PDA

View Full Version : Dual Core vs Pentium question



CB_3D
01-24-2006, 04:35 AM
I have to substitute my mobo and processor.

What would you recommend for LW use?

I am stuck between a "Intel Pentium 4 640, 3.2 GHz 2MB Cache, Socket LGA 775" and a dual core "Pentium D 820, socket 775 Bus frequency 800Mhz".

I am little confused about the 800mhz frequency. In 3dsmax render benchmarks it beats the P4 by around 20%.

What to buy?! What┤s better for renders, future compatibilty (64bit) and raw working power?

Recommendations from the hardware gurus, puleaze!

Thx! :thumbsup:

mattclary
01-24-2006, 05:13 AM
I have to substitute my mobo and processor.


If you have to change both, why are you stuck on Intel? Get an AMD64 X2! Intel dual core chips are a hack.

dballesg
01-24-2006, 07:46 AM
Hi,

Here we have two machines, with a Dual Core Dual Opteron machines. Windows 64 bits and 4Gb of memory in each workstation.

We are really impressed and happy with this workstations. Lightwave 32 bits runs fine on Windows 64, so if you go for an AMD with Windows 64 bits, I think you will have best of both worlds.

To my knowledge the only appp (I mean for 3D) I heard it is not working well on windows 64 is ZBrush, but it is temporarily until they get out an specifigc 64bit version.

Best regards,
David

dgon64
01-24-2006, 07:50 AM
I don't mean to start something but I agree with the previous post. I have a dual-core 830 and it's o.k. It runs XP64 and LW64 but from what I've read if I had to do it over again I'd probably go AMD dual-core. Then it comes down to how much you can spend. Good spending!

krimpr
01-24-2006, 08:23 AM
Also in agreement. I'm using AMD dualcores in my new pc and was reluctant to change from Intel. I'm very pleased with this new setup and have yet to hear that the current Intels can outperform the AMDs. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend the AMDs.

lots
01-24-2006, 08:44 AM
The X2 is definately the way to go if your choice is between it and the dual core Pentiums.

Since you asked which is better for rendering, a dual core CPU will be better for rendering than a single core CPU. Since dual core is practically the same thing as dual CPU systems, you should see a pretty big improvement in rendering with a dual core CPU. Assuming you're not doing anything that is heavily single threaded.

nerdyguy227
01-24-2006, 01:18 PM
AMD will give you more for the money and the cheapest X2 is not that expencive now. I think its about 315.

if you have to get intel for some weird reason, change that reason and get amd

CB_3D
01-24-2006, 02:09 PM
What about Fprime? Does it work fine with Dual core, be it Intel or Amd?

krimpr
01-24-2006, 02:40 PM
What about Fprime? Does it work fine with Dual core, be it Intel or Amd?

Yes; no difference in functionality.

AbnRanger
01-24-2006, 03:39 PM
Before Dual-Cores came out last June, Intel had a slight edge on AMD (regarding 3D programs/Renders) with it's Hyperthreading (which emulated as a "virtual" dual processor). But AMD broke out like gangbusters with a superior implementation, when they introduced the new Dual Cores.
For years while Intel was developing, then producing chips with Hyperthreading (which AMD could have duplicated, but saw it as a temporary "Half-Measure"), AMD put it's stock into making a real breakthrough Dual-Core solution. Intel's development of this was much slower, and when AMD stepped up their release dates, Intel was caught with their britches down...still trying to address serious heat issues.

nerdyguy227
01-24-2006, 06:41 PM
yup- AMD has the on-die memory controller (stores all the memory addresses) which gives it the real push since all the mem addresses are right next to what needs them

For intel, their memory controller is in the chipset so it is a much larger and longer circute to get a memory address thus it is slower

This does make rendering much faster especially for scenes that use a lot of ram

AMD also has the processer able to have both cores comunicate while intel is now described as having a "Two-chip-weled-together" design since they have to comunicate through the chipset

AMD also runs much cooler so you can save a little for each cooling device

only real advantage intel has is they have got the DDR2 memory- but amd way more than makes up for it on most benchmarks because of both advantages above (mostly the on-die mem controller) Also, amd is supposed to release a DDR2 compatable dual core proc I think some time by summer (not positive on the time) so it might be worth waiting but you can make the waiting argument any day since there always will be something better comming out

yes amd is compatible with FPrime

Socket 939 (AMD X2 and AMD 64 socket) also gives you way more flexability to upgrade and I think they are still going to use it for later processer releases so you can buy some better X2 or even the dual core FX 60, which just came out, once the prices drop

so clearly AMD has the lead for now in price and power

CB_3D
01-24-2006, 08:16 PM
Interesting stuff, thx guys!

Another question, a rather stupid one. I┤ve assembled many systems and always made fresh installs. Can i simply take a hard-drive with XP already on it?

Basically just exchange the components and continue working with all my old installations, including XP?

nerdyguy227
01-24-2006, 08:52 PM
yea you can just make sure you updata all the drivers and install the proper ones for components

I dont think there are many hds you can buy with xp on it though

even if you could, its not hard to install, you said you have done it before so I am sure you know

CB_3D
01-24-2006, 09:33 PM
Cool!

