AMD or Intel

M

mawd

New member
Hi....will ALL current programmes run properly on the new 64 bit AMD/Intel processors, providing I use the current 32 bit Operating System....IOW...are the new chips 100% backward compatible? Also....I've read that top end audio programmes are written around the Intel specifications....is there any evidence that AMD's aren't? I currently use AMD with my old machine and I love it, but I'm planning on ordering a new PC for music only and I'd like to get a definitive answer on this....AMD or Intel.
Regards.....MAWD
 
You not only need to use a 64-bit OS, but a true 64-bit audio program, 64-bit plugins and 64-bit drivers for your sound interface and other devices.

Oh did I forget to mention that the wise man said, "he who lives on the bleeding edge will often get splattered with blood." You'll get to diagnose and fix all the bugs that are rampant in early versions.

Make a list and start checking it off. When satisfied, start building.... (same as any other computer project)
 
TimOBrien said:
You not only need to use a 64-bit OS, but a true 64-bit audio program, 64-bit plugins and 64-bit drivers for your sound interface and other devices.
Click to expand...


:confused: :confused: I have an AMD Athlon 64 3500+ and I dont think Cubase SX3 is a 64 bit application, Correct me if Im wrong, but I thought that you could run 32 bit applications with the 64 bit chip?
 
Carter said:
:confused: :confused: I have an AMD Athlon 64 3500+ and I dont think Cubase SX3 is a 64 bit application, Correct me if Im wrong, but I thought that you could run 32 bit applications with the 64 bit chip?
Click to expand...
you can but it will not run at it's fullest potential. Even so I would say go for dual core and 64 bit processor and hold off on the 64 bit operating system. 64 bit processors still work with 32 bit operating systems. Cubase for example has dual processing built in to it. its too soon for 64 bit but its nice to have when it settles down and widely accepted and used. Then it will be better supported. My processor pick would be either AMD 3800+X2 )budget wise) or 4400+X2. if you got some more cash. And so on.
 
The 64-bit apps such as Sonar 5 may very well take advantage of 64-bit registers and floating point math. Ask Cakewalk.

This means Windows continues to do 32-bit I/O, but the Sonar program is smart enough to use 64-bit libraries when it detects 64-bit hardware. This is a very old concept, so I would be very surprised if Sonar 5 doesn't use 64-bit hardware with standard WinXP.
 
Cubase SX3 and Sonar 5 both provide 64 bit versions - but everything needs to be 64 bit - software, and all related hardware (soundcards, etc) will need 64 bit drivers or you're stuck. To me, AMD vs Intel is like Ford vs Chevy. Pick one and don't look back (I like AMD).

Bob
 
All 64-bit is a shame... it doesn't take a lot of coding to determine which library to use at startup time. MS did this for years (hardware vs software floating point).

There is a huge advantage to using native 64-bit functions in hardware. Especially in floating point.

The real battle in AMD vs Intel is in the bus speed and pipeline efficiency. Intel chose to tweak hell out of the clock rate (and market accordingly), where AMD increased the efficiency of how much work is done per clock cycle. Brute force vs finesse.

The dog Intels are the Celerons and the others with the slow FSB (front side bus) speeds. This is a very noticeable difference, and why low end Dell and the others feel so sluggish. Intel's new 945 series chipset with PCIe is a real performer. I have one in my new Dell 6400 latop with a T2300 Duo-Core processor. This chipset supports the fast FSB and memory bus speeds that make the difference between a hotrod and a pig.

Even with the hotrod hardware, I had to wipe the new Dell 6400 clean, and do a fresh reinstallation to get rid of the endless amount of bundled junk. The difference is performance is significant.
 
BTW, Athlon 64s have both 32 and 64-bit registers, thus there is no 'loss' from using 32 bit apps.
 
Opteron

Dude if you want to be super serious you could build a computer with 2 dual core opteron 200's I don't think pentium can even touch that especially considering pentiums run really hot wich means more fan noise. I have an AMD 64 3000+ with windows XP pro I want to get Windows 64 but I don't think it would make much of a difference since I'm only using Sonar 4. But most people will tell you that AMD out performs pentium, is cheaper, and I also learned that the reason that AMD's numbers like 3000+ and 3400+ and their clock speeds are slower is that the architecture is better than pentium and actually 3000+ is compared to a Pentium 3.0Ghz and 3400+ to a 3.4Ghz and so on, and if thats true then Price to power ratio is definately AMD.
 
JazzMang said:
BTW, Athlon 64s have both 32 and 64-bit registers, thus there is no 'loss' from using 32 bit apps.
Click to expand...

Hi....I'm the guy who initially asked about chips....AMD or Intel. Along the way I learned a lot about the two big ones...AMD and Intel and Motherboards and all that kind of stuff. It certainly helped me in putting together a system for PC recording. In fact....I'm getting it built as we speak. I want to thank everyone who put in their experience and opinions etc. It sure helped me to decide which way to go when the time came to order a machine. Well that time came yesterday and the box is being built as we speak. Here's the system that I hope will do the job I have in mind, mainly creating loops off my Korg Triton Pro/Karma and flying them out to Acid....screwing with the data in Samplers and stuff....here's the system. I think it'll work well actually.
MAWD

AMD 3800+ Dual Core
Socket 939-MSI-motherboard-PCII-SLI-LAN and SATA
2 x 160 GIG Hard drives
Iomega 100 Meg Zip Drive
3 1/2 Floppy Drive
Legend nVidia Video Card
M-Audiophile 24/96 soundcard
Pioneer DVD-RW +/- drive
Tower w 450 W Power supply
XP Pro w SP 2
2 x 17" LCD screens
Internet:
D-Link G604T broadband Router
Surecomm PCI wireless network card

Whatdo ya think? Thumbs up or thumbs down?
 
Mawd, I don't see RAM specified here.

Get at least 1gb, and buy the sticks in pairs. This lets you take advantage of the dual memory controller functions which gives a performance increase. Look into Corsair XMS in matched pairs. They come with integral heat sink plates and a lifetime warranty. I have 100% success with these in the hotroad AMD machines. Corsair seems to be eclipsing Crucial as the memory of choice. Both are excellent. Avoid no-name memory.

The current trend of SLI/PCIe really helps the gamer, but I have to ask if there are any new cards that are optimized for the 2D (business) user. The Matrox G450 was a dual-head card and worked great for DAW use. It was useless as a gaming card, which is pointless on a DAW.
 
bgavin said:
Mawd, I don't see RAM specified here.

Get at least 1gb, and buy the sticks in pairs. This lets you take advantage of the dual memory controller functions which gives a performance increase. Look into Corsair XMS in matched pairs. They come with integral heat sink plates and a lifetime warranty. I have 100% success with these in the hotroad AMD machines. Corsair seems to be eclipsing Crucial as the memory of choice. Both are excellent. Avoid no-name memory.

The current trend of SLI/PCIe really helps the gamer, but I have to ask if there are any new cards that are optimized for the 2D (business) user. The Matrox G450 was a dual-head card and worked great for DAW use. It was useless as a gaming card, which is pointless on a DAW.
Click to expand...

Hi....I should have included this:
1 GIG DDR 400
Aopen QF 50B Black 450W P AMD Certified USB tower

I'm not really up on cards as such...the guy that's putting the system together for me tells me the card he's specified will work just fine...he's been building PC's for many years so I'll run with his advice. That's about all I can tell you. [I have no interest in games whatsover]
MAWD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top