AMD Vs. Intel processor

  • Thread starter Thread starter lapieuvre
  • Start date Start date
L

lapieuvre

Member
Hi,

Sorry for that post, I am sure it has been a concern a zillion times before, but I want to know if the choice of processor is really that important. I heard AMD was not recommended for audio recording. I also heard that Mhz for Mhz AMD processed data faster.

So which one do you prefer?

Thanks,

Thierry Angers
 
Intel. Got an Intel P4 3GHz Canterwood that I'll be ordering next week for mass audio recording.
 
Howyadoin,

I've tried both with my Delta 1010...

1st system:
AthlonXP 1800+, o/c to 2000+
nVidia nForce chipset
Win2K w/SP2
SoundForge 6.0

Had problems with popping and clicking, and the system ran hot as a bastard when tracking saturated the CPU. Had to resort to watercooling to get rid of the fans I was relying on before.

2nd system:
Intel P4 2.4 @533FSB, o/c to 3.0
Intel 845PE chipset
WinXP w/SP1
Cubase SX

So far (running 1 week), flawless... no pop/clicking, no temperature issues with stock heatsink/fan, might even try a Zalman Flower mongo-passive heatsink to reduce noise.

Granted that there are a lot of X-factors here; chipset, OS, software, etc.

The most common question on this board is "What works?". I've found an Intel setup that works beautifully with my Delta 1010. That's what matters at the end of the day. I've been using AMD since the K6-2 days, and there's no question that AMD has been kicking Intel's ass on price/performance since the Athlon came out. AthlonXPs do generally outperform P4s in the common benchmarks like Winstone and 3DMark.

As anyone can see from reading this board, there are people with relatively underpowered systems that are having no problems, and people with uber-boxen that are frustrated as hell. DAW performance is not as critical as stability and a properly configured software environment, particularly the OS and sound card drivers.

-Mark P.
 
http://www.liquiddaw.com/

this guy builds amd based DAWs, he has some benchmarks for AMD vs Intel with different audio apps and plugins. From what I understand the AMD processors are better at "pure math" like plugins and stuff. This website has an explanation
 
This topic pops up every couple of months.
It always ends up in this: There are happy users in both camps.

IMHO:
Intel users buy Intel because it's an Intel with its long history of good performance and stability.
I and with me a lot of other people buy AMD because the performance and stability is at least on par for less money.

Do a search.
 
As far as universal compatibility, I think Intel is better; i.e. all the major pro soundcard manufacturers say the Intel CPU/Intel chipset will work.

However, the only companies that give a definitive answer on AMD are Digidesign, Echo, and Aardvark. M Audio gives you a different answer everytime you e-mail them, and RME does not recommend them at this time.

However, being that I do use Echo right now, and for the forseeable future, I'll be sticking with AMD because i am very happy with the performance and the limited amount O' dough I've spent on it.
 
My personal choice will be INTEL all the way...

;)
Jaymz
 
James Argo said:
My personal choice will be INTEL all the way...
Not to start a war or anything, I'm just curious..
Why?
 
Gotta agree with everything Polaris20 said. An intel cpu with an intel chipset motherboard will give the the best compatibility with all soundcards. Whatever you do dont get an intel cpu with a non intel chipset motherboard (eg SIS). Virtually no soundcard manufacturers test that combination for compatibility.

I would go the extra step and say get an Intel brand motherboard (though my Asus works well and Asus is recommended often). Echo says to avoid MSI motherboards with their cards and I read somewhere that another soundcard manufacturer didnt recommend Abit (cant remember who??) so an Intel MB is the safest bet. Maybe I'm just overly paranoid when it comes to compatibility.
 
christiaan said:
Not to start a war or anything, I'm just curious..
Why?

I agree, Why?

Opinions are fantastic, but when someone states an opinion on a message board in response to a question, shouldn't there be a logical reason why included?

"I like Intel because it's supported more" would make sense.

--Just an observation that erks me about boards :D
 
alfalfa said:
Gotta agree with everything Polaris20 said. An intel cpu with an intel chipset motherboard will give the the best compatibility with all soundcards. Whatever you do dont get an intel cpu with a non intel chipset motherboard (eg SIS). Virtually no soundcard manufacturers test that combination for compatibility.

