AMD vs Pentium 4

  • Thread starter Thread starter pandamonk
  • Start date Start date
pandamonk

pandamonk

Well-known member
I've been told that AMD X2 are better for recording purposes than Pentium 4, Why is this?

I've also been told that AMD are less compatable than Pentium. I've been searching and have found Pentium 4 dual core. Would this be better than the AMD?

Would a dual core 3GHz be better than a standard 3.4GHz?

What is a good motherboard for the Pentium 4 dual core?

I'm planning on running Sonar 5 producers.
 
Its pretty much a preference thing. AMD X2 are quick but only marginally faster than intel, they are also alot cheaper. If you are building a new box, dual core is the way to go for sure.

I built a D system this summer and it was based on a Abit Aw8 (intell 955 chipset) with a pentium D 2.8 and it was a screamer. A dual 3.0 core may not be faster than a 3.4 (and only marginally, the difference is about what, 3%?) BUT it is a dually so you will be able to do more things at once (very good) and it will run multiple processer apps (VERY VERY GOOD) so in my mind, I would not even consider a 1 way chip these days. Once you go dual, you wont go back.

As far as AMD vs Intel, Where ever you heard that X2 is better for recording, they are wrong. How good a chip is for recording is the sum of the parts and how they work togheter. Yes AMD holds the speed record right now and the 5 towers (cubase benchmarking site) has Opterons holding all the top spots but those chips are about $300-400 more than any pentium 4.

I think my biggest gripe with AMD is the overall quality of the systems (and I administer a network for a living). We run a mixed environment of about 20 machines split 70/30 with the majority of the machines being AMD XP/Semprons on via chipsets. Of those machines, I have had various problems with about 1/3 of them where on the intel based machines, that number is 0.
I think the chipsets are just weak and poorly implemented.

For music, I want stability over bleeding edge performance and I have yet to see a decent, non-opteron AMD based systen that offers that. My intel box has been running non-stop since May (when I moved, I dont turn my machines off) and never crashes, freezes, or otherwise gives me problems
 
Would you recommend i get the Dual 3 GHz at £237.82 over the single 3.4 GHz at £129.19? Why do people say that AMD is better than Pentium? Is it just speed? What about 64-bit? But what's the point of having a processor that allows up to 64-bit if none of your gear is even close to that? With AMD, xp 64, and sonar producer 5, they all allow for upto 64-bit, does this mean that even though you wont be recording at 64-bit, you can still add FX etc at it? Anyway, I'll probably go with the dual 3GHZ Pentium, unless someone shows me reason not to.
 
Would you recommend i get the Dual 3 GHz
Click to expand...
yes

Why do people say that AMD is better than Pentium?
Click to expand...
dunno, player hating maybe?

The whole 64bit thing has yet to really unfold. Sonar is the only DAW that is native to win64 and it looks like most of the mainstream hardware ppl have 64 bit drivers (which was the hold up since you cant use 32bit drivers on win64 but you can use 32 bit software). I have yet to read any real reviews on 32 vs 64 bit windows DAW work, but its coming. Pentium D's all have EMT64 which allows them to run 64bit windows. If you are a sonar person, then it may make sence but if not, running 32bit will be fine till Vista is settled in
 
AMD X2s beat their equivalent PentiumD's for the vast majority of tasks, which is why you see speed benefits in Cubase et al:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2484&p=1

I don't know what altitude909 has against AMD chipsets - they've always been fine for me, and I build multi-media encoding stations in my job. The old myth that AMD stuff is inherently less compatible or stable than Intel stuff is ten year old propaganda from Intel and has never been true in my expereince.

There have been problems with VIAs AMD implementations over the years - but this shouldn't reflect badly on AMD as their own chipsets have always been rock-solid IME.

Anyway - with a good NForce4 based mainboard (Abit's An8 is nice), good quality RAM, and an X2 CPU, you'll have something powerful and stable. I'm currently running an X2 3800+ and I reckon it's the best value chip I've ever bought.
 
