Curse

Wrath Of Dragons · Oct 11, 2006, 11:41 PM // 23:41

Alright, people thanks for the feedback.
@tree dude--Its not hundreds, its 8. DeVry university is making a special lab for their new-ish program, game and simulation programming, because the current machienes they have available are incapable of anything that requires over a gig of ram, and something beyond a integrated GPU.

Yes, they looked at alienware computers. heres the quick stats of the ~2200 dollar system they had:
amd x2 64 4200 dual
(us: amd x2 64 4600)
OS:
we decided to go with the standard, not the 64bit, so we kep tthier xp pro
PSU:
alienware 650 watt atx2.0
(us: enermax 650 watt somthing or other.dont have stats with me)
Chasis:
Alienware case
(us: heavy case for noise, lots of fans, not too pickey)
MoBo:
alienware nForce4 sli x16
(us: the ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe Socket AM2 NVIDIA nForce 590 SLI MCP ATX AMD Motherboard)
GPU:
pci xpress nvidia 256 geforce 7900
(us: ati 512 crossfire-capable, dont remember the version. 1900 sound right?)
RAM:
2gb pc3200 400mhz
(us: corsair ddr2 pc2 6400, 800mhz)
HD:
150gb 10k rpm
(us: 2 74 gig raptor 10k rpm raid + external memory server thingy)
us/them gigabit network throughout the room
sound:
integrated
(us: creative 7.1 something)

Warranty:
3 years
(us: a school full of geeks)

the alienware system ccame out to 2200 or so
ours topped out at arount 2000

Tachyon · Oct 11, 2006, 11:44 PM // 23:44

One of my American friends is studying at DeVry University!

Laughing Man · Oct 11, 2006, 11:48 PM // 23:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relambrien

Okay, here are my unbiased opinions, as I am not a fanboy of either AMD or Intel :P

Intel's Core 2 Duo line was reviewed to be ridiculously better than AMD's latest chip. AMD had to slash prices drastically to remain competitive.

Thus, it is generally accepted that the Core 2 Duo processors are the best in the world right now for what they're used for.

AMD, however, with its next release, is expected to take the lead in the market once again.

I don't want to say anything more on the subject as I am by no means a graphics guru, but with processors, Intel is currently in the lead. I would suggest more RAM, however, as anything you can get helps.

Yeah Intel is currently in the lead with processors thanks to Core 2 Duo now and Conroe (well Conroe more

).

Though if your refering to AM2 it was a flop.

EF2NYD · Oct 12, 2006, 12:01 AM // 00:01

The OP should probably take this to a real forum since this thread is already oozing with fanboyism. What comes from a simple OS and RAM critique bursts into irrelevant Intel vs AMD BS. The idea is to save money while getting the best performance and compatibility. No one cares about who came out with what first.

Wrath Of Dragons · Oct 12, 2006, 12:17 AM // 00:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by EF2NYD

The OP should probably take this to a real forum since this thread is already oozing with fanboyism. What comes from a simple OS and RAM critique bursts into irrelevant Intel vs AMD BS. The idea is to save money while getting the best performance and compatibility. No one cares about who came out with what first.

Well, their advice wasnt vital to the project. There were 5 of us, and the dean asked us to put "build" a computer, and then we would all compare and come up with a finished product.
I came here because even though there is a lot of fanboyism, its the why's of it that concern me. mostly, i was liiking for someone to say "this wont work, and heres why" or "this is good, and heres why". I got what i came looking for, and once again, thanks for your input everyone.

@azgoth
what city?
Phoenix campus ftw!

Tachyon · Oct 12, 2006, 12:32 AM // 00:32

My mate is at the Columbus, OH campus.

Mushroom · Oct 12, 2006, 03:00 PM // 15:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by EF2NYD

The OP should probably take this to a real forum since this thread is already oozing with fanboyism. What comes from a simple OS and RAM critique bursts into irrelevant Intel vs AMD BS. The idea is to save money while getting the best performance and compatibility.

I agree, and that always happens. But in many ways, this is because of what information we have been given.

First and foremost, I consider myself a "Consultant". Even when I am working in a big company like Boeing, or a small store like I do now, I am first and foremost a consultant.

The first thing I made mental note of when I looked into this project was "school". That almost always means "budget". And because of the price of processors, AMD almost always becomes my first recommendation. I am making suggestions based on the fact that this is for a school.

Now if I was told "This is for Disney" or "This is for NBC" or even "this is for the KXYZ News Department", then my advice would be totally different. In the corporate world, money is not the primary consideration. I would recommend the ultimate Dual 2 processor with no hesitation.

Price Vs Performance is always the fine line you have to walk. And in any system that has to do rendering (audio, video, graphics), it becomes a question of "how valuable is the time spent in rendering?" If it is for a news program, it is highly critical. If it is for a company that makes commercials for local business, it is nowhere near as critical. Their deadlines are normally not so tight, that the extra 5-10 minutes spent rendering will matter very much.

When I worked independently as a consultant in Hollywood, I made it standard practice to submit 3 proposals in every bid. One was a low-end "just enough" type system. That would normally flip back and forth between Intel or AMD. Then I normally offered my "Price for Performance" model, which would depend on proposal, normally an AMD. Then I would offer the "High End" solution, either a dual-processor AMD or single processor high ended Intel (or dual Xeon for the "uber-rich" companies).

Once again, this depended on the project. If it was an Avid system, I suggested the dual processor AMD (or for high-budget, dual Xeon). If I knew they were working with Canopus, I suggested Intel only for every proposed system. This was because Canopus was notorious for not liking a lot of chipsets for AMD at the time (early 2000's). If it was for audio editing, I normally suggested AMD only systems, because Cool Edit (and now Adobe Audition) always seem to run faster on AMD processor (I have read it has to do with the way the RISC processor works with the program).

As a consultant, it would be foolish of me to stick to only one company. And I built an equal number of AMD and Intel based systems in the 2 years that I did that in Hollywood. But based on the information provided, I still recommend AMD, because of the performance for the price outlined.

Ghozer · Oct 13, 2006, 03:31 PM // 15:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laughing Man

Yeah Intel is currently in the lead with processors thanks to Core 2 Duo now and Conroe (well Conroe more

).

Though if your refering to AM2 it was a flop.

how can you say AM2 was a flop?? its brand new and hasnt had the chance to 'take off' yet..

the reason there's not many AM2 systems is because (like me,

) people built socket939 Systems, with DDR ram, as thier upgrade, thinking "wow, Dual Core"

If I had held out 1 month extra, I would have gone for AM2 with DDR2..

all AM2 is, is it adds DDR2 memory controller capability for DDR2 speeds...

AM2 is only a TINY bit more expensive than 939, as i said, wish i had held out for 1 month more... but oh well

Tachyon · Oct 13, 2006, 03:41 PM // 15:41

Yep, that's exactly what I did. Built a 939 system and then not long after AM2 was announced.

I learnt my lesson though. So now I'm waiting to see what AMD's quad core CPU's are going to bring to the party. It'd be silly of me to build a dual core system now when AMD are going to release quad core CPU's with DDR3 support and 2nd generation PCI-e interfaces sometime next year. Not to mention the new DX10 graphics cards that are imminent.