Closed Thread |
Results 1 to 15 of 43
- 10-13-2003, 01:48 PM #1
Which is better?
I work with music and videos... I own a Athlon XP 2500 on a Soltek motherboard and I think it is slow!
I use windows XP too....
› See More: AMD or Intel?
- 10-13-2003, 06:46 PM #2
Their both about equal. the reason it might be slow is amount of ram u have or the amount of memory space left on ur hard drive.
- 10-14-2003, 01:50 AM #3Newbie
- Location
- Australia
- Posts
- 1
If you're a gamer go with AMD. If you're more interested in the internet and office type stuff go with intel.
- 10-14-2003, 04:53 AM #4
if you work with video and music i suggest getting a big chunk of DDR RAM as well as a great DDR video card and a nice sound card. i have an Athlon XP 3GHz with 128MB DDR Video and 512MB DDR RAM to go along with a Sound Blaster Live (kinda old but useful) and a 80GB Seagate HD... thats a far cry from my previous PC (a measly K6 II 500Mhz)
Direction in life comes not from the outside, but from within. If you have really found the love within, then the love comes out and controls and takes over the direction of your life.
-Mind Warpin',
Trance Lovin,
Nookie Huntin'
Member of the
Name Glow Crew!
- 10-14-2003, 05:21 AM #5Junior Member
- Location
- Perth, Australia.
- Posts
- 15
I think Intel is the best solution for music and video.
because all P4 processors support SSE and SSE2.
SSE is instructions in the processors to increase the perfomance of processing specific task, including video.
All of the old AMD processors only has SSE. except for the new AMD Athlon 64 which has both SSE and SSE2.
a big chunk of memory is also require.
- 10-14-2003, 05:37 AM #6
I have two HDs: a 10GB for data and the other, 40GB HD with 20GB free for programs, 1GB of RAM and an ATI Radeon 64 MB video card... What am I doing wrong?
I do enjoy games and I must agree, whenever I install a game that works with XP, the performance is quite satisfying. It's when filtering recordings from Vinil and rendering videos that I have the feeling my new computer is not much faster than my old PII 350MHz!
I need to buy a new sound card though. I don't even have a soundblaster live... I have a 128PCI and I've noticed it's not really good for midis.
Well, what should I do next, any suggestions?What if there were no hypothetical questions?
- Proud Member of theProdigious Prodigal Name Glow Crew
!
- Proud Member of theZel's Angels Team
!
- 10-14-2003, 05:41 AM #7Originally posted by xing3ds
I think Intel is the best solution for music and video.
because all P4 processors support SSE and SSE2.
SSE is instructions in the processors to increase the perfomance of processing specific task, including video.
All of the old AMD processors only has SSE. except for the new AMD Athlon 64 which has both SSE and SSE2.
a big chunk of memory is also require.
- 10-14-2003, 01:36 PM #8Sr. Member
- Posts
- 150 - liked 1 times
Sound Blaster Live! is probably the best bang for the buck you can get for MIDI. In the right places on the internet, one can be bought for just 30$ US/84 Reais!
SSE/SSE2 definitions:
http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dicti...IMD+Extensions
www.hyperdictionary.com/computing/sse-2
- 10-14-2003, 02:25 PM #9Originally posted by Zandro
Sound Blaster Live! is probably the best bang for the buck you can get for MIDI. In the right places on the internet, one can be bought for just 30$ US/84 Reais!
ThanksWhat if there were no hypothetical questions?
- Proud Member of theProdigious Prodigal Name Glow Crew
!
- Proud Member of theZel's Angels Team
!
- 10-14-2003, 02:40 PM #10gotMonkey?
- Posts
- 1
This is a really really old argument that we're not likely going to resolve here.
The rule of thumb is AMD for Home and Gaming
Intel for Office and Business.
AMD CPU's are slower, but do more work per clock speed, but now Intel has released p4 with hyper-threading...
Intel is supposed to be better at video rendering and 3D, and be better at multi-tasking, but is more expensive and worse for
gaming (according to many many gamers)
I've had great luck with AMD personally.1111111111222222222233333333334444444444555555555566666666667777777777888888888899999999990000000000
- 10-14-2003, 05:58 PM #11Newbie
- Posts
- 3
Intel may be better for software which supports SSE2, otherwise amd rules in speed vs. price comparison. Generally Intel processors have higher clock so child always beat his-amd-trusting-friend.
- 10-14-2003, 11:55 PM #12Newbie
- Posts
- 2
My favourite is AMD, 'cause it's cheaper...
I love me!
- 10-15-2003, 07:17 AM #13Originally posted by DTAG Armin
My favourite is AMD, 'cause it's cheaper...
You've hit the nail right on the head...
I need a better computer on a tight budgetWhat if there were no hypothetical questions?
- Proud Member of theProdigious Prodigal Name Glow Crew
!
- Proud Member of theZel's Angels Team
!
- 10-15-2003, 11:12 PM #14Originally posted by Luizacunha
I have two HDs: a 10GB for data and the other, 40GB HD with 20GB free for programs, 1GB of RAM and an ATI Radeon 64 MB video card... What am I doing wrong?
I do enjoy games and I must agree, whenever I install a game that works with XP, the performance is quite satisfying. It's when filtering recordings from Vinil and rendering videos that I have the feeling my new computer is not much faster than my old PII 350MHz!
I need to buy a new sound card though. I don't even have a soundblaster live... I have a 128PCI and I've noticed it's not really good for midis.
Well, what should I do next, any suggestions?
- 10-16-2003, 01:30 AM #15Newbie
- Posts
- 1
If You look at the prices of AMD and Intel and MB's for them,You'll see,that they are equal. It's only Your choice, which You like more AMD or Intel.
Similar Threads
- Computers
- Computers
- Computers
- Computers
- Computers
The Ukrainian Review
in Chit Chat