Author Topic: Intel Pentium (Read 595 times)

Waffle · « **on:** July 28, 2005, 05:44:42 PM »

I've been using AMD for the last several years. Anyway - I've been contemplating switching over to Intel due to some compatibitily issues with some software. From what I've read and done some research on, for graphics and audio editing - Intel is the way to go.

I have no clue about intel product line - only that they're up to P4s now..lol No clue on mother boards, ect.....

Right now as fas as graphics card - I'm ATIX800pro. I've also read ATI seems to perform better with Intel. than ATI the ATI//AMD combo.

Anyway - I'm not sure if I want to get a rack mount chasis with removable drive bays - go to dual processing, ect.... What woulld be the benifits in a workstation envioronment with dual processors?

The main audio software that would be on it would be Didgi-designs Pro-tools, as well as various 3d/2d editing programs.

and of course AH..lol

Anyway - I guess I'm looking for a muti-function mutimedia monster...at least 1.5-2GM RAM. I'll need firewire, and would prefer to have at least 4 SATA HD's in RAID, for data, and then at least one or 2 Smaller IDE drives for my OS / Programs.

Just looking for suggestions and benifits of a dual processor system as well as thoughts on intel and what I'm looking to do.

WindX · « **Reply #1 on:** July 30, 2005, 09:32:22 AM »

Waffle, Im running an Abit AG8 Third Eye motherboard with Intel P-4 3.2 extreme edition (2mb L2 cache) 800 mhz fsb lga775 processor, Abit X800 ATI 256mb video card, 2 gigs of Low Latency Patriot PDP Dual channel pc3200 memory, 2 Seagate 120gb sata 150 hdd's. I have yet to find any program or combination of programs that have been able to slow it down. I can play a DVD, a video in WMV, and DivX all at the same time with no problems. The only thing I had a problem with is the heat produced by the processor. I am using the Swiftech H20-120 watercooling kit to keep processor temps down to an acceptable level.

Krusty · « **Reply #2 on:** August 06, 2005, 05:25:05 PM »

The latest socket set is "LGA 775" a.k.a. "Socket T". There are plenty of mobos out there that support this, mobos with PCIe and with AGP (whichever you prefer).

I did a lot of research on the subject. I just ordered a new Asus mobo. I've heard MANY people swear by ASUS because of all the tweakability in the BIOS (overclocker's wet dream, I hear).

I went with a lesser P4 (only a 533mhz FSB and no hyperthreading) but I was on a budget. If you go past 3.4GHz, put a LOT of thought into cooling and ventilation. The future of personal computers is liquid cooling, because fans just won't cut it when we push the limits now with AMD and Intel chips.

So like I said if you go past 3.4 or so GHz, consider a small liquid cooling rig or just make sure your case is properly ventilated.

P.S. 4 ram slots are a must... don't settle for 2 or 3.

Overlag · « **Reply #3 on:** August 07, 2005, 09:43:34 PM »

changing to intel now would be like changing to SDR ram...... pointless, silly and a waste of money

Kev367th · « **Reply #4 on:** August 08, 2005, 03:38:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Overlag
changing to intel now would be like changing to SDR ram...... pointless, silly and a waste of money

Actaully even being and AMD user i would disagree.

Performance wise now that AMD have SSE3 theres not much to choose between both CPUs.

But I wouldn't say a P4 is a pointless waste of money.

Probably would come down to how much your willing to spend and what you feel comfortable with.

If he's going dual processor even with the Opteron performance, Intel still has lead on the dual CPU chipset side of things.

One caveat - Dual Core on a Dual Processor system - AMD. Main reason is every dual core Opteron you add you adds an extra memory controller. Allows greater use of avail memory bandwidth.

But single core Dual CPU - Intel.
I'm sure Krusty will recommend him a good setup.

Overlag · « **Reply #5 on:** August 08, 2005, 04:18:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kev367th
Actaully even being and AMD user i would disagree.

Performance wise now that AMD have SSE3 theres not much to choose between both CPUs.

But I wouldn't say a P4 is a pointless waste of money.

Probably would come down to how much your willing to spend and what you feel comfortable with.

If he's going dual processor even with the Opteron performance, Intel still has lead on the dual CPU chipset side of things.

One caveat - Dual Core on a Dual Processor system - AMD. Main reason is every dual core Opteron you add you adds an extra memory controller. Allows greater use of avail memory bandwidth.

