AMD or Intel?
 

I don't know which one to get!

AMD64 3000+ Socket 939 or P4 3.0GHz Socket 478 or 775

P4 socket 775's run too hot and use a fair bit of power, the AMD64 socket 939 run much cooler and save power. Which will be better for encoding in general (video & audio). I get the feeling Intel is better, but if I get Intel it will be socket 478. Any advice?

I think there was a thread related to this on doom9 and it seems that on XVID jobs AMD is also faster, well it depends on the instruction sets (but to whon I say that as YOU got skills in coding c++). AMD64 also gots SSE2 and I think especially for you its importand on which CPU libavcodec runs better.
Related to cooling, well ... a simple change of the boxed coller with a Zalman or Thremalright is IMHO a silent and cool solution.

My choice would be:

- AMD64 3200+ 939
- MSI KT NEO PLATINUM 939 board (as its the best Board available for 939)
- PC3200 RAM from A-DATA or MDT (CL 2.5)

The two different setups I was considering were:

3.0GHz Pentium 4 Socket 478 Prescott
Gigabyte GA-8IPE1000 PRO2
512MB DDR PC3200 "Legend" RAM

or

AMD Athlon64 3000+ Socket 939
ABIT AV8 Socket 939
512MB DDR PC3200 "Legend" RAM

The AMD rig would be cheaper, bumping the processor up to the 3200+ would make it about the same.

I want the setup that will encode TMPGEnc, XviD, FFMPEG & Mencoder, Lame and Ogg Vorbis jobs the fastest, and not too much power. The open-source tools are not a problem as they can be optimised to take every advantage of a CPU, and probably are best optimised for AMD already. But I think TMPGEnc is far more optimised for Intel, and AMD's just don't compare because of the compiler options used. But I'm not sure, and can't really test it out. The other benefit I see with the AMD is under Linux where I can immediately take advantae of the 64-bit capability. But this apparently is not very significant. Hmm, not an easy decision. The AMD looks like the way to go, but I'm still not sure.

Hi Peter,

Well, that would rule out AMD, because AMD is far more power hugry than Intel.
But if you really want the fastest thing, then AMD64 is the way to go.

-kwag

AMD64 is getting the backing of a number of big players in the tech industry as Intel made the big mistake of deciding backwards compatibility was not important.

64 bit version of linux/solaris/bsd and all the other flavours of *nix will only improve with time,

Cheers,

That was the case, but apparently the tables have turned. Check out this table from TomsHardware http://www20.tomshardware.com/mother...et_775-49.html
Compare the Pentium 3.0E GHz with the AMD Athlon64 3400+.

AMD Athlon64 socket 754 processors use much less power than AthlonXP processors, and much less power than the P4 Prescott processors. Socket 939 isn't in that table, but it shouldn't be much different. Seems that AMD solved their power leakage problems and Intel now have it.

AMD looks like its the way to go. But I'm still not sure.

You're right Peter :!:
I would definitely go with the AMD 64 :D
Look here: http://www.techreport.com/onearticle.x/7417

-kwag

Looks like AMD is the go then. Can't wait to get it. Living in "regional" areas suck - you have to wait a long time for stores to get new stock after pre-christmas sales.

What I'm getting is:
300W Antec Solution Series PSU (hopefully this one won't blow up!)
AMD Athlon64 3200+ Socket 939 CPU
Abit AV8 M/B
512MB DDR PC3200 "Legend" RAM (or Corsair if I do some haggling)
XpertVision ATI Radeon 9600LE 256MB 128-bit DDR

Total cost: AU$865 (~US$650)

If I ordered the same system online, it would cost me AU$804 + postage. Stupid local computer store rip-off merchants.

If I lived in the USA, I could by the same from newegg.com for only US$500 8O.

Don't mind me, I'm just pissed off that I'm spending all the money I earned working over my holiday break. So much for saving money :x.

Hi Peter :),
That's what usually happens to me too :(.
Whenever I "sacrifice" myself a bit more by working overtime (when I do have time for paid overtime 8O) or at the weekends, there's always something happening to me.
Either it is the car that won't start and I have to buy a new start-engine, or is the kitchen oven that toasts and I have to buy a new one, or my PC mobo+cpu fries due to thunderstorms, etc, etc...
So, yeah, I do know what you mean.
All but the part about country side effect.
We have plenty of PC stores here and they're all full of hardware right now.
BUT it is a lot more expensive then back there at the US or Australia :(.
Well, that's just the way it is and I've gotta learn to live with it.
Just a few words so you can see you're not alone :lol:.
Cheers

Peter, an Athlon64 3200 is known for better overclocking as anyway you want to push it a little, thats why I recommend it.
Also think about the mainboard, the MSI KT NEO Platinum gots the most settings and its the "lovemachine" in the AMD64 user scene.
The AMD64 by its default gots less vcore than a XP model and so a significant real MHz increase is possible up to 2500-2600 Mhz but it depends on the AMD64's stepping. As HeatsinkCooler I recommend a Zalman one (the big one) which keeps your CPU very cool and also silent :)

Related to your Graphics Card: Do you play the latest games or is your intention more in Video Processing/watching?

If yes, then an ATI Radeon 9250 with VGA and DVI connectors is a very good choice cause:

- Very good TV out capabilities via TV out
- In case of Dual connectors (DVI VGA) you can use your monitor via DVI/VGA Adapter and solder an VGA-Scart adapter for sending a Real 640x480i signal to your Beamer,TV or whatever means 1a RGB! Tvout.
- Its noise "dead" as its passive cooled :)

The MSI Neo2 Plantinum board is really expensive. $AU 300 is a lot more than $AU 185. The Gigabyte GA-K8NS Ultra-939 looks ok, and will only cost me $10-$15 more. The nForce3 Ultra chipset is probably a better choice than the Via alternative. Cheers for pointing out an alternative. nForce3 Ultra chipsets are better for overclocking apparently, the Neo2 would be really nice. Maybe I should rob a bank? :lol:

Edit:
I don't play games much, but I want to have a system powerful enough to handle the latest games just in case a game comes out that I'd like to play (and have time to play!). Don't really use TV-out, that's what KVCD/KDVD is for :P.

