Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

For 3D rendering and physics calculation

Last response: in Systems
Share
February 15, 2010 12:16:50 PM

Hey Guys

Im new here, so bare with me if this question has been asked already. I have searched and searched but it seems people just try and ignore it.

I am a VFX artist in South Africa working on Autodesk Maya. I do lots of 3D rendering and physics simulations involving liquids and breaking objects. How can i speed up the process of rendering and simulation time by upgrading my hardware. Im really confused with the difference between gaming cards and 3D cards. And I dont have lots of money to spend so Please help!!

My PC Specs:
Intel Core2Duo 1.8Ghz
3Gb RAM
Radeon HD4850 1Gb GDDR3
Windows XP SP2
a c 84 B Homebuilt system
February 15, 2010 7:11:24 PM

The biggest performance increase would be getting a quad core CPU. For a rendering system, I typically recommend the i7-920, but that will likely cost $800 for the CPU, motherboard and RAM alone. The i7-860 would be next best, but it cost around $600 for the same parts. After that, I would suggest the Phenom II X4 955 ($400 for main build). Those upgrades would likely be the biggest upgrade.

Another choice would be dropping in a LGA775 (the CPU socket) quad core. These range from $150 to $350, but wouldn't require anything else to be changed.

For the difference in cards, it's mostly gaming cards and workstation cards. All of the cards can do the same things (mostly), but the main difference is the approach to doing them. Gaming cards use more of the brute force approach. They push out frame after frame as fast as they can, but don't concentrate on quality. Workstation cards go slower, but make every frame perfect.

The other issue is which brand of card to get: ATI or nVidia. nVidia is typically better for working with it's CUDA and PhysX uses. ATI (at least right now) is better for strictly gaming.

Your GPU is a preferctly fine gaming card. It shouldn't be holding you back much right now. Likely, any trouble you're having is due to the dual core CPU.
February 15, 2010 9:33:34 PM

As far as I know your graphics card has nothing to do with your rendering speed in Maya. Unfortunately modern 3d applications haven't yet figured out how to use the GPU for rendering which is a shame because even a mid-range GPU would blow away an i7 at rendering tasks.

MadAdmiral is right, you should upgrade your CPU. I'm not sure which desktop Core2Duo is clocked at 1.8GHz but you'll probably get more than double the rendering speed by just replacing your CPU with a Core 2 Quad, say Q8200 for $150.

Maybe a better option would be getting an Athlon II X4 630 for $100 and an AM3 motherboard for $70-80. It'll get you a similar perfomance boost but you'll have a good upgrade path in AM3 as opposed to sticking with soon-to-be-phased-out LGA 775.

It should go without saying that you should get an i7 if you can afford it (CPU + motherboard + DDR3 RAM).
Related resources
February 16, 2010 8:49:48 AM

Thanx so much guys. You guys have really helped me a lot and cleared lots of the confusion in my head.

I'll start saving up for the Intel Core2 Quad Q8200. What about the the i5?
a b B Homebuilt system
February 16, 2010 9:06:02 AM

stay away from the core i3 and i5 ... quite simply, they will screw you up ...

Best = Core i7 - 920

Next = Core2 Quad

Last = Fast Core2 Duo

these have hyperthrreading, and *NO* integrated graphics ....

A Core i5 would be a great system for your receptionist, though.

=f=
February 16, 2010 9:09:31 AM

lol thanx...but where does the Quad Core fit in? And why not?
a b B Homebuilt system
February 16, 2010 9:48:36 AM

Well, over at newegg, they (pretty sure) will let you compare specs on (check-boxed) items ... So you go CompHW>CPU>INTEL and compare the specs ...
... different SW 'velopers may adress or utilize various features like ...
#Cores, #(hyper)threads, Turbo Boost, Extended command sets, On-die MMU, # and size of on-die caches, # of bus pins (in/out), unlocked clock multipliers, etc., ad-naseum ... Like PhysX, CUDA(graphics compute engine) ... annnd ... barfola!

Our point would be that you want to load up on (not exclude) those features which may be critical or desirable to the programmers who write the professional applications which you do use, or are likely to acquire, in future. Gag! Earl!

Look at the Adobe(TM) site ... go to support and look at system requirements for their advanced professional tools (i.e. CS4+++ ... +).

I mean, ... I edit video ... HD video needs more CPU umph ... Actually, HiDef data density (hi pro bitrate codecs) need all the system throughput (sans any bottlenecks) that a chimp can muster.

