Trance Forum | Stats | Register | Search | Parties | Advertise | Login

There are 0 trance users currently browsing this page and 1 guest
Trance Forum » » Forum  Production & Music Making - AMD64bit 3000 vs Pentium3Ghz
← Prev Page
1 2 3 Next Page →
First Page Last Page
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on StumbleUpon
Author

AMD64bit 3000 vs Pentium3Ghz

TRapp
Inactive User

Started Topics :  7
Posts :  271
Posted : May 26, 2005 23:52
it is realeased>?>??? wtf??

Windows What??? it cant be XP? are you sure Elf....???

*very suprised*

~~represent
Narcosis
Narcosis

Started Topics :  45
Posts :  618
Posted : May 27, 2005 00:05
Quote:

On 2005-05-25 01:18, piXan wrote:
Quote:

On 2005-05-25 00:07, Narcosis wrote:
No. AMD 64bit had some problems about music creation that i hear. I buy Intel pentium 3ghz and im very happy.




can u give some explanation to this " problems in music creation" ???



Yes. The 64 bit r not tested for all the uses. A friend buy this one and the cpu stucks. Is not stable with music programs. so you pay mopre u get more.           Trance Sound As A Medium Towards Mystical Experience...
john_c
IsraTrance Junior Member

Started Topics :  47
Posts :  263
Posted : May 27, 2005 00:22
you people are all guessing.
do some RESEARCH like I did.
AMD is handedly beating Intel right now in performance with the exception of video editing. Every DAW tester, PC mag, etc will tell you the same thing: Athlon 64 kicks Pentium's ass, comparing chips with the same price range. AND if a stable Windows 64 DOES come out soon, thats just icing on the cake.
AMD easy.
Elf


Started Topics :  8
Posts :  58
Posted : May 27, 2005 01:48
Quote:

On 2005-05-27 00:22, john_c wrote:
you people are all guessing.
do some RESEARCH like I did.
AMD is handedly beating Intel right now in performance with the exception of video editing. Every DAW tester, PC mag, etc will tell you the same thing: Athlon 64 kicks Pentium's ass, comparing chips with the same price range. AND if a stable Windows 64 DOES come out soon, thats just icing on the cake.
AMD easy.



I'm sure that 64 bit optimized windows came out.
And i am not guessing.Friend of mine tested amd 64 and p4 3.0 GHz(1MB cache) with multiple applications,and results were exactly the same.
UnderTow


Started Topics :  9
Posts :  1448
Posted : May 27, 2005 01:58

I agree with john_c. If you don't know the answer, don't pretend you do.

Anyway, you can download Windows 64 bit beta here: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/64bit/evaluation/default.mspx

If you want to try running an audio application in 64 bit, you can download Sonar 64 beta here: http://www.cakewalk.com/x64/

Next computer I get will be 64 bit for sure. No point in getting 32 bit technology now. It is allready old.

And yes, AMD beats Pentium for floating point calculations since a few years allready. I am not sure if this is still true but not so long ago it was so that Intel had one Floating Point unit. AMD has three.

For music production, AMD is faster.

UnderTow
Elf


Started Topics :  8
Posts :  58
Posted : May 27, 2005 02:11
Well,if you want to compete with knowledge,than go to some specialized forum for cpu.
If you got idea,you will make good music with any cpu!
z1P^
Megalopsy

Started Topics :  28
Posts :  535
Posted : May 27, 2005 11:54
here you got some numbers ;D

http://www.digital-daily.com/cpu/athlon64fx-p4ee/index03.htm

enjoy'em           (www) DarkPrisma.com.ar/ ~ FranticNoise.com.ar/ ~ Megalopsy.com.ar/ ~
providing shamanic euphoria until the end of the days!
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member

Started Topics :  46
Posts :  1142
Posted : May 27, 2005 17:08
Quote:

On 2005-05-25 00:07, Narcosis wrote:
No. AMD 64bit had some problems about music creation that i hear. I buy Intel pentium 3ghz and im very happy.



wich problems??? if anyone says anything like that they're: a) trying to sell you a pentium b) trying to justify to have spent more for less power


          roll a joint or STFU :)
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member