No, i won┤t buy a hd with windows, i will use my old one with all the apps and stuff, LOL.

lots
01-24-2006, 09:54 PM
A memory controller is more like the device that sends data to and from memory. But nerdyguy is basically right. Since AMD's memory controller is built directly on the CPU, it communicates with the CPU in the CPUs timings. This is several magnitudes faster than the traditional CPU -> northbridge (memory controller) setup which has an FSB to connect the CPU to the memory controller. This also effectivly eliminates the FSB (in a traditional sense) from the AMD CPUs. Intel does not have this advantage, yet.

To elaborate on the CPU to CPU communication on both AMD and Intel dual cores, the AMD dual core CPUs are integrated. They can communicate directly via internal HT links. Its very low latency, and very fast. Intel on the other hand (currently) has to send the data out onto the FSB and then back in to the other CPU. Data, once it leaves the CPU, travels VERY slowly in comparison. On top of the data that is already on the bus from the RAM, all the extra data makes it get pretty crowded pretty quickly :P

CB_3D
01-24-2006, 10:24 PM
Right now i am tending towards the Pentium D, simply for price reasons. I can get a good Asrock motherboard with a P D for 300 euro from my dealer.

Unless i find a good 60 euro motherboard that works with dual core Athlon that will be the way to go.

But probably i┤ll wait until midfebruary to see if the AMD pricecuts on the opteron line have any positive impact on the other processors.

Thx for all the great input!

mattclary
01-25-2006, 05:47 AM
Interesting stuff, thx guys!

Another question, a rather stupid one. I┤ve assembled many systems and always made fresh installs. Can i simply take a hard-drive with XP already on it?

Basically just exchange the components and continue working with all my old installations, including XP?

CB_3D, that would not be advisable. When you get a new motherboard and processor, you should reinstall the OS. Backup all your data, then reinstall the OS.

mattclary
01-25-2006, 06:00 AM
Right now i am tending towards the Pentium D, simply for price reasons. I can get a good Asrock motherboard with a P D for 300 euro from my dealer.

Unless i find a good 60 euro motherboard that works with dual core Athlon that will be the way to go.

But probably i┤ll wait until midfebruary to see if the AMD pricecuts on the opteron line have any positive impact on the other processors.

Thx for all the great input!

Right now, the low end Pentium D dual core at Newegg.com is $243 (197eu) and the 3800+X2 is $313 (254eu). 57eu difference! If you can't afford it now, definitely wait!

CB_3D
01-25-2006, 06:11 AM
The problem is finding an AMD compatible mobo around 60. They are all around 200+ over here.

If the processors fall around 30% i could bring myself to go the AMD route and bite the apple...ehhh...well.

AbnRanger
01-25-2006, 06:19 AM
The problem is finding an AMD compatible mobo around 60. They are all around 200+ over here.

If the processors fall around 30% i could bring myself to go the AMD route and bite the apple...ehhh...well.
A 939 series MB sells for a few lent balls here....how can they be that much more over there, if you order online?

mattclary
01-25-2006, 07:01 AM
Once again at Newegg.com, I looked for the cheapest 939 mobo that specifically claims to support the X2. $65 or 53eu. Seems like you poor European b*stards are getting screwed by someone. :thumbsdow

200eu! That's = $245! I only found ONE 939 board that cost that much, the ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe, and there is no way in **** I would buy that. For $245 it better freaking fellate me while I wait for my renders! :cursin: It's not even a dual socket board!

lots
01-25-2006, 07:37 AM
That is a bit rediculous. A decent quality s939 board in the states comes out to about $80-$100 on average less, if you're willing to sacrifice quality.

Maybe your shop gets a deal on parts *shrug*

TSpyrison
01-25-2006, 08:14 AM
It's not even a dual socket board!

Not to hijack the thread..

Anyone have any suggestions on dual socket boards to go with a couple dual core processors?

haba˝ero
01-25-2006, 08:19 AM
CB_3d, where are you planning on buying from? You could easily get a nice Asrock board I think at like 60-70 Euro. They have been getting prizes for quality as well as overclocking, and one of them will take both acp and pci-e graphic card.

You don't state much about what you have now but going dual core it is possible you will need more power than is in your current rig. I think more so with intel than AMD, it maybe won't be a problem so you could try without changing that but if you get instability it should be the first thing to check. I'd recommend a Fortron/source 3-400 W depending on the amount of graphic cards, hd etc for a budget setup, seasonic for a quiet and higher quality alternative.

I'd recommend buying the cheapest x2 athlon or 939 opteron if you can get it and overclock it as much you can without turning up the voltage, particularly don't use high voltage (2.9+) on the ram. To run an 3800 x2 at 2.5 instead of 2 is very often possible, and there are often no downside to this as long as you have sufficient MB and power. Stock cooling will probably suffice, or get the arctic freezer pro at like 20-30 Euros if you go over 50 C. Some motherboards don't report the temperatures and voltages right and those can be dangerous to mess with. The asrock dual sata Uli board, biostar Tforce 939 board or the asrock 6100 chipset board are all good candidates below 100 Euros with lots of coverage around the net. Try searching sites like hardforum.com or the anandtech forums. You'll find detailed guides for overclocking those exact boads and help with all possible issues, it's a great benefit of buying the enthusiast favorites.

http://www.asrock.com/product/939Dual-SATA2.htm
http://www.asrock.com/product/939NF4G-SATA2.htm
http://www.biostar.com.tw/t-series/products/socket%20939/tforce6100-939/product_details.php
http://www.arctic-cooling.com/cpu2.php?idx=80&disc=