Dual PIII -vs- Athlon

[Porkloin]

I'm contemplating an upgrade. The only things I really need speed for is Photoshop and Premier, so I'm wondering whether I'd be better off going with an Athlon 1.2 or a pair of 933 PIII's. Either way, I'm stuck with a Via chipset. I've read that Premier doesn't exploit multiple processors all that well, but even if my applications aren't multi-threaded, two running simultaneously would do quite nicely with a processor of their own.
What do you think?

 

[peteb]

9 times out of 10 a faster single processor will beat (or match) a dual system... Only specific multi-threaded applications (like file sharing NT) really use multiple CPUs effectively.

One of the best applications for dual cpu is running sensitive apps on a dedicated cpu.

Let's say that you want to burn CDs, and do some printing/image editing? Well - let the CD software run on the 2nd cpu fulltime, guarenteeing it the cycles it needs (but not always the i/o!!) then do you desktop stuff on cpu 1.

In short a single app is more likely (look for real enterprise applications that might really support multi-threading) to runn faster on a single 1.2Mhz Athlon than a dual 933PIII. In some cases it will break even - but you'll have spent ~$400 more at least on the PIII solution to get there.

Rather than spending your cash on dual cpu - look to other better components you can use - faster disk, bigger monitor, better video card, more (faster) memory. These are much more likely to affect how you perceive your system than having a dual CPU PIII.

Don't get me wrong - there are apps and people that need dual CPUs, just that they tend to be the exception, not the rule...

-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details

 

[Porkloin]

A pal of mine just called to brag about his swanky new Athlon machine. I'll install Photoshop and Premier on one of my dual PIII servers at work and his machine and run some tests with a stopwatch. Results to follow.
Thanks for your input.

 

[Guest]

I've been looking at a new system and am contemplating roughly the same options PIII 750EB dually or TBird 1000 (no DDR). My main attraction to the dually is multitasking. And for the graphic/sound apps, most of which support multithreading. Here's articles for you as I have not found too many. Benchmarks are interesting, and are you gonna overclock? Memory bandwidth is what hurts. Check it out...
http://www.hardocp.com/reviews/mainboards/msi/694d/
http://www.hardocp.com/reviews/mainboards/abit/vp6/
http://www.insanehardware.com/showfile.php?i=00011

I'm finding only about $70 increase for dual 750's (MSI 694d ar mobo) over 1000 TB (abit kt7ar).

Not too bad of a price diff. I want a sys that handles any (almost any) tasks that you throw at it simultaneously. Annoying having hangups and errors on CD burns while trying to do everything at once. Would larger amount of RAM help this on a single CPU as much as dual? I'm going for 256MB pc133 cas2. Still undecided and wondering the true benefits of both in real world application.

I look forward to porkloin's test.

EZ

 

[Guest]

there is no PIII 750EB, there's only a 750E. da B extension means 133mhz bus, no multiplier will make 750 out of a 133 bus. I suggest da T-Bird. OC it a bit and add more RAM will give you better performance than da dual PIII750s. Try to get 512 megs of RAM

 

[Guest]

Okay, I stand corrected... it would have to be the 733EB, if PIII at all. I figured your recomendation when I saw your name.
EZ

 

[Unolocogringo]

the 700e are a better choice. most (about 97%)will run at 133 fsb giving you 933 mhz . a dual 933 is a better option and cheaper.

 

[74merc]

yes, the Tbird will be faster in single applications, but if he runs Flask or something similar, he will have an entire processor free to play AvP or Quake III or whatever the hell he wants while still running the other program at full speed.
Depending on what I'm doing at the time, my PIII 700 isn't as fast as our dual PII 350, simply because the 350 has more data pipelines to run. 350 + 350 doesn't equal 700 in this situation, but 700 isn't always faster than 350 + 350 either.

----------------------
why, oh WHY, is the world run by morons?

 

[Porkloin]

The test will be Photoshop and Premier files of a large size. Most likely a lighting effects modification of large, 600 dpi 8X10 photo and a conversion of a video to the mpg format. It takes 35 seconds and 50 minutes respectively on the ol' PIII 450. I'll be running the test, hopefully at the end of this week on a dual PIII 800 with ultra 160 SCSI drives (closest to what I want) and then on a T-Bird 1.2 with an UltraDMA 100 Raid 0 array. Both will have 256 megs of name-brand PC133.
If I go dual, it will be a pair of gigs, so I won't worry about the over-clocking.