I would go the extra step and say get an Intel brand motherboard (though my Asus works well and Asus is recommended often). Echo says to avoid MSI motherboards with their cards and I read somewhere that another soundcard manufacturer didnt recommend Abit (cant remember who??) so an Intel MB is the safest bet. Maybe I'm just overly paranoid when it comes to compatibility.

I think the major thing with DAWs in general is that most of the damn companies (save Echo, Digidesign, RME, and Aardvark) don't test their stuff with what users may have.

Companies like Tascam, M Audio, and Presonus really aren't specific, and that's where the problems start.

From Presonus' site:

The FIREstation is compatible with any system using ASIO™ drivers. Including:

Operating Systems:
Windows XP
Mac OS 9.x and OS 10.2.5

That's nice, but what about cpu's and more importantly, chipsets? You mean to tell me this will work great with anything?

Riiiiiiigggghhhhhtttttt. I'm sure it will :D
 
christiaan said:
Not to start a war or anything, I'm just curious..
Why?

Not to offense other brand, but I love Intel because almost avery manufacturer (hardware & software) always test their products on Intel first. Thus it's asure compatibility. When it failed on Intel, it won't be on the market for sure. And Intel's proc is waaaay cooler than others (I really mean COOL). No need a bunch of heatsink all over the case = quiter PC. Quiter PC = good for recording. Sure I've heard a lot of good things about other brands, but I'll stick with Intel. That's my humble personal oppinion...

;)
Jaymz
 
Like Intel, James? Eh?

I'm not that big fan...

Do you agree with this:
"I like paying twice the price for half the fun"
... then Intel is for you. (It's not a true statement, but not far from it :D)

Click here
 
From what I understand, Intel and AMD will be getting a lot closer in the price differences in times to come. It is for that reason alone I went AMD. There was a guy standing at the computer parts store counter right beside me, buying an Intel machine about the same speed as my AMD, except he was paying a LOT more. (More than 500$ anyways).

Like everyone else said here, you really have to make sure of the compatibility factor. Whatever you buy, it has to work with all of your hardware components, most importantly your soundcard.

My MACHEEN;

ASUS A7N8X deluxe
ATHLON XP 1800+
512 ddr ram
various other parts including 1 m-audio delta 66

Never in my wildest dreams would I envision that a computer would run so flawlessly. This is going on now at least 4 months :D.
 
My old Mama once told me...

Play save, Jaymz... wear condom !

I ignored that...

Imagine what I got... :(

My old Mama once told me...

Play save, Jaymz... use Intel !

Somehow I'm just not gonna do the same foolish...

:D :D :D
 
moskus said:
Like Intel, James? Eh?

I'm not that big fan...

Do you agree with this:
"I like paying twice the price for half the fun"
... then Intel is for you. (It's not a true statement, but not far from it :D)

Click here

That may be the case now, but guess what - AMD is not profitable!

Regardless of whether they make better chips or not, they can't continue to do business the way they're doing it by undercutting Intel's prices. Sooner or later they're gonna go belly up or bump up their prices to continue to exist as a company.
 
James Argo said:
And Intel's proc is waaaay cooler than others (I really mean COOL). No need a bunch of heatsink all over the case = quiter PC.
Nonsense. Really. A P4 runs just as hot.
My AMD is cooled by a 20dB Fan/heatsink (and cost me less than $10)
 
James Argo said:
Not to offense other brand, but I love Intel because almost avery manufacturer (hardware & software) always test their products on Intel first. Thus it's asure compatibility. When it failed on Intel, it won't be on the market for sure. And Intel's proc is waaaay cooler than others (I really mean COOL). No need a bunch of heatsink all over the case = quiter PC. Quiter PC = good for recording. Sure I've heard a lot of good things about other brands, but I'll stick with Intel. That's my humble personal oppinion...

;)
Jaymz

Sorry for the expletive but;

Even 1 fan is way too FUCKING loud. Be it in an AMD or Intel :D.
 
brzilian said:
That may be the case now, but guess what - AMD is not profitable!

Regardless of whether they make better chips or not, they can't continue to do business the way they're doing it by undercutting Intel's prices. Sooner or later they're gonna go belly up or bump up their prices to continue to exist as a company.
Yeah, but I don't care as long as I'm the consumer! ;)

If they don't sell processors for lower price than Intel, they'll lose (because Intel is more stable than AMD, IMHO). And as long as it's cheaper and my PC is stable most of the time, I'm going for the "bang-for-buck" AMD processor.

:)
 
Back
Top