
tourettes5139
New member
tourettes5139 said:No way, man!! The TubePre is simply incompatible with AMD processors. It will blow up!!!!
Sorry about that man, I just couldn't resist.


tourettes5139 said:No way, man!! The TubePre is simply incompatible with AMD processors. It will blow up!!!!
Intel is always behind AMD in brute computing power
The Intel is a "home duty" processor
AMD is just so much powerful...
Look for benchmarks everywhere on the net dude, do your own research!.cortexx said:you state this
i call bullshit
show me the facts ?![]()
Dude, you can't compare a SERVER processor with a "hometown little bungalow consumer processor" like a P4. Of course, XEON processors are good, but they are in another league! We are comparing P4 to AMD Athlon 64 here...and the Athlon is much more brutal, look at benchmarks.cortexx said:Sorry but this is simply untrue!
That is utter bullshit , what chips do you find in a blade server ? hardly a home (or consumer for the correct terminology ) product wouldn`t you think ?
Just in case you don't know, the majority of Blade servers are xeon chips made by who ??? INTEL
The reason i suggested the dual core is because it is now CHEAPER than the single core due to an Intel price restructure. Why buy single core when dual core is cheaper and newer technology.
I`d also guess that being your only PC this is probably going to serve multiple purposes (ie internet use, word processing , mutimedia) and I guess that means you will want to run a virus scan.
Seriously, why do people argue with fact ? I just don't get it.
(walks off shaking head)
![]()
Look for benchmarks everywhere on the net dude, do your own research!.
Wow...you really needed to prove yourself there dude...cortexx said:I dont need to do my own research I know what the deal is I have been in the computer industry for the last 16 years and I own a medium sized PC distribution business that distribute consumer , small business and corporate equipment , services and support.
We are a Dell V.A.R.S member ( we sell Dell ) , we are authorised repair centers for acer, compaq, IBM, Alienware, HP and Toshiba. Most of my staff are microsoft and novell certified and we spend more time building, networking, installing, repairing and supplying computer equipment than you can imagine. I know my shit.
The problem is that alot of people just check the net for a view they like and dont look at the whole picture . Intel beats AMD on compression chores and corporate networking apps , AMD wins over on games and gaming multimedia and that is it.
The subject of blade servers and Xeon processors came up because someone labelled Intel as cheap home computer processors when in fact they were again either misguided or simply ignorant because Intel make the Xeon chip hence "INTEL" does not just make cheap home processors aimed at gaming. Infact that whole statement is incorrect because the Comparable AMD prcessors are faster at gaming.
AMD DO NOT and i repeat DO NOT beat Intel (again with comparable chips) when it comes to video , audio compression and processing OR network based apps therefore your "AMD beats Intel at everything at raw processing power is WRONG" .
Thats why I asked you to provide something to back your statement up, I'ts not my place to go look it up , i'm calling bullshit on this generalization so it's up to you to back it up with something . If you can't back it up then Degress the argument because you wont win by repeating yourself again and again and again.
Your not arguing with a 12 year old idiot, your arguing with someone who knows the PC industry inside out because it is my job, my business and my career. It`s what I specialise in every day i go to work !
Two things should be considered here, however: for one, the big "64 bit" unknown remains a non-factor and for another, the benchmarks in which the Athlon64 shines are significant. In practically all of the gaming benchmarks, the 3400+ is able to beat its archrival Pentium 4 - sometimes soundly. X2, Warcraft III, Unreal Tournament 2003, Splinter Cell, Serious Sam, Gunmetal, Comanche and Aqua Mark: the Pentium 4 has to concede victory in all of them.
Meanwhile, thanks to its higher clock speeds, the Pentium 4 comes out on top for encoding tasks such as creating MPEG-4 and MPEG-2 video or MP3 audio as well as for data compression with WinRAR 3.2 - although sometimes only by a hair. It also dominates in the case of professional tasks with 3D Studio Max or Cinema 4D, while the Athlon64 outperforms the Pentium with Lightwave 7.5.
The results with just under 8% overclocking to 2,365 MHz indicate decent performance increases for many applications, mainly due to the integrated memory controller. That also goes to show that the 64 bit Athlon stands to gain a lot from increased clock speeds. For now, however, we're dubious that there'll be an Athlon64 with 2.4 GHz based on 130 nm; 90 nm seems more probable.
That leaves us with a clear description of the Athlon64 3400+: it's a top quality CPU that's especially suitable for games and that also lives up to its model name - albeit only in this category. At the end of the day, it still lags slightly behind the Pentium 4, a deficit that the 64 bit architecture could compensate for in the medium term, however. In the short term, Cool & Quiet could do the job, as Intel doesn't offer this type of energy management for desktop processors yet. We can only hope that the motherboard makers take note.
If we go back to the original topic, the guy wants a CPU for a DAW...cortexx said:ill even do your homework for you .....
taken from this website which is probably one of the most informative sites for computer information and other technology ...........
http://www.tomshardware.com/2004/01/06/revving_up_in_the_new_year/page36.html
and before you say its old , its the type of processors you are trying to compare here .
Wow...you really needed to prove yourself there dude...
While the GPU takes most of the duty about graphics, the CPU has to make the link between the GPU and the hard drive/CD drive.cortexx said:Hm gaming ? thought the guy that started the thread wanted it for audio ? I dont think he said he wanted it for world of warcraft of quake 4.
And as far as gaming goes the CPU is irrelevant because gaming relies on the GPU not the CPU , benchmarking an Athlon FX57 against an Athlon 64 3500+ for gaming in the same machine with a 7800GTX will net you around 17,000 marks on 3dmark 2005 with a difference of maybe 300 points between them.
This guy wants it for Audio , which my initial point is that the P4 technically is the best choice.
the CPU has to make the link between the GPU and the hard drive/CD drive.
Guess what happens when you play 64 tracks? The CPU has to make a link between your HDD and your soundcard, just like it does between the HDD and GPU when playing games.
Thanks for the course...cortexx said:Now an AMD 64 processor has a higher front side bus ( around 1000MHZ also known as the hypertransport system ) , this means that for tasks that need lots of data going between the GPU , HDD , optical drives and other subsystems it is usually faster ( games prime example ) but the applications that require true processing power based on raw clock speed benefit from the Intel CPU over the AMD . For this reason anything that the computer has to compress, decompress , encode etc that uses primarily CPU power Will run better on an intel chip.
But based on what you said above, a faster front side bus is better, since a DAW does NOT perform compression and encoding, but transfers data.