PDA

View Full Version : Intel X AMD


okno
12-01-2003, 01:59 PM
Hi guys.
As you know i would like to build new PC :-)

Firt problem is procesor.
Intel P4 3,2 (i dont have money for XEON)
or

AMD AthlonMP(i buy one procesor and after two years i will buy second proc) or Athlon64.

What you things?

Thanks a lot.

Iysun
12-03-2003, 07:28 AM
its a tough chioce , some poeple swear by one some the other:D iIf i was getting processor i think id go for an intel, im running duel amd mp's right now and its faster, but not super faster then when i had a single pentium 3. But if you want to save money for power id go amd :thumbsup:

dwin
12-03-2003, 10:40 PM
I would choose intel. I think you can make a dual too with intel without the xeon version. If you want to get the cheap on go for AMD. I will choose for Intel.

ggg
12-03-2003, 11:18 PM
http://www.cgtalk.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=23

jedi71
12-13-2003, 05:33 PM
hi okno,

there's a serious problem with yr plan to buy one amd MP cpu first and then the 2nd two yrs later - the cpu stepping of each cpu will be completely different by that time (though the price will of course have fallen by then :) )

when building a dual proc. PC, whether it's Xeon or Athlon MP or even Opteron, it's best/vital to buy the procs at the same time, where the stepping number of both proc will be the same....maybe u can wait 6 months or so for the 2nd, but u have to make sure the guy u bought it from will be able to match the stepping number first b4 u plan it this way.

don't ask me what 'stepping' means..its got something to do with when the procs were manufactured or the batch or something like that.

trust me..i learnt this the hard way...i had the same plan 2 yrs ago when i bought a Dell Xeon pc with only 1 proc at first..6 mths later i checked with Dell abt the 2nd proc but the price was still too high for me...a year on, Dell told me it was impossible for them to get a 2nd proc at that time to match the 1st one and that's when i learnt all abt stepping...same goes for even PIII..i asked around to confirm/clarify.

sorrie to burst yr bubble
if i were u i'd wait a while, if possible, and get an Athlon64 when prices have dropped a bit and the motherboards are more mature. heard rumors that XSI/Mental Ray might be 64-bit in the future..just dun know when..IMHO i think the 3d/dcc industry is headed this way.

hope this helps..cheers :beer:

Nemo1975
12-13-2003, 07:39 PM
Hi Everyone,

Id defenitely go for Intel.

In the last 3 years Ive had 2 Intel and 3 AMD systems. The AMDs are faster, but Ive had problems with the stability. Especially with building the more complex scenes.

Sometimes the computer would crash, restart without notice.

With Intel I have had none of those problems. Also the Hyperfrething technology is an interesting feature if your software package supports it.

So if you can afford it, Id buy Intel. Ill certainly be replacing my AMDs for Intels in the future.

ggg
12-13-2003, 08:15 PM
can someone move this to hardware :)

ThE_JacO
12-13-2003, 08:24 PM
thread moved

HW threads in app specific forums are meaningful ONLY when you are interested into specific issues of a platform or part with a specific app.

number crunching and price/performance enquiries are better suited to the HW forum.

swampthing
12-13-2003, 11:15 PM
The whole stepping myth is just that anymore, a myth. You do NOT have to have both processors be the same stepping to run them in dual mode. They work either way, but they are only officially support to work if they are of the same stepping. This has been shown to be true over and over. There's even a website dedicated to dual processing that proves this. I really wish i could remember the url though, i think it mighta be dualproccessor.com or something.


That said, your problem isnt with stepping it's with the fact that your planning on buying the 2nd one 2 years later? You realize that in 2 years your original processor and motherboard will be so obsolete that you'll be lucky to even find a compatible 2nd processor. Let alone the fact that at that point adding the 2nd really doesn't make much sense performance wise.

Honestly if you don't have the cash to get it all at once, then dual processing probably isn't for you as it just doesn't make much sense. Just get a HT enabled processor.


As to brand, go Intel. Intel are faster in almost all 3d apps overall. Check some rendertime benches in lightwave and 3dsmax and intel usually creams AMD all over the place, especially in lightwave.

GregHess
12-14-2003, 12:29 AM
The url would most likely be...

http://www.2cpu.com

However the stepping problem is not a "total" myth.

Sometimes steppings are minor changes in the production cycle of chips...sometimes their more substaintal, changing voltages and the like.

If the stepping is a minor stepping...there will be no issues whatsoever. The only downfall you'd possibly net would be a minor decrease in overall stability.

http://developer.intel.com/design/Pentium4/qrg/update.pdf

Here's an example of some stepping differences in the Pentium IV core.