 

[Porkloin]

Here's the results to a Photoshop test:
The PhotoShop Test

I was a bit rushed in California where I had access to the Dual PIII, so the tests aren’t very thorough.
The Computers:
a.) Dual PIII 733 with 256 megs of PC100, IBM Ultra SCSI 160 HD and 4 megs of Video on the motherboard (a server).
b.) Mac G4 with 128 megs of ram.
c.) PIII 450 with 192 megs of PC100 and two IBM deskstar 7200RPM IDE drives hooked up to a Promise Fast-track in a RAID 0 configuration.
d.) Thunderbird 1.2 with 512 megs of Micron PC133 and a pair of IBM Deskstar UDMA 100 hooked up RAID 0 to a Highpoint controller on the motherboard.
The Photo: An 8 X 10 color photo of my kids scanned in at 600 dpi. The picture took up 85 megs.
Test 1: Lighting effects
This is usually a big time burner, so I performed the filter with the same default settings on all of the machines.
Dual PIII – 41 seconds with a 20 second screen re-draw.
G4 – 70 Seconds with a 20 second screen re-draw.
PIII 450 – 30 seconds with a 24 second screen re-draw.
T-Bird – 12 seconds with a 5 second screen redraw.

Test 2: Auto Levels
Dual PIII – 24 Seconds
G4 – 22 seconds
PIII 450 – 25 seconds
T-Bird – 3 seconds (instant screen re-draw)

Test 3: Chalk and Charcoal
Dual PIII – 55 seconds with a 20 second screen re-draw.
G4 – 85 seconds with a 25 second screen re-draw.
PIII 450 – 84 seconds with a 12 second screen re-draw.
T-Bird – 33 seconds with a 3 second screen re-draw.

NOTES:
1.) The only machine with a decent video card was the T-Bird, which may account for the superior screen re-draws.
2.) The test scores on the T-Bird dropped considerably when we reduced the ram to 256, which means to me that, with Photoshop, RAM is King.
3.) The test scores on all machines improved when we upped the amount of memory available to Photoshop from 50% to 75%. Again, RAM is King.
4.) Multi-tasking wasn’t tested at this time, so the winner so far is the Athlon.
More to come.

 

[Prez]

Personally, I would go with the Athlon system. I run a 1.2 with DDR (256mb), and it flies. I think there are scenarios where the dual cpu's would rock, but if you just need high performance in 1 particular program, the AMD is the way to go.

[Comm n Chief] Prez

 

[Porkloin]

I just doubled the ram in the PIII - 450 and the performance in the Photoshop tests just about doubled.
However, Premier didn't seem to give a damn about the new ram. It still took 39 minutes to convert a 3 minute .avi to a 3 minute mpg. The T-bird took 19 with 256 or 512 megs of ram. I'm thinking that the dual processor machine may have a chance to shine on this one. The results when I get them.

 

[jclw]

Just out of curiosity how many people here have dual PIIIs?

Anyway here are a few key points:
- If you have apps that take advantage of it then it makes a big difference.
- If you do multiple things at once it makes a big difference.
- There are more multi-threaded apps being released everyday.
- If your app isn't multi-threaded and you're not doing anything else at the same time then you're better off with a fast TBird.
- If you buy a dual PC you'll never buy a single processor machine again.

Take at look in the forums at <A HREF="http://www.2cpu.com" target="_new">http://www.2cpu.com</A> for all the info and complaints.

If you're like me and you like to burn a CD, watch a DVD in the corner of the screen, download a 60MB update file, and play solitare while your AutoCAD scene renders itself in the background then nothing compares to a dual.

BTW: To make it fair run the memory in the TBird @ 100 like all the other computers. If you got a new PIII system it would run at 133.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by JCLW on 04/02/01 06:32 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[dryfly]

My 2 cents is that if you are using photoshop, you needs tonnes of RAM. Note one of the earlier posts that noted the increased speed with the TB, but really this is because of the ram.

My suggestion would be to forget about a dual processor machine, since most systems can't even make use of this power. Get a Tbird and spend the extra money you save from the second processor on more Ram. Also, the Tbird will allow you to overclock the CPU and the Bus, and this can make alot of difference in speed if you have high speed ram. Also see Tom's write up on CPU Scaling analysis. He talks about TBirds and Pentiums. He is a fan of Tbirds for a good reason. He also talks about dual CPU's and he agrees that their use is somewhat limited.

Later

<font color=blue>You don't know what it is, but it's there. Like a splinter in your mind.</font color=blue>

 

[Porkloin]

Cool site.
Both of my power-hungry (Photoshop and Premier)apps are supposed to be multi-threaded, but so far, Photoshop has responded much better to memory upgrades whereas Premier doesn't seem give a rat's butt about memory when rendering an .avi file to an .mpg. I'm hoping my trip to the office where I have a bunch of dual machines to practice with will reveal Premier's multi-processor capabilities.
And as multi-tasking has become important to me, I'll be testing that out too.