computer configuration

# 1 31-01-2007 , 09:09 PM

Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005

Posts: 61

hi,

i want to upgrade my system. i want it to be compatible with maya. so i have two types in my mind.

so what is better between AMD and INTEL CORE 2 DUO.
i want my system to be compatible with maya.

Quote

# 2 31-01-2007 , 09:25 PM

Subscriber
Join Date: Jul 2004

Posts: 1,257

Hello Jasi,

AMD and Intel both provide processors that are compatible with Maya, it's just a matter of preference as to which one you choose. I always used to go for Intel purely because it's the market leader in this country but I decided to change to AMD when I built my new computer as I had heard good things about them (they use less power, run at lower temps etc.)

I'm very happy with AMD and until something much different/better comes along I'll be sticking with them. At the end of the day I don't really think that it makes much difference which company you initially choose just so long as you get a motherboard that will accept the CPU!

All the best,

Mat.

Quote

# 3 31-01-2007 , 10:44 PM

Moderator
Join Date: May 2005

Location: Manchester Uk

Posts: 6,300

Yeah Mat spot on.

I've got an intel chip in my laptop and a AMD in my desktop both work with maya no probs.

End of the day I would go for hte fastest CPU you can get you hands on as the faster the processor the happier maya and you will be!

The intel core 2 duo's are the fastest at the moment, they even do Quad core processors, but they will cost you. You can pretty much guarantee that AMD will fire back soon with something, then intel will and it will go on and on like that.

"No pressure, no diamonds" Thomas Carlyle

Quote

# 4 31-01-2007 , 11:06 PM

Subscriber
Join Date: Jul 2004

Posts: 1,257

Hey there Steve,

you're right but you do have to remember that the advertised speed of a CPU can be a bit misleading. If I understand things correctly AMD CPU's (in general) run at a lower clock speed than Intel as there are fewer processes from the data entering it until it exits, this means that, in a set time, a 1.8 Ghz AMD CPU will process the same amount of data a much faster Intel CPU.

I think that's right,

Mat.

Quote

# 5 31-01-2007 , 11:21 PM

Moderator
Join Date: May 2005

Location: Manchester Uk

Posts: 6,300

Yes of course, it was like the AMD's like the 3800 ran at about 2.2 ish GhZ, but the 3800 was there to make it comparable to a intel chip that ran at a higher clock speed. I.e AMD were implying its the same performance as a 3.8Ghz Intel Chip.

What I was saying is that the Intel Core 2 Duos have the performance edge over the AMD chips, at the moment.

Cheers

Steve

"No pressure, no diamonds" Thomas Carlyle

Quote

# 6 31-01-2007 , 11:32 PM

Subscriber
Join Date: Jul 2004

Posts: 1,257

Speaking of performance edge, have you read this......

Nano Barrier Report

quite a milestone.

Cheers,

Mat

Quote

# 7 31-01-2007 , 11:56 PM

Senior Software Developer
Join Date: Jan 2005

Location: Livingston, Scotland

Posts: 1,701

Either processor is as good. When it comes to the speed tests to prove who is fastest and you compare AMD or Intel chips of the same speeds to each other the speed calculations are minimal and nowthign you as a person will actually notice. The thing I prefer about Intel is its Thermal Controls, something AMD has lacked (not sure abotu its more recent releases).

I dont think you can really make a bad choice on the processor. On a budget get AMD, cash not an problem get Intel.

The Nano jump is beyond huge, its mamoth. It will lead the way for smaller faster and more quiet components.

Chris (formerly R@nSiD)
Twitter
When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will truely know peace - Jimmy Hendrix

Winner SM VFX Challenge 1

3rd Place SM SteamPunk Challenge (May 2007)

Quote

# 8 01-02-2007 , 12:24 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006

Location: /dev/null

Posts: 891

In my opinion both AMD and Intel have their own advantages and disadvantages.

In Intel's case, the Core 2 and the offers excellent execution units but their potential cannot be shown thanks to the archiac GTL bus which serverely hinders data transfers.

AMD however with their Hypertransport bus and intergrated memory controller offers pretty good performance so there is less reliance on large caches which is probaly why AMD processors are cheaper. However, the intergrated memory controller means that when a new generation of memory is coming out, it means that there is usually a longer wait for a new processor with a new memory controller that can use the new memory.

I would wait for Intel to bring out its CSI bus and for the quad cores to become offered in standard processors instead of the Extreme and Xeon versions, which should be later this year.