As you can well imagine, if the steppings are major (like years of changes) it can induce a rather large instability variable to the system, and in some cases, refuse to run in SMP.

As to Intel creaming AMD...I guess you missed some of the latest FX and Opteron benches.

http://www.tech-report.com has a review of the latest opteron system in a few cg apps.

MadMax
12-14-2003, 03:33 AM
Id defenitely go for AMD.

In the last 4 years Ive had numerous AMD systems. The AMDs are faster, and I have never had problems with stability, even on the most complex scenes.

When I did use Intel, I wasn't all that impressed.

I have never once had crashes, blue screens, lock ups or other unexplained problems since I went Athlons.

With Intel I had ALL of those problems.

Based on current available technology, AMD has the edge in speed and maturity. IF you go for Athlons, nForce2 cannot be touched for reliability.

Although, Athlon64 costs the same as the 3.2 P4, is about the same speed, and it is 64 bit while the P4 isn't. A64 is new tech, P4 is at the end of its life cycle.

AMD is most definitely the better deal.[/B][/QUOTE]

Thalaxis
12-15-2003, 05:10 PM
Originally posted by jedi71

don't ask me what 'stepping' means..its got something to do with when the procs were manufactured or the batch or something like that.

The best analogy I can think of is a point release; it's sort of akin
to a maintenance patch for a piece of software, with the obvious
caveat that you can't just download and apply it ;)

Intel and AMD always go through a bizillion revisions; they're
constantly tuning, fixing errata, tweaking the die to get higher
clock speeds, and so on. For their volume-oriented business
model, it works very well... but the dual processor issue is a bit of
a downside. Fortunately, not a big one if you know about it,
though -- at least IMO.

Thalaxis
12-15-2003, 05:16 PM
Originally posted by swampthing

As to brand, go Intel. Intel are faster in almost all 3d apps overall. Check some rendertime benches in lightwave and 3dsmax and intel usually creams AMD all over the place, especially in lightwave.

LW and Cinema are the main areas where Intel still has a non-
trivial performance edge... but primarily in rendering.

Generally, for software that is heavily SSE2+P4+HT optimized,
you'll see the P4's in the lead. For video, the same holds.

Similarly, for OpenGL/Direct3D, the Athlon64 and Opteron have a
non-trivial lead.

Otherwise, it's a very close race. The only good reason not to get
an Athlon64 or Opteron machine right now is price, but AMD is
working on fixing that. There is already news hitting the boards
about a $250 Athlon64 model for Socket 750. Yes, it's slower than
the launch models, but still quite powerful.

Personally, my preferred choice would be an Athlon64FX-5x
(x=1,3,5 depending on purchase timeframe + budget), on a
Socket 939 motherboard for a single-CPU system, using an nVidia
nForce3-250 chip.

okno
12-15-2003, 05:48 PM
I bought this:
intel P4 3Ghy (800MHz)
MSI NEO 2 FISR2 (mobo)
MSI 5700FX (graphic)
2x 512RAM
120Seagate + 80WD (my old)

What you thing?

MadMax
12-15-2003, 05:50 PM
Originally posted by swampthing
As to brand, go Intel. Intel are faster in almost all 3d apps overall. Check some rendertime benches in lightwave and 3dsmax and intel usually creams AMD all over the place, especially in lightwave.


That is a bit misleading when places like the Lightwave benchmark page can only give results based on people uploading their results.

I noticed in the single CPU database, not a single FX or A64 has been posted, and only a couple of the very early and lower clocked Opterons appear on the Dual database.

As the new CPU's are SSE2, and a better designed chip, there is no more Intel creaming anything, A64 and FX chips are most definitley on a parity with Intel chips and in many cases a clear speed winner.

Thalaxis
12-15-2003, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by MadMax

I noticed in the single CPU database, not a single FX or A64 has been posted, and only a couple of the very early and lower clocked Opterons appear on the Dual database.

As the new CPU's are SSE2, and a better designed chip, there is no more Intel creaming anything, A64 and FX chips are most definitley on a parity with Intel chips and in many cases a clear speed winner.

The "older" (revision A and B) Opterons also had mediocre SSE2
performance, compared to rev C, which has very good SSE2
performance.

I still think that LW and Cinema4D will continue to show an
affinity for the P4, with the current binaries, but once XP64/AMD64
is released, all bets are off.

CGTalk Moderation
01-16-2006, 08:00 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.