Now (Kids, one and all) ... The Core i7 1366/X58 with a top end workstation card (just one really good one), will do ALL OF THAT "etc." stuff, for whomever needs to tweak at whatever feature ... should I repeat that? For how much more money ?!?
I still need a power supply, a fast HDD (SSD!) KB, Mouse, display, software ... etc ... SO? Howz about upping us to an i920 ??? and, yeah, 12GB DDR3 .. Velociraptor?
... I mean, seeing all whot you are spending on power strips and a wireless mouse?

'kay ... point made (I hope) ... Check this page out ... I do like these guys (gals too).

http://www.videoguys.com/Guide/C/DIY+Systems/Videoguys+...

=alvin=
February 16, 2010 1:01:39 PM

ryanj252 said:
Thanx so much guys. You guys have really helped me a lot and cleared lots of the confusion in my head.

I'll start saving up for the Intel Core2 Quad Q8200. What about the the i5?



Check this out, it's a benchmark of most available CPUs in 3ds max. I know it's not Maya but there are also Cinebench and Blender benchmarks and they're mostly in line with these results. You can find your current CPU and the one you want to upgrade to and see how much of an improvement you're likely to get.

It's easy to just spend $1000 and buy the fastest hardware, just not always as smart...


As for the i5, if you get it you'll also have to get DDR3 RAM and a new motherboard. Might as well get an i7 if you're planning to spend that much.
a b B Homebuilt system
February 16, 2010 9:59:06 PM

Do you remember the fabled "Celerons"?
They were "hobbled/crippled" Pentiums ...
Hobbled? How?
No Math co-processing .. No Hyper-Threading .. + crappy on-board graphics.

Think of Core i3/i5 as if they were "Core i7 Celerons"

They are simply not designed for Math, Science, Graphics, CAD, Editing ... period!
Any INTEL hyper-threading quad core (even a faster HT CoreDuo w/Peony-Quatro) would be a WAY better than an i3 or i5. A Honda civic simply will not pull a 32' long camper/trailer ... not far, and not for long, anyway ...
... You might run into a steep hill ... somewhars down the road ... eh?

=Al=
February 16, 2010 10:48:52 PM

Alvin Smith said:
Think of Core i3/i5 as if they were "Core i7 Celerons"

They are simply not designed for Math, Science, Graphics, CAD, Editing ... period!
Any INTEL hyper-threading quad core (even a faster HT CoreDuo w/Peony-Quatro) would be a WAY better than an i3 or i5.


Sorry but this is wrong. i5 750 is faster at rendering than any Core 2 Quad, even the extreme editions. Maybe you were thinking of dual core i5 6xx? Still competitive with C2Q. So are the Phenom IIs 9xx.
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 4:33:45 AM

killerclick said:
Sorry but this is wrong. i5 750 is faster at rendering than any Core 2 Quad, even the extreme editions. Maybe you were thinking of dual core i5 6xx? Still competitive with C2Q. So are the Phenom IIs 9xx.



I certainly do defer to your superior (and broader) knowledge-base ... I do not deny it, and I am not ashamed to admit that ...

... I skipped-out (knowledge-wise and purchase-wise) on almost everything that has happenned since Pentium4/Northwood (socket470) and XP/SP3 ...

Why? Because nothing of note, and nothing worth buying has happened, since then, ... EXCEPT ...
1) The intro of widescreen LCDs and Drivers
2) The intro of SSDs
3) The intro of the 920+ (uncobbled) Nehelem Architecture

Performance-wise, everything that has happenned, between those two exact points, has been a grossly kludgey and fault-riddled fiasco ... any way *I* look at it. Anybody who did not have an absolute need (fully cost justified) to upgrade anything, it that stated interim, was wasting money and time and effort.

This (Now) is the first "Total Market (cycle) Convergence" that I have seen, since the last of the Socket470 systems and ... because of my firm belief is tight standards and total compatibility, I have NEVER (ever) paid any attention to AMD or APPLE ... I only have so much time ... I am glad they exist (very) and AMD does not get enough credit ... Apple, too much. . . . Xerox PARC ???

For the first time in my life, I am considering an AMD based "thin client" because ATOM/ION costs so much already ... I might as well spend $100 more and have "real" graphics and real speedier cores.

MY LONG-WINDED POINT ??? Who cares about ANYthing between a Thin-Client(ATOM+++) or a Nehalem 920 ??? Either you want a surf-box(+print/NAS serv) ..or.. you want a workhorse/ws/game/edit/CAD.

