Piii / P4 / Amd

  • Thread starter Thread starter lenMCHC
  • Start date Start date
L

lenMCHC

New member
Hello, i'm going to be using a Motu 2408 recording system with a Mackie 14vlzpro, and some effects. I will be mainly doing cheap demos for my own band and friends. What would you suggest for a new processor, and why? I am hearing conflicting stories about them all, and I'd like to hear some opinions about why you chose what you did.

Thanks
Len
 
I chose an AMD Athlon XP 1500. My decision was cost vs. performance: you can get a great performing AMD for less than an Intel processor of comparable caliber. I chose the 1500 (which is the slowest Athlon XP chip) over faster AMDs because it seemed to have the best bang for the buck. I built this system in June with an Abit KG7 motherboard (AMD761 chipset) and Windows XP and it's been fast and stable. I had some problems with n-Track crashing, but a complete uninstallation and reinstallation of both my soundcard drivers and the n-Track software solved these problems beautifully. I have absolutely no complaints about my system at the moment.
 
I am a HUGE fan of AMD for the same reason, cost vs. performance. You just get more for your money with AMD and since I work in 3D and AMD performs better on floating point stuff than Intel, it's a no brainer for me. But on the audio side of things I have heard lots of conflicting reports about problems with the VIA chipset (more bad than good). This issue involves your motherboard, which you did not mention. R U planning on building a machine or upgrading a current machine? If upgrading you will have to match the CPU to your MoBo or get a new MoBo for the new CPU that you chose. I'll continue later if necessary... :)
 
Hey..

I am currently running a Celleron 700 chip, on a TYAN mobo..
It works ok, but i'm looking to get a faster more reliable chip and processor.

If P3 is my choice i can use up to a 1.2 in my existing Mobo no problem.

If I go with P4 or AMD I will need to purchase a new mobo and Ram. Is there a certain chipset i should be looking for to cut down on conflicts?
 
AMD definatly... it just makes sense: a better processor for less money...
 
I'm not sure about if there's a better chipset than others for audio. I only know I see lots of complaints and advice to avoid VIA. You can probably search this forum for some previous discussions about chipsets. If your MoBo will take a PIII 1.2 then that's not a bad choice. I don't know what the cost of the cpu is, but at least you will only have to swap the processor and it's plenty fast enough for audio. Just make sure you get the right socket P3 :)
 
I just didn't know if buying a p3 1.2 chip would be worth it.
I don't feel like shooting myself in the foot on this purchase.
I have the sound card and mics, other equipment, but Lacking
the necessary processor speed to really get moving.


I can pick up a p3 processor for like 100$ or less...
 
Seems like the thing to do then. It should be relatively painless and for less than $100 your getting a pretty decent upgrade. Otherwise you're talking about more expense and headache than it seems you want to go through. PIII 1.2 is plenty :D
 
i just want to be able to record 4-5 tracks simultaneously.
and playback up to 15 or so for mixing purposes...
I won't be running too many if any effects...
I mainly do 4-5 song demo's for local bands
and usually they are hardcore/metal bands who like
the raspy feel of no effects... and the fact that it's cheaper like that as well.
 
Oh yeah, then it totally sounds like the 1.2 gig PIII is the way to go for you. Your system will be able to handle that without even blinking.
 
lenMCHC

I just went through a chipset review and decided to go with the SIS 645DX chipset and Intel P4. I have been using a PIII 600Mhz overclocked to 811MGHz.

Let me backup up first to tell you how I got there.

I went with Intel mainly because I use Sonar and there were some blurbs on the net from one of the programmers at Cakewalk that they acutally have Intel specific code in the software. Also, I have both processors here at home and frankly, I never have problems with the Intels and although I have solved the AMD issues, they tended to involve more tweaking before they ran smoothly. They have not been bad but just too time intensive.

I wanted a P4 in the 2.0+ range and, looking at prices, decided on a 2.26 with 533FSB, 512cache. The SIS chipsets are getting rave reviews for speed and performance over at www.tomshardware.com . This is above similar Intel chipsets 845i etc. The 645DX was less money with higher performance ratings so I went with this one. Currently there is a SIS 648 chipset that just became available and so you might want to look at one of these. Asus or Soyo Motherboards are available with these on them.