Hi: I want to upgrade my system, board, cpu, etc.

I use Windows XP. What is the better choice?
Thank you.

I think you tell to few to have an interresting answer.
People do not know what you want to do, and how much you are ready to put on the table.
(note : upgrade = changing all your PC or changing some pieces only ? If it is the second solution, then tell us from what you are starting).

For the "etc." part, Windows 2000 :!:
Really. Not kidding.
If you want a faster and more stable OS, get yourself Win2K with all service patches.

-kwag

I totally agree .... I also changed from XP to W2k more than one year ago :)

Thank for your answers.

Please advise me what can I buy dealing between quality and money, for a multi purpose PC (I mean encoding and playing movies and games).

The matter is : is it possible to buy a legal win2K nowaday ? ;-)

(I'm not even sur to not having read that win2K will be dropped from windows update soon -> means no more security patches).

I still have one orig cd here from my first PC, and I do think there are still W2k offers available in the stores.

But youre right, I do hope the patch support for Win2k wont be dropped soon :)

I don't think Win2k support will drop any soon.
As a matter of fact, Windows NT 4 support was just recently dropped :!:
http://www.informationweek.com/story...00171&tid=5999
And NT 4 is WAY older than Win2k. So there will be Win2k development for quite a while, because Win2k is heavily used in corporations.

-kwag

But it is win2k fully compatible with PC games?
And with multiple monitor system?

If I do understand you right ....

a multiple Monitorsystem depends on the right HardwarePciCard(s) and their drivers compatible with Win2k. Almost all Graphic cards do support in their drivers Win2k, so thats not an issue. Even the old very good matrox G400 ones.

And Gaming?! Well I'm not a gamer at all but AFAIK if you got the latest DirectX installed and full working drivers (as mentioned above) then this would be no issue.

I confirm that I can play with Doom3 and Rome Total War (two very recent games) on my win2000 equiped laptop.

I am sorry to say that we (the company where I work for) have recently received an email from Microsoft recommending us to move on to XP and 2003.
They emailed us because we had sent them a purchase order of 10 x W2K Pro licenses.
They told us that W2K lifecycle is reaching it's end and that they should stop W2K support during this year.
I don't have to say that from then on "bye bye" Service Packs (which already stoped) and security updates, do I?
All in all, it's a very good piece of an OS.
2003 is bloated of too many features we don't really need and it turns out to be slower on our old dual PIII servers.
I'll miss it.
Just thought I should let you know.
Cheers

We (Nortel Comany) also use W2K on our laptop (that are rented with winXP but the OS is immediatly changed when the PC arrive :-)). I guess that this is why I also saw this news somewhere.

When I said we, I meant Papelaco - Avaya Silver Business Partner.
Then that means you are our competitor and I ain't talking to you never again :mrgreen:.
Just kidding you :lol:
Nevertheless we have already moved on most of our desktop PCs to WinXP but some of them need to remain with W2K due to software incompatibility issues detected a long time ago with our ERP software.
On the server side we'll keep working with W2K for a very long time.
But we'll start some testing with 2003 by mid this year.
After all we will keep on needing the security updates...
Cheers guys

Finaly I updated my PC with this configuration:

AMD64 3200+ 939
Gigabyte GA-K8NS Ultra-939
1024 Mb RAM DDR
HDD 160 Gb
GeForce4 ti4200 128
Pinnacle AV-DV

I have some questions:

1 - Start up is slow, it is normal (I mean before load WinXP)?
2 - In start up screen, it shows CPU clock = 200 Mhz. What is it? Is this ok?

No, it isn't. AMD64 3200+ has FSB at 400 MHz, so something is incorrectly set up ...

Saludos,

Video card clock ?

If the CPU speed is correct, the CPU clock is also correct. With all the different buses, it could actually be 2x200=400.

I suggest you check the BIOS settings, the definite answer is found there.

Slow startup might be caused by initializing SATA/RAID devices even if there are none. If you don't have any, you can disable SATA in BIOS which will make booting faster.

I already was check the bios, but I didn't understand.
It shows cpu overclock value = 200 and AGP port = 66.
No other site shows 200 Mhz as value.
I still don't understand if that value (200) is ok or not.

GA-K8NS Pro-939

http://www.giga-byte.com/Motherboard...Socket+939.htm

http://www.giga-byte.com/Motherboard...%20Pro-939.htm

Download and install CPU-Z. See what that program shows.

EDIT: I am quite positive that 200MHz is the correct value.

Hmmm, I think that you've reason. 400 MHz only if there is DDR memories working in Dual Channel mode (400 = 2 x 200 MHz in this case) ...

Cheers,

And that's not actually 2x200MHz. It's 128bit (dual channel) vs. 64bit (single channel) and the difference isn't 100%:wink:

With AMD's latest processors, HTT is the multiplier which adjusts the memory bus speed. With Intel's processors it's usually 4x (533=133x4, 800=200x4).

Really? 8O Living and learning! :D

Greetings,

That's true..it's very hard to keep up with the technique so I could be wrong as well :lol:

Dual channel is a nice thing to have if you use memory-intensive applications, and video processing is one of those. With them it gives a good boost, in other apps probably ~5% compared to single channel mode.