I can see both sides of the argument, regardless of whether statistics show the end results that are actually being seen. While the X38 board may perform better when put under the microscope and hit harder, the P35 is perfectly suited to doing the job the original poster needs it for. Surely both of you can agree on that. Be well.
You know, its gotta be kept interesting and fun. I DO try to sneak in a chuckle between actual work. And everyone here at work are a bunch of tech geeks, and thats no fun.
The original post is for a pc to do home recording (at least thats what I think he intends to use it for). So a pc capable of running the Pentagon is not what he is after. Intel and AMD have always been the subject of debates for years. Intel will be the fastest then AMD. Ive only been recording music for a year. So I really couldnt tell you if Intel is faster in the audio deptartment and I really dont care. When I bought my Mackie 1640/firewire and plugged it into my AMD 850 (yes prehistoric) with 512megs of memory. It worked flawlessy. I was using Mackies Tracktion 2 at the time (Tracktion 3 now). I could record all 16 channels (16 channel mixer) at once with no problems. And during mixing many tunes had 20 or more tracks. And alot of those tracks had 2 or 3 vst plug-ins, and the classic AMD 850 had no problems handling them. I did upgrade to a AMD 3.2 with 2 gigs of Mushkin memory (Black) and a DFI LanParty mainboard ( I play games in the studio some times and my newer FPS's didnt run well on the old cpu and gpu). The only thing I have gained by upgrading is the rendering time is less. But I sort of enjoyed the time the AMD 850 took. I could go take a break. So rendering is the only gain I saw (well games too). Maybe if I was mixing around a 100 tracks I would see a difference between my old cpu and new one. Anyway go with what you want. I can record on my system all day and never have a cpu usage problem. And at the time I think I sunk maybe $500 into it.