But single core Dual CPU - Intel.
I'm sure Krusty will recommend him a good setup.

my orignal post was a bit silly really, it totally depends on what system he currently has. If its anything built in the last year or 2 from AMD, changing to Intel he will probably only see the slightest increase performance, at the expense of a extremely hot system, and crappy DDRII.

However if its duals (2x 1 1CPU), like 2 Xeons then thats ok. But then you go back to the "old" arguement of the past, cost. Why pay so much more for one brand, when the other brand performs on par, and if anything is starting to pull away?

Im currently pricing up some systems for a music producer. Prices range from

4 gig ram, 6600gt gfx, 74gig + 250gig HDD's etc

£2006 for a X2 4400 rig
£2180 for a 2x 2200mhz Opteron rig
£2240 for a 2x 3200mhz Xeon rig (only more expensive due to AGP version of 6600gt same price otherwise)
£2320 for a Dual core 3200mhz P4

im torn between the top 3. system 4 im not even going to show the guy. Also note the AMD's are 2200 which is 3400 rating each.....basicaly meaning im 1 CPU speed rating higher on the AMD systems, yet costing less

Mak333 · « **Reply #6 on:** August 08, 2005, 12:02:28 PM »

If you play games atleast 40% of the time on your PC, Intel is not the way to go. If you look at some benchmarks on various games, you will see that even some of the cheapest AMD processors will outrun the lastest and greatest Pentium 4. Intel is great for a lot of the miscellaneous work and graphics and such, but for games, it really does let ya down.

My original setup was this:
Intel P4 2.8ghz
512MB pc2300 (DDR-400) RAM
80GB Hard Drive
CD/RW Drive
DVD Drive
ATI Radeon 7500LE

I upgraded to an ATI Radeon 9600XT and my RAM up to 1024MB or 1 Gigabyte of pc3200 RAM and didn't notice much of a difference in the game. Checked out some benchmarks and I noticed it was my CPU. Games these days (unlike a few years ago) depend more on your CPU usage than your RAM or Video Card usage.

llama · « **Reply #7 on:** August 08, 2005, 09:16:22 PM »

I wouldn't necessarily say that the AMD *CPU* is giving you compatibility problems. The CPU is top-notch.

I would bet that the motherboard *CHIPSET* is giving you a problem. There's VIA, SIS, NVIDIA, and other manufacturers making chipsets for AMD boards, and each of them have weird nuances, and need periodic driver updates.

When I get an Intel CPU, I make sure it is mated to motherboard with an Intel chipset. These too have nuances like the ones I mentioned earlier, but I figure that the developers have many of these in house, and are aware of them, and how to work around them.

I would *really* love a board with an Intel chipset that supports an AMD cpu. I would buy one in a second, but the last time you could do that was with the AMD-K6-3 and the Intel TX (I think) chipset.

For a while I had such a system, and it was the fastest rig on the WB Benchmark page. For about 1.5 weeks, that is. ;-)

-Llama
(happily running an Intel P4@3.2 and an Intel865-based motherboard.)

Krusty · « **Reply #8 on:** August 09, 2005, 01:11:26 PM »

That's another thing! If you get an intel mobo, ****get an 865 chipset mobo****!!!

Regarding dual core, I actually have little knowledge of them. I'd like to learn more, but I have no clue about what Intel's doing just now. I hope that in the future the dual cores use the same socket (LGA775) so that I don't have to buy a new mobo in a few years, if/when I get a dual core.

Kev367th · « **Reply #9 on:** August 09, 2005, 10:43:57 PM »

Only diff between Intel and AMD dual core is that AMD has memory controller on the CPU.
This should change next year when Intel moves the memory controller on die also.

Socket is going to be interesting -
AMD is definately moving to a new socket next year that will allow better performance from dual cores and DDR2

support

Intel - I have no idea

They're great CPU's Krusty (look at sig)

Krusty · « **Reply #10 on:** August 09, 2005, 11:55:30 PM »

Oh, I have respect for AMDs, sure. But I also have a preference for Intel. Don't get me wrong, if you like AMD go for it, but I'd suggest Intel any time. Avoid the Celery and you're good.

Kev367th · « **Reply #11 on:** August 10, 2005, 12:28:02 AM »

Yeah, hate celery, keeps getting stuck between my teeth

.