• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Poll: AMD or INTEL

J

JeffB

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 10, 2003
Messages
283
I'm building my new comp and am looking for some processor opinions

Here are the canidates.

1. Intel P4 3.2Ghz Extreme Edition
2. Intel P4 3.2Ghz
3. Dual Intel 3.2Ghz Xeons
4. AMD 64
5. AMD 64 FX-51

What do you think?
 
i think we all would like alot more info. i say definately not fx or extreme edition. i would get the amd64 for just a normal gaming system, but hey, thats just me.
 
If its free, get the Extreme Edition, If not, get any P4C... they rock...

Althought I would wait for Prescott...

Go Intel Either way... no i am not a fan boy, i just recognize a good processor when i see one....

A64 is top for gaming tho... but if you do anything productive... get a P4..
 
If you want top performance get the AMD 64 FX-51.

Either that or the A64 3200+ or the 3400+ when it is out.
 
Dual Xeons? Do you think that you need that much power for a simple gaming rig? :confused:
 
Its really not a gaming rig, no wait ya it is...

I will mostly get into 3d work and video editing and such.

As for details, heres the rest of the computer

512MB Kingston DDR400 w/ECC or without ECC x4
OR
Corsair 512MB DDR400 PC3200 CL2 x4

Radeon 9800 XT

Audigy 2 ZS Platinum

WD360 "Raptor" 36GB x2

WD2500 "Caviar SE" 250GB x2

Plextor Premium 52x32x52x CD Burner

Plextor DVD + RW

Antec Plus View 1000 AMG Case

Antec 550watt EPS12V

PCI 1394 Firewire Card

Logitech Z-680 Speakers
OR
Klipsch Promedia Ultra 5.1

Thermaltake Subzero 4G Thermo-Electric Cooling

And possibly a RAID card (Any suggestions on that one?)
 
Ok, Where to start...

First of all, you are going to need some more RAM, 1GB+ preferably. Next for processor they all are great, for top end I would get the Dual Xeons, Dual Opterons, FX, EE, or 3400+. Since you do alot of 3d work and video editing Its hard to say intel, but I think you might experience a few seconds lower. For me I love my FX and wouldnt trade it for anything, but I am mostly gaming, music, movies, and some HTML/Photoshop work. They are all great choices, but I really dont think you should get the EE, for $1000 the FX and 3400+ will beat it in multiple instances. Do you have any loyalties to either brand?

Antec 550watt EPS12V
Click to expand...

I believe that is a server PS, just get the normal one.

Logitech Z-680 Speakers
OR
Klipsch Promedia Ultra 5.1
Click to expand...

I like the Ultras better, You can go listen to them yourself if you want. The Ultras have a lighter bass, and the Logitech has more of a boomy bass. The logitech also has a problem with hissing sounds, although this is my opinion, I would go and listen to them at your local bestbuy, compusa, or circuit city.
 
Originally posted by Sc0rched

First of all, you are going to need some more RAM, 1GB+ preferably.
Click to expand...

He's got 2 gigs...those are 512MB...x4.

Which is excess. I'd go with 1 GB. That's all you really need.
 
3 if you can affard to have that on the list
it should pretty much cover any eventualities
like modeling atomic weapons, environmental change and deathray development :p

however you left out

6. Dual 248 Opterons
 
3400+ if you want top of the line and 3200+ or 3000+ for price/performance ratio. Intel and AMD products are more or less even right now, however, the AMD processors are ready for the 64bit revolution. As a result, these would be the ones I'd focus on for encoding and the like, as the higher integer addressability will come in useful. When the XP64 goes gold (has it already?), the gains by these processors should be quite noticable.
 
If I'm not mistaken, the Opterons take Registered RAM, which is "expensive"

Besides, I like Xeons better than Opterons, dont ask why.
 
indeed and yes my 4GB cost $1200
but there is also alot to be said for ECC
if your running critical aps
you didnt immediately mention the application, probably the single most important factor in your selection

(which is why I was cracking wise with the deathray :p )

SMP can benefit rendering but will have limited impact on modeling
 
Originally posted by Ice Czar
indeed and yes my 4GB cost $1200
but there is also alot to be said for ECC
if your running critical aps
you didnt immediately mention the application, probably the single most important factor in your selection

(which is why I was cracking wise with the deathray :p )

SMP can benefit rendering but will have limited impact on modeling
Click to expand...

Was that 4 gigs with ECC? And I'm only doing 2gigs
 
of the options listed 3. Dual Intel 3.2Ghz Xeons is the best one right now, and a dual 3.2 will beat the FX in the apps you are looking for, i dont know if you can get the fx to run in smp, although a dual opteron (say 248) would be another good option, but dont let the 64 bit applications worry you, remeber the 386 was a 32 bit cpu and there was not any real 32 bit os's for a long time (os2 maybe the first or winnt 4.0)
 
Originally posted by JeffB
If I'm not mistaken, the Opterons take Registered RAM, which is "expensive"

Besides, I like Xeons better than Opterons, dont ask why.
Click to expand...

