CPU comparrison?

[Babillon]

I'm looking to make a new computer for programming/personal use, and I've been told by a couple different groups about what to go with for my system.

One company suggested getting an AMD64(not sure which one, but the newer one anyway), whereas another person suggested an Intel D.

The system I'm thinking of making will have 1-2Gb RAM, 200Gb SATA harddrive, and just basic onboard sound and graphics. What I'm really curious about though is which chip I should go with, considering I mainly want the machine to be able to compile as quickly as possible(while having a few other apps running ie; music, servers, graphic editors).

And as for price differences, that's really not too important.

 

[Sympology]

Try:

http://www.tomshardware.com

they have good chip comparisions on there. Bit less subjective than you may get here (no offence, but I'm already predicting a AMD vs Intel camp war).

Stu..

Only the truly stupid believe they know everything.
Stu.. 2004

 

[paparazi]

Certainly AMD versa's Intel AGAIN! lol

This really depends on just how seriously rich you are? wether you want to adopt the best mainstream option at the moment in AMD's X2 or seriously push the boat out (cash wise) with a multi processor based intel Xeon system.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2419

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2388

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2389

Your specs sound fairly modest so i'm suggesting a top "mainstream system"

Athlon64 X2 (4200/4400/4800?)
Asus/Gigabyte/MSI Nforce4 socket 939 motherboard
2X 1Gig OCZ Platinum low CAS memory

Martin







We like members to GIVE and not just TAKE.
Participate and help others.

 

[cdogg]

Actually, anyone that gives advice on the subject should present advantages, disadvantages of both options. That's usually how it starts out here, but the problem Stu is referring to is when posts following the "subjective" one take sides.


Tom's Hardware is a good place to start. Honestly, you won't go wrong with either choice for what you want to accomplish. Compile time won't differ too much either way.

If you go the AMD route:
[tab]- AMD CPU's have more efficient floating-point instruction executions
[tab] (has been since the introduction of 3DNow! - partly explained at the link below):
[tab][tab]

http://www.virtualdub.org/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=22

[tab]- Athlon X2 has a direct parallel connection between CPU's for communication,
[tab] whereas Intel's Pentium D CPU's must talk to each other over the
[tab] already stressed out frontside bus (much slower)
[tab]- AMD's Cool & Quiet technology
[tab]- Lower power consumption

If you go the Intel route:
[tab]- Faster audio/video encoding which is just raw integer number crunching
[tab] that favors the faster CPU clock speed
[tab]- Already proven hyperthreading technology which aides multitasking
[tab]- Wide support for DDR2 RAM


To sum it up, I would guess that compile times will be a little quicker on the AMD Athlon 64 X2, but multi-tasking will be slightly better on the Pentium D architecture.

You should read this article first:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/200508011/index.html

~cdogg
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884

 

[kmcferrin]

You indicated that you will be doing compiles with other apps running in the background. That sounds like heavy multitasking to me. In that case you'll want either a dual CPU system or a dual core CPU. The Athlon 64 X2 and Pentium D are both dual-core CPUs, so either would probably be just fine. Intel stuff used to be a little more expensive than AMD, but that was at the high and low ends. In the mid-range they tend to be pretty comparable. The only major differentiating factor is that the Pentium D CPUs have an 800 MHz FSB, while the Athlon 64 X2 uses a 1 GHz Hypertransport connection. In extremely memory intensive applications the Athlon 64 X2 will probably be a little faster than a comparable Pentium D.

 

[paparazi]

cdogg
Respect

I COULDN'T HAVE!!!! put it better.

Martin

We like members to GIVE and not just TAKE.
Participate and help others.

 

[cdogg]

paparazi,
[tab]

kmcferrin,
Good point about hypertransport. In addition, the technology advantage is deeper than clock speed alone. Although it has a 200MHz jump over Intel's bus technology, it doesn't always run at that speed. There are times when data transfers are occurring at 200MHz. Even then, however, it allows for simultaneous two way transfers, which is a huge boost over the older bus technology. It also has less overhead per packet of data sent, a technology which works much like a networking topography incorporating addresses and commands.

~cdogg
"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein
[tab][navy]For general rules and guidelines to get better answers, click here:[/navy] faq219-2884

 

[Babillon]

Thanks for the input guys, I'm probably going to go with the X2 chips. I've checked out a few benchmarks and from what I've seen the AMD will probably be a bit better for what I want to do.