Another cool thing about these SIS chipsets is that you can run DDR 2700 memory which when all is said and done screams at Rambus memory speeds without the compatability and stability issues.

Result: 50 tracks with plug ins no hiccups in Sonar. Life is good.

Unexpected suprise: For some reason my sound cards sound better running at the higher bus speeds the P4 allows. First thing I noticed. Don't know why because digital is 1s and 0s but things are audibly better.

Hope you find this useful.
 
Unexpected suprise: For some reason my sound cards sound better running at the higher bus speeds the P4 allows. First thing I noticed. Don't know why because digital is 1s and 0s but things are audibly better.

Hope you find this useful.
Click to expand...

how can things sound better when digital makes an exact copy of the sound :rolleyes:

i hope u digital sheep see that comment...
 
Yeah, I'm with you, Teech. There's no way I'm going to believe that, all else being equal, the faster bus speed on the P4 motherboard sounds better.
 
gentlemen...

I don't mind spending money on a new system, since i will no doubt be doing other things on the machine as well...
So if you think that more FSB by using a new mobo and p4 or amd chip, i won't mind... I am trying to be money consious, but i don't mind spendin a few. So whats better? p4 or p3 for audio production? versus amd? i went on tomshardware.com, but that place is hard to navigate if you aren't lookin for info on a specific device.

thanks
Len
 
i'd say AMD cuz its cheaper and its architecture is designed to take advantage of the win xp's software better then Intel, thus y slower speed AMD match faster or even surpass intel counter parts thats the reason for the strange # syster for ex. a 1900+ Amd runs@1.6ghz but under XP runs as well(the speed it processes) and maybe better then a 1.9ghz P4
 
If you're not that concerned with the money, then PIII probably shouldn't be an option for you. Why would you go back a version when you can buy what's current and obviously faster?

Teacher is absolutely correct about the performance of AMD over P4. But it's really only on floating point processes that I know of. Is audio floating point? For instance, my dual 1.2 Athlon MP machine at home outperforms my dual 1.7 XEON machine at work on 3D applications and games. But on word processing and business apps it's about the same. Still giving you the same bang for much less buck though. If you're MOTU stuff is compatible with an Athlon XP Mobo and chipset, I'd go that way :)
 
How did I know I was going to get heat for that one.

Look I am not claiming that upgrading your MB will get you a better sound. But isn't it possible that the software creates different amounts of digital information based on the amount of time (processor time available) per second or smaller time frame. Thus if you have a faster processor with extreme cache, which the P4 equates to, you would be able to generate more digital information per second/msec for a given audio event. This would equate to a better resolution and thus sound more accurate.

Of course all of this is mute if the software establishes absolute samples per second limitations for a given resolution. But if there is any variance at all it could generate a better sound.

(The sound of Velcro as the non-digital expert puts on his BBS Kevlar jacket and hits the enter key....)
 
Last edited:
Quote

"i'd say AMD cuz its cheaper and its architecture is designed to take advantage of the win xp's software better then Intel"

Where did you get that peice of information? Microsoft has no special hooks for AMD chips I can assure you. Architecture wise there is no advantage. It may be faster but there are no relevant hooks in the software specific to AMD.
 
check the nvidia website...but i guess thats only for video, so my statement wasn't totally off just not directed primarily at audio which still could be true we just don't know

and middleman i was not flaming u at all i was just making a statement that digital maybe ones and zero's but theirs more factors that go into converting the sound into 1's and zero's and what are done to the 1 & 0'z when in the program

i'm not surprised by ur statement at all
 
>you would be able to generate more digital information per second/msec for a given audio event. This would equate to a better resolution and thus sound more accurate.

The resolution at which you record is dependent on the settings you use for your soundcard. You can change sample size (8 bits/16 bits/24bits) or sample frequency (44.1KHz/96KHz etc.) but the speed of the PC will only determine whether it works for a set number of tracks at the settings you choose, or not.

There is no such thing as "almost" capturing 16 bits and then getting an improvement using a faster PC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top