This is misguided...look at the benchmarks. And if benchmarks don't count, one can be called a fanboy.:(
 
Originally posted by yoda634
AMD.

Perhaps dual opterons?
Click to expand...

good man.

at the very least, single opteron 2xx in a dually board, so you can upgrade to dual later. duals are awesome, used to have one, sucks I had to get rid of it for a much more powerful single proc (games are starting to get too advanced and pissy)
 
Originally posted by JeffB
Was that 4 gigs with ECC? And I'm only doing 2gigs
Click to expand...

yup Crucial PC2700 ECC & Registered 1GB sticks in a Tyan K8W
 
I would wait for Prescott which is due out in less then a month. There could be some major changes involving it and new motherboards. ATI is working with Intel on some new technology. And VIA and Intel are due out with PCI Express for the Pentium 4's soon.

The AMD A64 motherboards i've seen are some real crap especially when it comes to memory compatibility. And being there ISN'T going to be a 64bit OS any time real soon i wouldn't bother buying into the 64bit idea. Microsoft wont release it till Intel has a working 64bit processor. And you can't just have a 64bit OS ither, the games and applications have to be written for it and who knows how long before they start doing that. Sorry but Intel has ALOT more pull then AMD and Microsoft doesn't want to release two 64bit versions.

The new socket T teja's are something to look out for also coming late summer 2004.
 
http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1816
Opteron 244 vs. Xeon DP 2.80
a server oriented comparision but thats to be expected

the main advantage of 64bit
it eliminates the 4GB mremory barrier w\ 32bit
my Tyan will support 16GB of RAM

Where the Athlon 64 has 1 single channel 64bit memory controller
integrated on the processor the Opteron
has an integrated dual channel 128bit controller.

Supports up to three HyperTransport links, providing up to 19.2GB/s peak bandwidth per processor
 
Originally posted by Daemia
Get whatever you want really.
Click to expand...

Thats not the type of post he wanted. He wants advice, not what h knows
 
i'd get dual xeons if it was up to me.....that is.....if this is all free
 
Well he needs to stop and think what he is going to use this computer for. For common uses such as hardcore gaming and normal application usage he definately doesn't need anything more than a regular uniprocessor. I'm gonna take a wild guess and say he would never use over 1.5GB of RAM and 6.4GB/s of bandwidth for anything he went to do. That said i would buy a Pentium 4 as it has a great gaming to application and encodeing ratio. They have alot of overclocking headroom and the motherboards have alot less compatibility issues than the new A64's mobos.
 
Originally posted by JeffB
I'm building my new comp and am looking for some processor opinions

Here are the canidates.

1. Intel P4 3.2Ghz Extreme Edition
2. Intel P4 3.2Ghz
3. Dual Intel 3.2Ghz Xeons
4. AMD 64
5. AMD 64 FX-51

What do you think?
Click to expand...
P4 2.4C @ 3.2
 
I dont see where people get that Registed RAM is expensive. I got my 1GB of PC-3200 with 2-3-2-6 timings for the same price as unbuffered ram. *sigh*

the motherboards have alot less compatibility issues than the new A64's mobos.
Click to expand...

I never had a problem with my mobo, but maybe im just special.:p I dont mean to pick a fight though. I myself think a P4 might be a better option in this case.
 
If you get Xeons over Opterons, you're supporting an outdated product. Xeons have fallen behind and Intel wont give them the boost they need till they jump to Prescott. As far as single processors go, the FX-51/3400+/3.2C are ALL good options, the EE is just a waste of money. For what you're doing though, Dual 248's and 1GB of Corsair or OCZ Registered would do nicely.
 
Originally posted by burningrave101
Well he needs to stop and think what he is going to use this computer for.
Click to expand...

he posted that 10 posts into the thread :p
(I know I ribbed him a bit for that)

I will mostly get into 3d work and video editing and such
Click to expand...

exactly where alot of RAM and SMP pays off ;)
 
Originally posted by Sc0rched
I dont see where people get that Registed RAM is expensive. I got my 1GB of PC-3200 with 2-3-2-6 timings for the same price as unbuffered ram. *sigh*

I never had a problem with my mobo, but maybe im just special.:p I dont mean to pick a fight though. I myself think a P4 might be a better option in this case.
Click to expand...

I dunno about the Asus FX-51 board but the current A64 boards have quite a few issues that need to be fixed. The ability to lock the AGP/PCI bus and memory compatibilities are just a couple.

Given these overall disappointing test results, motherboard manufacturers' claims that theAthlon64 can acccomodate large memory volumes of more than 4 GB borders on the absurd.

Moever, as our test has shown, when two DIMM modules are used on most of today's commerically-available motherboards, often incomprehensible problems can be expected.A memory upgrade can thus be especially problematic, as the localisation of the problem-causing components can take hours and put a strain on the user or white box vendor's the nerves.

