans in it
500watt power supply
2 250 gig 7200 rpm storage drives
and a dvd-r / cdr burner
and the good old 3.5 floopy 8)
sound activated lighting system inside the case

build the computer your self its cheeper

I heard that eMachines were really well priced, but are pieces of crap altogether. I guess you get what you pay for.
My own my emachines Laptop for about 6 months now and it beats my expectations so far.

I admit that the name emachines and the low cost scared me at first but it turned out that the laptop itself feels solid physically and no problem that I have encountered yet except for one time, the DVD recorder does not eject after the little button is pressed forcing me to restart then things are back to normal.

i was in the same situation as you going into school last year. i ended up buying an expensive desktop replacement laptop. i used this as my main PC and I also brought it to classes, etc. this was not the best choice. desktop replacement notebooks are not very mobile, and it was hard carrying to classes. my suggestion would be to get a good desktop PC (PLEEEEEEASE DO NOT GET A MAC!!!), i prefer the pentium 4 CPU. AMD used to be a good company, used to be able to get a CPU that far exceeded the performance of an intel at the same price, but that just isnt the case anymore. these days, you will get the same performance out of whatever price u put in, AMD or Intel, and becuase AMD runs much hotter than Intel, i usually just go for the Intel. plus, the P4's are much faster at video encoding than the AMDs. i saw a benchmark somewhere, where a p4 3.4ghz beat an athlon64 in video encoding. it seems like AMD isnt the company it used to be.

so, that would be my suggestion....buy a real good desktop pc, and get a small, mobile notebook for school work. that is what i am currently doing, and it works well for me.

hope my suggestions are helpful.

go AMD, AMD is awesome, cheap, and colder than intel

and colder than intel
maybe only if AMD is in Antartica and Intel in Sahara

shadarlocoth, where did you get a PC like that with 5 gigs of RAM for that price?

I have been looking at tigerdirect.ca, they seem to have some of the best online prices. I might get my video card off of eBay. Since I have not gons shopping fer a video card for a long time, does anyone have any suggestions? I want to try out Doom 3, so I need something with power.

So what is the difference between this: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=716809&Sku=P450-8511

and this: http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1009364&Sku=E145-6802

I can't afford the second one unless I get a huge deal on everything else.

What is the best video card for the price? Any suggestions?

I have decided to go with an Intel Hyper-threading processor since programs always seem to work better with Intel. I need a good Video Card to support it.

go Intel go Intel

*cough*i have intel stocks*cough*

Buy Intel, go Intel go Intel.

only took a quick glance at the gfx cards, but damn your have to look deep in your pocket to get the last one :), also note it got "only" DVI output, not a bad thing unless you get a older monitor.

vslayer: AMD is about the same price as intel for the speed you get, and it is a fact that AMD CPUs operate at a higher temperature than intel. therefore, with an intel system, you have great performance, as well as less system becuase the fans do not have to run as high

ilikesalt: he did not say 5gb of RAM, he said 1.5gb....it is impossible to have more than 4 gb of RAM in a 32bit system, more than that cannot be allocated. really, anything more than 1gb or 1.5gb is overkill for the average user, even if u plan on playing doom 3 a lot...go with a high end graphics card over more system memory if you want better gaming performance. i would suggest the new ATI X800 line of video cards...they are a bit expensive, but their performance will play any game today, even doom 3 at high settings with no problem.
this one looks really cool: http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=14-161-119&depa=0
it has better performance than the geforce 6800, a very cool (no pun intended) cooling system, and is much lower in price than the geforce

That looks like a great video card. The price is still a bit high, but II'm still shopping around.

Look for what provides the best performance for your price range.

I'm not exactly sure what kind of performance I want...

I want something that won't go obsolete in the next year and that can run the latest games (like Doom 3) with maxed out (or almost maxed out) settings.

I heard that PCI express cards are better than AGP ones. I'm reading a lot lately. What is your opinion on PCI express (16x) cards?

