HiveMinds

jmikec

I combined these two to make life easier.

First, I'd like to decide between AMD and Intel, and what speed.

Then, move on to which motherboard/chipset.

Fire away!
_________________
--jmikec

I'm jmikec and I approved this post.

Dn · Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 9:34 pm Post subject:

Have you seen SoopahMan's recommendations in PC-building for newbees?

Take a look at these 2:
nForce2 333mhz IGP MCP-T motherboard ($77)
Athlon XP 2500 processor
_________________
[Fun Tagline Goes Here]
Politic Minds | Tucker, Georgia

^WingNut^ · Posted: Fri May 21, 2004 10:34 pm Post subject:

Part of whether you go for AMD or Intel depends on what you do. AMD is better at raw number crunching, whereas Intel is generally better for media apps and other things where memory performance is critical. Also, AMD tends to beat Intel at the price/performance aspect, especially at the lower end of the price scale. If you go AMD, I would heartily recommend an nForce chipset. I would recommend that you check out AMD/Intel reviews at AnandTech.com and see which chip is faster at the apps you run, then head over to Newegg.com to check out prices.

When choosing a motherboard, think about what features you want/need such as RAID, overclocking features, etc. I've used both Asus and EPoX and they're both quality boards. If you go with AMD/nForce, try and get a board that uses the nForce audio instead of a third-party audio chip (this is assuming you don't already have a high end sound card, of course).
_________________
^WingNut^

If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you...

Richard C. · Senior Royalty Joined: 09 Nov 2002 Posts: 2346

Phooey, you guys have got it all wrong.

Go here:

http://www.datadocktorn.nu/

and follow the Docktor's advice, and you'll build a great PC! Really, yuo will!

Dn · Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 9:31 pm Post subject:

"Build an desktop"
Man, that is so funny I'm in tears laughing. Where do you find stuff like that?
_________________
[Fun Tagline Goes Here]
Politic Minds | Tucker, Georgia

Dn · Posted: Sat May 22, 2004 9:54 pm Post subject:

^WingNut^ (a.k.a. BFKA^),

That's an excellent site you linked to. Thanks!
Entry-Level System: http://anandtech.com/guides/showdoc.html?i=2053
Mid-Range System: http://anandtech.com/guides/showdoc.html?i=2058

Mid-Range Recommendations:
CPU: AMD Athlon XP 2800+ 333MHz FSB (512K L2 cache) Barton
Motherboard: ABIT AN7 (nForce2 Ultra 400)
Price: CPU - $120 shipped (retail heatsink and fan). Motherboard - $96 shipped
_________________
[Fun Tagline Goes Here]
Politic Minds | Tucker, Georgia

SoopahMan · Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 9:01 am Post subject:

I only build with AMD chips. The R&D trick Intel is playing to get the clock rates high without the performance to show for it is cruel - but on the otherhand, it makes very fast AMD chips cheap for those who buy on market research instead of "What's the Ghz? I'll buy that."

I generally stick to Barton chips, which are the 2500, 2800, and 3200. The first 2 are 333Mhz FSB (pair with PC2700 ram) and the 3rd 400Mhz FSB (pair with PC3200 ram). Bartons are the latest AMD generation and run the coolest, which in the lower range means you can use quieter fans throughout the case, CPU included.

I've mentioned elsewhere that only the nForce2 333 MCP-T comes with SoundStorm - a Support dispute has prevented that incredible chip from making it into any future boards. So if you want 0% CPU usage with full 3D DirectSound support, you have to go 333Mhz which means the AMD 2500 or 2800. If you don't care about that though, the 64-bit chips from AMD and an nForce3 board become very reasonable. The newer 64-bit chips do actually offer higher 32-bit performance than any chip, Intel's best included, if CPU kick is paramount to you.

Hahaha Richard - I love the welding of the HD to the case, very um, "strong." I hope this PC was too old to have any other use ;o)

dbmasters · Senior Royalty Joined: 09 Nov 2002 Posts: 2433

I have always heard that Intel handles media apps better but I find that to be untrue. I used Intel for a long time in my studio with fine performance, occasional lockups and stuff like that. I recently switched to AMD with my last system build, as AMD Athlon 2500+ and it has run rock solid and performed quite well, even under very extreme abuse of multitracking along with video syncing, doing the very same project on my friends comparible Intel system, with virtual the same applications (otherwise it's tough to work together) we had not nearly the performance as in mine.

I know benchmarks and stuff like that often go in Intel favor, and I may very well be off base here, but in a very real-world type setting such as a couple of real, working studios, AMD seemed to hold up better.

Just my two cents.
_________________
Dan
dB Masters Multimedia - Google AdSense Tips - MonaVie

jmikec · Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 2:10 pm Post subject:

I have been leaning toward AMD, but a friend at work reminded me of the Intel Hyperthreading thing. Is that something I really need to consider?

Primary uses of home machine:
1) "side project" type web development. Includes running a testbed Apache/MySQL/PHP or IIS/.Net install when necessary.
2) Some image manipulation when required for #1 above, but I try to get a designer to do that stuff for me. "Me draw pretty one day, but not today".
3) Typical office app stuff, but since my next-to-last system rebuild, I've not even installed MS Office, but have used OpenOffice with no loss of functionality.
4) As I aquire a better digital camera in the next year or so, I will probably do more digital photo work - primarly cleanup, remove redeye, etc. I will most likely stick with something in the Paintshop Pro variety.
5) Some gaming...
_________________
--jmikec

I'm jmikec and I approved this post.

Tim · Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 2:17 pm Post subject:

Are those apps compiled to handle hyperthreading or multi-processor support? If not you may not see much gain from what I understand.

SoopahMan · Posted: Mon May 24, 2004 3:46 pm Post subject:

I recently read a hardware review pointing out, amazingly, that it's cheaper to buy a dual-AMD mobo and 2 AMD CPUs than it is to buy an Intel mobo and CPU, where the dual-AMD will match or outperform the Intel setup every time, depending on threading (more threads, AMD wins). Intel's prices are just that outrageously high (or AMD's low, however you prefer).

If Intel priced their chips reasonably, then you would be able to compare AMD's rating with Intel's Ghz number and see a reasonable comparison, in which Intel would do better at multimedia. If you go Ghz to Ghz, AMD always wins, again - an Athlon XP 2Ghz is much faster than a P4 2Ghz.

So if I can pay $87 for an AMD chip that's faster in all respects than a $200 Intel chip, what do I care that for $500, the Intel would edge the $87 guy out in Multimedia? ;o)

jmikec · Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 9:08 am Post subject:

So I have been looking at this chip on NewEgg.com:

jmikec · Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 9:30 am Post subject:

SoopahMan · Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 12:46 pm Post subject:

That SL6WU guy is talking about overclocking for very extreme, ridiculous types. Ignore it.

The AMD Athlon XP 3200 will beat the P4 3Ghz in speed. In multithreaded apps the 3200 and P4 trade hands depending on the benchmark run. You can get one for $139 on Pricewatch.

jmikec · Posted: Thu May 27, 2004 1:16 pm Post subject:

This chip, correct?