R@nSiD > 'The Nano jump is beyond huge, its mamoth. It will lead the way for smaller faster and more quiet components.'

Faster components likely, quieter (and cooler) probaly not. Since 45 nm is a huge leap from 65, Intel probaly wants to push clock rates towards 5 GHz, considering that IBM is doing the same thing with its POWER6. Anyways, I don't know why quiet computers are so popular, I like my workstation and the loud jet like noise it makes.

Last edited by The Architect; 01-02-2007 at 12:27 AM.

Quote

# 9 01-02-2007 , 12:29 AM

Moderator
Join Date: May 2005

Location: Manchester Uk

Posts: 6,300

[i] Anyways, I don't know why quiet computers are so popular, I like my workstation and the loud jet like noise it makes. [/B]

Originally Posted by

Hahaha

On the popularity of quiet Pc's

If your sitting in an office with 100+ PCs on and your on the phone......

If your sitting at home on your laptop in front of the TV and the family are watching tv....

Theres some editing suites at uni that sound like cars and there bloody distracting when your in there for a long time and your trying to concentrate, Just why I quite like PC's to be quiet.

"No pressure, no diamonds" Thomas Carlyle

Quote

# 10 01-02-2007 , 12:51 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006

Location: /dev/null

Posts: 891

gster123, 'If your sitting in an office with 100+ PCs on and your on the phone...'

Well at my school we don't have 100+ boxes sitting in one room, but the libary has got 30 P4 Ds in tiny cases which are very loud as the CRT screens are blocking the vents which makes a high pitched whine that no one seems to mind. In my opinion it sounds pretty cool, but its probaly not good for the CPU...

Just out of interest, am I the only person who doesn't mind noise?

Quote

# 11 01-02-2007 , 01:06 AM

Senior Software Developer
Join Date: Jan 2005

Location: Livingston, Scotland

Posts: 1,701

Shhhhh...

LOL

If I had the money I would water cool mine in an instant. When you have worked in rooms like Steve and I have with HP Proliant servers and IBM eServers spinning 6 to 8 huge fans each to keep everything cool. It starts to grate on you.

Chris (formerly R@nSiD)
Twitter
When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will truely know peace - Jimmy Hendrix

Winner SM VFX Challenge 1

3rd Place SM SteamPunk Challenge (May 2007)

Quote

# 12 01-02-2007 , 01:20 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006

Location: /dev/null

Posts: 891

R@nSiD > 'When you have worked in rooms like Steve and I have with HP Proliant servers and IBM eServers spinning 6 to 8 huge fans each to keep everything cool. It starts to grate on you.'

mmm... 64+ processor rack mount computers... *drools*

Anyways, a friend of mine once had this huge blower from a old Motorola industrial computer. As you can guess, its pretty noisy.

R@nSiD > 'If I had the money I would water cool mine in an instant.'

Doesn't liquic cooling need a noisy pump or something? Thats what all the websites I've been to say.

Quote

# 13 01-02-2007 , 06:18 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005

Posts: 61

ok guys cool down. i`ll be doing some more research.

but i think i`ll be going with the AMDbecause budget is a problem for me. nothing can be said now.

so i did not update my knowledge in the cybermarket. can u tell me. what`s the latest AMD`s processor.

Quote

# 14 01-02-2007 , 12:53 PM

Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2006

Location: /dev/null

Posts: 891

The latest AMD processor is the Athlon 64 FX-74, which is dual core, runs at 3 GHz and has 1 MB of L2 cache for each core. Since its the best and latest model, its probaly a bit expensive so theres always the Athlon 64 X2 which is mostly the same except that it maxs out at 2.8 GHz and has a few features missing (you probaly won't need them anyway).

Quote

# 15 03-02-2007 , 12:52 AM

Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005

Posts: 61

Ok then, i have decieded on the processor. i will be taking the Athelon 64 X2, might be 2.8 ghz or a little lower than that, bcoz that fits well into my budget.

Thank u very much guys for the advice.

Now i have to decide on what mother board should be purchased.

can u suggest about a mother board or chipset that is pintype(removable one), or else flat type(integrated with the processor).

i heard that the performance of the flat type mother boards are better than the pin type one. is it true.

Quote

computer configuration

Posting Rules Forum Rules

Similar Threads

Topics

Free Courses

Full Courses

VFX News