Which Computer?

M

Mr. Ins@ne

New member
Upgrading time is at hand!

First of all:

Intel or Amd?

If Intel:

From 2.6 to 3.0, from FSB 533 to FSB 800...which option is really worth the price considering it is for audio use mainly and for some video apps (like playing dvds)?

I'm not familiar with AMD but I've been told Intel is better.
 
I would stick with Intel.
2.6gig CPU will be just below the price hike.
ASUS boards have always been reliable for me. (P4P800)is a good buy.
I would go with the 800FSB CPU and board.
512-1gig Ram 2700-3200 DDR

Audio & Video of all things eat resources so go with the best you can afford with room to upgrade in the future.
 
More important when using an Intel processor is getting a good Intel chipset.

IMO, beware the knockoff chipsets. I will use the nVidia ones, but shun VIA and the others. The highest level of compatibility is an all Intel system. For the record, I build only AMD systems, on the nVidia or AMD 760 chipsets.
 
bgavin said:
More important when using an Intel processor is getting a good Intel chipset.

IMO, beware the knockoff chipsets. I will use the nVidia ones, but shun VIA and the others. The highest level of compatibility is an all Intel system. For the record, I build only AMD systems, on the nVidia or AMD 760 chipsets.
Click to expand...

I will say it again; read what the sound card manufacturer tells you.

Digidesign and Echo recommend Via chipsets for AMD stuff.

http://www.echoaudio.com/Support/PC/AMD.php

http://www.digidesign.com/compato/xp/mbox/
 
I just built 3 computers.

All 2.4ghz on asus p4p800s. Those run the intel 865pe chipset.. which, as you may know, is practically just as good as the 875.

The delux version of the p4p800 has onboard RAID. They all have onboard S-ATA.

This machine totally kicks ass. Thats all I have to say.

xoox
 
Could you explain to me what is RAID and what is S-ATA? Is it applyable to audio? I don't know shit about computers.
 
either maker, they both do the same thing, one cost more than the other...

couldn't speak for intel. they release different models so fast there out dated before they hit the shelves today, intel is the fastest comp maker today, woowoo, amd is just as stable as intel and cost less, does the same thing and has alot of support which is hard to find with intel less you OEM a system and get/buy support, yes most of amd's support in on the web but you won't be waiting on some slack ass tech to "call you back" usualy, either way, it's your money, intel is gaining support i would expect by now at least, it sells enough product lord knows...
 
Mr. Ins@ne said:
Could you explain to me what is RAID and what is S-ATA? Is it applyable to audio? I don't know shit about computers.
Click to expand...

RAID: redundant array of independent disks. RAID 0 (striping) is a high performance I/O scheme. RAID 1-5 has more to do with recovery from disk failure. As you might have gathered from the name, RAID requires multiple hard drives.

S-ATA: Serial ATA. This is the replacement for parallel ATA (Ultra ATA/100, Ultra ATA/133, etc.). The industry is going this direction. You'll probably see better throughput from an S-ATA drive.
 
Just my 2 cents here...

I was using an AMD 1ghz athlon, and it would crap out on me when I got up to around 28 tracks... I just up'd to a AMD 2500+ with the barton core. Unbelievable improvement. The fan that came with the cpu is MUCH quieter than the one I had also. I paid 109 bucks for this upgrade, totally worth it. I'd go with AMD, I haven't had any problems. If you go with AMD, make sure you pay attention the cache, there's other things envolved with the cpu besides ghz.
 
wetteke said:
sorry i have to correct you on this but as far as i know RAID means 'Redundant Array of INEXPENSIVE Disks'
Click to expand...

Sure, back in 1987 when the guys at Univ. California - Berkeley presented RAID they described it as INEXPENSIVE, but in modern usage you'll see INDEPENDENT used more often. But really, we're splitting hairs. You'll find both definitions in the literature.
 
AMD is cheaper. It runs hotter I guess than an Intel cause it's clocked faster.

That's the only difference there is.
 
I dig AMD for cost reasons. As for heat? The new Barton core aka 2500+ is cheap and runs quite cold. I saw em idle at pretty much room temp. 80 degrees-f at default clock and voltage settings.
AMDs are actually clock much slower than P4s, but do more per clock cycle. Also have good FPU performance with I'd think would be good for processing all those fx plugins. I was so impressed with the couple computers I built with the 2500+ and the Nforce2, I plan on buying that CPU and an Nforce2 dual IGP mainboard as soon as I get some extra cash.
 
ed2brute said:
Sure, back in 1987 when the guys at Univ. California - Berkeley presented RAID they described it as INEXPENSIVE, but in modern usage you'll see INDEPENDENT used more often. But really, we're splitting hairs. You'll find both definitions in the literature.
Click to expand...

you're right, it's totally UNIMPORTANT as long as we UNDERSTAND what we're talking about :)
 
AMD is as fast as Intel. When AMD releases their new chip.. who knows
Click to expand...
AMD has already released their new chip(s) - Athlon64, Athlon64 FX, and Opteron. Intel has also released their 3.2GHz P4 EE (Xtreme Edition :rolleyes: ) with 1MB of L3 cache, and the new Xeons with 800Mhz bus speed.
 
if you're going intel, i'd wait just a bit longer.

quote from

http://www.sharkyextreme.com/guides/MVGSBG/article.php/10708_3090501__2

"There may be some good news on the horizon, as Intel is rumored to be cutting CPU prices through their entire line, and this may being the 800 MHz models a bit lower on the scale, as well as giving us a shot at a Pentium 4-2.53 GHz upgrade. It may still be a tight squeeze, but for those with time to wait, it may be best to wait until the end of October to fully evaluate the Intel CPU scene."

another source i read quoted october 20th.

of course, after the price drop you may lust after the higher priced and faster new pentiums.
 
Re: inaccuracies are counterproductive.

camn said:
Im really not biased.. But I JUST did a bunch of reseach.. and RIGHT NOW... IN this moment... AMD is as fast as Intel. When AMD releases their new chip.. who knows.. But NOW

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030513/index.html

The p4 @ 800Mhz is fast as hell. p4 plus Intel 865PE.

xoxo
Click to expand...

heh, it's always up in the air with speed techs, imho, the time has come that the comp waits on you and not you waiting on it, so, it make no difference which brand you use at say 2ghtz or better, more important is the memory and main board imho, quality hardware is where it's at today, cause there's so much carp hardware being pushed and lied about it's preformance it's hard to believe false advertizing isn't really being enforced...

i think you get my drift, eh, asus, epox, msi, ect etc, oh, and "reviews" USER FOURMS, not web site lies, absolute...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top