Not even well-known names like Gigabyte or MSI are a guarantee for smooth operation, and therefore the only option that remains for users who need 1 GB or more memory is to study merchandise return agreements carefully. We can't even guarantee that the boards from Biostar and Chaintech will work perfectly with all the available DIMMs. These two manufacturers have simply done their "homework" better and have passed our spot check. We hope defects will be remedied quickly through improved BIOS versions.
Click to expand...

http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20040112/memory_performance-19.html
 
Originally posted by burningrave101
I would wait for Prescott which is due out in less then a month. There could be some major changes involving it and new motherboards. ATI is working with Intel on some new technology. And VIA and Intel are due out with PCI Express for the Pentium 4's soon.

The AMD A64 motherboards i've seen are some real crap especially when it comes to memory compatibility. And being there ISN'T going to be a 64bit OS any time real soon i wouldn't bother buying into the 64bit idea. Microsoft wont release it till Intel has a working 64bit processor. And you can't just have a 64bit OS ither, the games and applications have to be written for it and who knows how long before they start doing that. Sorry but Intel has ALOT more pull then AMD and Microsoft doesn't want to release two 64bit versions.

The new socket T teja's are something to look out for also coming late summer 2004.
Click to expand...

prescotts are plagued by what has always plagued intel's high-end p4 series, way too hot and power-hungry and way too underpowered. i agree that A64 isnt the way to go since you lose a lot of the advantage of the new AMD procs, but Opterons crush p4's and xeon's. And microsoft is finishing up the 64bit OS, because what is intel going to do, suddenly not work with microsoft stuff?

and i guess you dont know this, but the 64 windows also runs 32 bit stuff as fast or even faster than the 32 bit XP
 
Dual Xeons .. you don't want anything less for 3d work and video editing .. I've worked on Dual AMDs .. and they were crap .. get the Xeons ..
 
I think the most important thing to consider is what the computer is going to be used for. If you're a gamer, I think the FX-51 paired with a 9800XT or a nicely OCed 9800pro is the best proc/gfx card combo available right now. I have access to several different high-end gaming computers (p4s...Athlon64 3200, etc.), and I wouldn't trade my set up for any one of them. I play a wide variety of the newest games out, and the FX-51 just smokes!
I'm anxious to see how HL2 and some of the newer DX9 games are gonna look on it!
 
Originally posted by kronchev
prescotts are plagued by what has always plagued intel's high-end p4 series, way too hot and power-hungry and way too underpowered. i agree that A64 isnt the way to go since you lose a lot of the advantage of the new AMD procs, but Opterons crush p4's and xeon's. And microsoft is finishing up the 64bit OS, because what is intel going to do, suddenly not work with microsoft stuff?

and i guess you dont know this, but the 64 windows also runs 32 bit stuff as fast or even faster than the 32 bit XP
Click to expand...

Well prescott is going to debut on the new 90 nano process so its scalability for overclocking is going to be very good. All the Pentium 4 processors i've used have always run cooler then the AMD processors. The 3.8GHz Prescott is supposed to use up to 150w of power but for something of that speed on 90 nano its to be expected. The current Athlon and Pentium 4 processors both demand 70w off the 12v line.

Opterons and Xeons are too expensive and unpracticle for normal computing. If your running a server or doing business graphics designing then its probably worth all the money. Otherwise its not.

Pentium 4's with Hyperthreading work really well with graphics designing programs and other applications. They excell in encodeing and video editing. Prescott will have a new and improved Hyperthreading setup with SSE3.

And yes i know that the 64bit OS will alow the programs that are written for 32bit to run even faster but that doesn't mean they can run in 64bit mode and Prescott is suppost to have 64bit extensions along with Teja's rumored to have full 64bit support. Microsoft and Intel are in direct ties as is ATI who is working with Intel on a new chipset and integrated graphics. AMD doesn't have the money or the backing to keep up with Intel in a 64bit race i doubt. AMD can't even put out their own Chipset for their top end processors. The thought of even expecting a Windows XP 64bit is completely unpracticle until after this summer to what i've read. Microsoft wont release a 64bit OS for just the AMD platforms because they would have to release another when Intel had a 64bit processor. Microsoft hasn't been working on the 64bit OS anyways, they've been finishing up service pack 2 for the current Windows XP 32bit. Intels Grantsdale chipset should start hitting in March.

The new improved Hyperthreading on Prescott is suppost to give up to 30% faster results in encodeing and video editing.

Intel will continue to release Northwoods this year also. The 3.4GHz P4EE, 3.4GHz Northwood, and 3.4GHz Prescott are due out shortly.

FURTHER DELAYS in the introduction of AMD64 for Windows are because Intel is preparing its own gig on future Yamhill technology.

Microsoft, according to this conspiracy theory, has no plans whatever to release an OS that will run only on AMD 64-bit CPUs.

Microsoft will then release Windows XP for X86 just as soon as Intel declares its intent to also provide a similar technology on its future chips.

Which it won't do for a little while now.

If you have an X86-64 codebase and processor architecture specific extensions for both AMD and Intel are provided, the install will detect which host processor is in play.

Then it will install the correct elements of Windows.

We think this makes absolute sense and where you will have an x86-64 codebase and then processor architecture specific extensions for both AMD and Intel - so dependent upon which host processor the install routine detects, the correct elements of Windows will be installed… er, did we say Windows Elements?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top