Then you will want a Athlon 64 FX with more then 512MB of DDR400 (two sticks for duel channeling of course) and a Radeon X800 or Geforce 6600.

PCI express are rare on motherboards but sure you want max performance go for it, it won't help you mcuh thought maybe in a few years it will have been worth it but not now.

edit please read refreances:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2149&p=7
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/doom3cpu_08020430812/3452.png
http://graphics.tomshardware.com/graphic/20040310/index.html

Thanks for the chart WellCookedFetus,

Pentium 4 EE is the Extreme Edition and Pentium 4 E is Hyper-Threading and Pentium 4 C is normal, right?

All of them have hyperthreading, but as performance goes EE>E>C

hyperthreading is the ability to run more then one thread at a time, processors with this feature on can run two thread at the same time simulating dual processing. This feature is very useful in doing multiple tasks, but few games are design to take advantage of multiple processing (multiple simultaneous threads). Doom3 like Quake 3 is design to take advantage multiple simultaneous threads, even so the P4 simple is no match for the Athlon 64’s on-die memory controller with extermely low latancy, hypertransport channel and 3Dnow.

Multiple threading is the future though, processor years from now will most likely run dozens of thread simultaneously or have multiple processing units on one chip. To give you a understand of why this is so important: the best neurons in the human brain can fire about 200 times in a second for a short burst, that would be about 200hz in computer language, extremely slow yes but the human brain runs billions of neurons in parallel doing different task simultaneously, equivalent to running billions of threads simultaneously.

To clear up some common anti-Mac info (though I do love Ctrl-Alt-Del), the G5 is very capable processor, and the only chip of the three 64-bit desktop chips which can claim direct parentage from mainframe/server processors (which has its advantages).

That and it seems the G5 Powerbook may very well be announced Monday (based on some Paris Expo advertisements - "Then: Super Computer on your desktop. Now:_______. Paris Macworld"). The G5 iMacs will be announced monday, for sure (already sub-announced last month in the midst of the "oops, we ran out of iMacs to sell you" debacle), but the price/performance for the iMac has always been sub-par.


What you should get really depends on what you are planning on doing with the machine. From the sound of things, the amount of non-console (xbox, PS2, etc) gaming you are planning on doing will largley removes Apple from your possible choices. While there is a healthy gaming market for Mac games, 95% of them are ports; they do not run as fast or as smoothly as their Windows counterparts. It is a major downside of having <5% of the installed userbase of personal computer systems.
Doom 3 will be released for Mac OS X sometime this fall, buut currently the official ship date for it is "when it's done", which isn't too promising.

further applicable tech notes:
1)AMD vs Intel. IME, and in the Expirience of many others, AMD chips are comparible to Intel offerings, for less money. For those of us who care about the Engineering asthetics of the underlying hardware, AMD chips were designed to be efficient and powerful. Intel chips were designed to run as fast as possible, efficiency and future advancement be damned.
This is why today you have a 3.4 Ghz Pentium 4 that isn't able to keep up with Athlon XP chips running at 2.1 Ghz, or G5 chips (IBM's 970, and now 970FX) running at 2.0Ghz. Intel lengthend the instruction pipeline to insane levels; this allows for more clock cycles per second, but causes serious real-world speed penalties when pipe bubbles or branch mis-predictions occur.
This is also why Intel has recently changed their marketing numbers, as they move away from the P4 "netburst" arcitecure, over to the much cleaner and more AMD and G5 methods used in the Pentium M (which can keep up with a Pentium 4 3.0 ghz while running at a paltry 1.6 Ghz).