I will be running sonar, would i be better off getting AMD?
 
pandamonk said:
Will this motherboard fit into this rackmount case?
Click to expand...

It should fit fine. The case says it fits 12" by 9.6" Motherboards, and the manual for that motherboard says that it is 12" by 9.6".
 
I'm no computer guru by any means but i do no this. My amd speced out at out the same as a pentium 4 was way cheaper. At the same time, it is less stable than my brother pentium 4. Both are very close to 2.2 ghz.
 
altitude909 said:
I think my biggest gripe with AMD is the overall quality of the systems (and I administer a network for a living). We run a mixed environment of about 20 machines split 70/30 with the majority of the machines being AMD XP/Semprons on via chipsets. Of those machines, I have had various problems with about 1/3 of them where on the intel based machines, that number is 0.


I think the chipsets are just weak and poorly implemented.
Click to expand...

That's is the important thing, right there.

Either amd or p4 will work fine. Buy the fastest chip you can afford, but make sure you get a decent motherboard with a quality chipset and good ram.

Start with the audio interface you plan to buy, then check the manufacturers requirements. They will usually publish lists of ram, mobos/chipsets, and video cards that work OK (or don't) with their gear
 
altitude909 said:
We run a mixed environment of about 20 machines split 70/30 with the majority of the machines being AMD XP/Semprons on via chipsets. Of those machines, I have had various problems with about 1/3 of them where on the intel based machines, that number is 0.
I think the chipsets are just weak and poorly implemented.
Click to expand...

... which would be a poor motherboard choice on the system builders end. A poor chipset = crap, regardless of what CPU is in it.

BTW, what are these 'problems' that you speak of that are supposedly all related to the chipset?
 
of that are supposedly all related to the chipset
Click to expand...
Oh, for sure. I have never seen a processer fail, whether it AMD or Intel. I'm sure there are plenty of decent AMD chipsets out there by now (at least i would hope so).

poor motherboard choice on the system builders end
Click to expand...

I expect stuff to work as advertised, not to have a bunch of bugs that I need hours of goolging to sort out and with Via it seems to be a constant "something". Why would anyone sell or make a "poor" chipset?

I'm not saying that there are not good AMD rigs out there, but everytime I have given AMD a chance, I have been let down sorely.
 
Think I might go with the AMD X2 4200+ as there doesn't seem to be much in it. I've just read quite a large article on the subject where the AMD out performs the Pentium D on most tasks. One of the main reasons i might go with AMD is that i can get a PC with AMD X2 4200, SATA 200GB, 1GB, dual monitor graphics, DVD+/-RW for under £600+p&p on ebay, here. I'll just sell the case(with neons lol), speakers, and anything else i don't need, and buy a rackmount case, another hard drive and more ram. The whole computer should come to just under £900 before i sell what i don't need. It will be AMD X2 4200+, SATA 360GB, 4GB RAM, DVD+/-RW in a rackmount case. Is that reasonable?
 
I have an athlon x2 system with the 4200 and it is a beautiful thing.. I had been using pentium 4's but i tried an athlon 64 system a while back and have been hooked ever since. Runs cooler and outperforms!
 
One of the biggest differences of DAW’s is that almost no two are identical. From the processor, motherboard configuration, software installed, any widows tweaks. That’s why you get mixed reviews on AMD vs. Intel. Some people install almost every freeware app they can click on. Some dedicate their DAW for recording only. Some use it as the “do it all” media center, game machine, DAW, office work. As these machines get faster we tend to want to cram it with more tasks and max out all settings. Most who have little knowledge of PC’s have spyware and don’t know it or some lack some software/ hardware updates. So you are going to read a long thread on the AMD vs. Intel with no end. I myself have AMD and I also use Intel. But if Intel is your first choice then go with that. Always go with your first instinct.
 
Think the AMD was my first slightly educated instinct, lol. Before i asked and read about it i didn't have a clue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top