Started Topics :  46
Posts :  1142
Posted : May 27, 2005 17:10
Quote:

On 2005-05-26 13:01, Elf wrote:
It is released...(64 bit windows)
And,yes,Intel is better solution.



no it is not

the 64 is still beta and the intel is more expensive and less powerfull...

please... dont make uneducated guesses


          roll a joint or STFU :)
UnderTow


Started Topics :  9
Posts :  1448
Posted : May 27, 2005 17:37
Quote:

On 2005-05-27 11:54, z1P^ wrote:
here you got some numbers ;D

http://www.digital-daily.com/cpu/athlon64fx-p4ee/index03.htm

enjoy'em



Interesting if you want to play games on your PC or only encode mp3 but useless for evaluating a DAW CPU.

UnderTow
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member

Started Topics :  46
Posts :  1142
Posted : May 27, 2005 17:42

You know it's very difficult to benchmark something...

It all depends on how a specific piece of software is coded and what are you exactly doing with it...

I have the experience that with a extremly complex FL Studio project that stumbled on a similar Intel 3GHz w/ 1Gb RAM run fine on my XP 2.1 with 256 RAM, and it's a more outdated machine...

          roll a joint or STFU :)
z1P^
Megalopsy

Started Topics :  28
Posts :  535
Posted : May 27, 2005 18:33
what do you mean by DAW CPU?           (www) DarkPrisma.com.ar/ ~ FranticNoise.com.ar/ ~ Megalopsy.com.ar/ ~
providing shamanic euphoria until the end of the days!
sy000321
IsraTrance Junior Member

Started Topics :  46
Posts :  1142
Posted : May 27, 2005 19:18

Digital Audio Workstation Central Processing Unit           roll a joint or STFU :)
Colin OOOD
Moderator

Started Topics :  95
Posts :  5380
Posted : May 27, 2005 20:13
Cubase SX has been coded for 64-bit operating systems for a while. The Microsoft 64-bit OS is codenamed 'Longhorn' and is (I think) in the final stages of development. However plugins and device drivers will need to be updated to support the advantages of a 64-bit OS and many manufacturers have not yet done this. M-Audio are apparently amongst those who have.           Mastering - http://mastering.OOOD.net :: www.is.gd/mastering
OOOD 5th album 'You Think You Are' - www.is.gd/tobuyoood :: www.OOOD.net
www.facebook.com/OOOD.music :: www.soundcloud.com/oood
Contact for bookings/mastering - colin@oood.net
UnderTow


Started Topics :  9
Posts :  1448
Posted : May 27, 2005 20:31
Colin, are you sure about that? I know Intel where jumping all over CakeWalk giving them free developement machines when they announced work on Sonar64 because they where supposed to be the first. But I could be wrong of course ...

For having a general idea of CPU speeds for audio processing, you could have a look here:

http://forum.cakewalk.com/tm.asp?m=34827

It is tested with Sonar 3 which is a bit old but that is still better and more relevant than a games test.

Verdict so far in decreasing order of speed:

- Dual Opteron 252, 2.6Ghz
- Dual Opteron 250, 2.4Ghz
- Dual Opteron 248, 2.2 Ghz
- Dual Opteron 246, 2.0 Ghz
- Athlon FX53, 2.4 Ghz
- Dual Xeon 3,2 Ghz <------- Slower than a single cpu AMD FX53!
- Athlon64 3400+, 2.2 Ghz
- AthlonFX51, 2.2 Ghz
- Athlon64 3200+, 2.0 Ghz
- Opteron 146, 2 Ghz
- Centrino 2Ghz (2MB L2)
- P4 Extreme 3.2Ghz (2MB L2) <---- finaly an Intel P4 Extreme Edition.
- etc

So at least with Sonar, AMD beats the bejesus out of Intel.

Another reason not to choose Intel is because of the denormal problems. There are still loads of plugins that have denormal problems. This can seriously limit the power of your system.

UnderTow

Trance Forum » » Forum  Production & Music Making - AMD64bit 3000 vs Pentium3Ghz
← Prev Page
1 2 3 Next Page →
First Page Last Page
Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on StumbleUpon


Copyright © 1997-2025 IsraTrance