2)My personal preference is the macintosh, because I use Windows 2k and XP all day at work, and hate the way it functions. And all too often, the way it breaks (1 registry file=1 point of failure=poor OS design). I would use Linux, but it's not *quite* there yet as an everyday desktop OS. I used it all the time back in college, and attempt it again every few months, but I still feel like I spending more time fixing and tweaking the system than I am using it. Plus, most games don't run under Linux w/o help from WINE, which incurs its own performance hit.
So, I get all the benifits of Linux with Mac OS X (based on a customised FreeBSD/Mach subsystem/kernel), no windows type spyware/viruses/vulnerabilities, *PLUS* MS Office and Photoshop and Garageband and Final Cut Pro (video editing) *and* gcc all on one machine.
And I do all my gaming on my PS2.


Specifically in reponse to WellCooked's post:
3)hyperthreading is not quite how you defined it. all modern chips and all modern OS's have the ability to multi-task, and more importantly, run multi-threaded applications (run peices of related code seperate from other code in the same application), and run instruction OO (Out of Order).
Hyper threading has to to with the method of handing the threads as they enter the processor's insctruction pipline - it reduces the chances of pipeline stalls due to one thread stalling out. So instead of "hyperthreading is the ability to run more then one thread at a time", its closer to "hyperthreading is the ability to actively handle more then one thread in the pipeline/CPU instruction queue". The processor's ALU (where the number crunching is done) only handles one instruction at a time .
Also, because Intel has not yet full implimenting operation grouping, the hyperthreading performance gains have been so far unimpressive.

4)Most modern games are also built threaded, however, games don't benifit as much from OOE and a threaded design, because everything is very sequential in games - much of the instruction code can't be heavily threaded, because it is dependant on everything else. Game really have four main threads: audio, video, UI, and background processing; each thread handles its own thing independantly of the others. It very difficult to break up one of those threads (say graphics) in any effective way.

5)AMD and gaming performance. You are correct in AMD's power in gaming right now, and as you hinted at, it's due to the XP 64's bandwidth, more so than the processing power. Getting information from RAM->CPU->GPU is much, much faster on the current AMD systems than on the 800mhz FSB Pentium systems.

6)multi-core chips: AMD has multi-core CPU's in t he works, the IBM POWER5 is multi-core, and the 980 (Apple G6) will most likely be dual-core as well. Motorola is presenting a dual-core G4 chip in October, which should be available for sale in PPC-based desktops before the end of Q1 '05.

7)Brain power vs computer power: that's my main theory of true AI, we may not see true AI until we have machines where every bit of memory is also a CPU.

good luck!

edit: reference material from my favorite tech site, ARStechnica.com. Most of the above theory info is from my college professor, all the CPU model specific info is from Hannibal the guys over on the ARStech boards.

introduction to microprocessor terminology and technology:
http://arstechnica.com/paedia/c/cpu/part-1/cpu1-1.html

multithreading & hyperthreading
http://arstechnica.com/paedia/h/hyperthreading/hyperthreading-1.html

explination of the the CPU pipeline
http://arstechnica.com/paedia/c/cpu/part-2/cpu2-1.html

pentium history part I
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/004/pentium-1/pentium-1-1.html
part II
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/004/pentium-2/pentium-2-1.html
Pentium future
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/004/prescott-future/prescott-1.html

The 64 bit argument in the Intel/AMD world
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/03q1/x86-64/x86-64-1.html

introduction to the 970: part I
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/02q2/ppc970/ppc970-1.html
Part II
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/03q1/ppc970/ppc970-0.html
(you should be noticing alot of similarities between all these chips by now)
Addendum
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/03q2/ppc970-interview/ppc970-interview-1.html

and the article only an Apple geek could love:
http://arstechnica.com/cpu/004/ppc-1/ppc-1-1.html

the multitasking to modern processor is simple stopping one task run over to another and then running back, at any one instant a processor is doing one instruction, there are some exceptions but those are in limited acts of caclutions, but in whole a processor is serial and cannot run in parrelel.

yeah. there is some level of simultainious instruction execution in the ALU of most processors (one integer, two fast integer, one FPU calculation might all be dispatched in one clock), but for the most part it's one instruction at a time once you get to the actual computation.