Maybe ... naw, ... I was gonna say something about complex spreadsheets but a (nearly slow as ATOM) system would do that, fine.

Why should anyone care about (or want) anything in-between.

As for me? I would rather have a 920 with 1GB mem and an 80GB 5400 drive than "less". At least I could build it out, to whatever level. The 920 is *THE* sweetest spot (greater than the ATOMish rank)

= Just my opinion, but certainly not humble, because I am correct =
February 17, 2010 6:51:42 AM

ive made up my mind and im going for the Core2Quad Q8200 2.33Ghz, with 4gb RAM. Just need to find a suitable mobo then im happy with my homemade workstation
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 7:34:58 AM

ryanj252 said:
ive made up my mind and im going for the Core2Quad Q8200 2.33Ghz, with 4gb RAM. Just need to find a suitable mobo then im happy with my homemade workstation



Sure ... Your "thin workstation" will still suit you better than a "fat client" ...
... Economics rears it's ugly head ...

I'm going back over to the "$6000 gaminng rig" thread ... since money seems to count so much, around here.

= Harumph! ... stomp-stomp-stomp ! ... SLAM! =

February 17, 2010 8:38:13 AM

Alvin Smith said:
stay away from the core i3 and i5 ... quite simply, they will screw you up ...

Best = Core i7 - 920

Next = Core2 Quad

Last = Fast Core2 Duo

these have hyperthrreading, and *NO* integrated graphics ....

I would agree on the i3 but not on the i5.
the i7, c2q and c2d have not igp either...
for what he needs, the i7 is best, next is the i5 and then is the phenom II 955.
Alvin Smith said:

A Core i5 would be a great system for your receptionist, though.

=f=

huh? you really don't know much heh... a receptionist will be suffice with a 775 intel or the Athlon X2.
i5 is way overkill for that.
February 17, 2010 8:39:46 AM

ryanj252 said:
ive made up my mind and im going for the Core2Quad Q8200 2.33Ghz, with 4gb RAM. Just need to find a suitable mobo then im happy with my homemade workstation

imho, thats a wrong move, either get an i5 or get a phenom II quad that you can upgrade with time, the Q8200 is a dead end socket.
February 17, 2010 8:43:33 AM

what do you mean by dead end socket?
February 17, 2010 8:54:36 AM

ryanj252 said:
what do you mean by dead end socket?

intel stops producing 775 socket hardware, they've switched to 1156 and 1336 (like you won't find any hardware to the old p4 cpus tis days)
so you'll get a computer that you cannot upgrade in a year or the cost will be to high to justify (let say you want a better cpu or more memory).
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 9:17:55 AM

Daggs is righteous ... I concur (now) and defer.




=Al= (like a socket 1366 would have killed his budget! ... tsk!)

February 17, 2010 9:22:37 AM

Well if your motherboard supports Q8200 (check the manufacturer's web site) then your best (most cost effective) option is to just buy the CPU.

If you're buying a new MB you're better off getting a newer platform, either i5 750 based or Phenom II based. If you go with the i5, you'll also have to replace your RAM with DDR3 and if you decide on the Phenom II X4 (or even Athlon II X4, according to Tom's Hardware CPU 3ds max benchmark it's comparable to Q8200 but much cheaper) then you can either get a DDR3 motherboard and get even higher performance or get a DDR2 motherboard, keep your current RAM and save some money that way.
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 9:28:31 AM

daggs said:
intel stops producing 775 socket hardware, they've switched to 1156 and 1336 (like you won't find any hardware to the old p4 cpus tis days)
so you'll get a computer that you cannot upgrade in a year or the cost will be to high to justify (let say you want a better cpu or more memory).



Righteous? Yes! Flawless? No! Even Daggs can make a dyslexic typo ... That was meant to read "Socket 1366" (not 1336) picky, picky, picky ! Vindication, however trivial, is still sweet.

=ZZZzzz=
February 17, 2010 9:31:14 AM

Aah!! That makes sense...so when i upgrade my MB, i should go straight to a 1156 or 1336 socket MB? That gives me headroom for upgrades in the future?
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 9:51:37 AM

ryanj252 said:
Aah!! That makes sense...so when i upgrade my MB, i should go straight to a 1156 or 1336 socket MB? That gives me headroom for upgrades in the future?



Zactly ... what he (&we) were saying. A more moder architecture will allow you many more bios and driver upgrade cycles ... prolly a higher RAM limit ... more and better ports ... a wider transfer bus ... extended modes and instruction sets. Turbo Boost (for what it's peceptably worth) ... etc.

You might have to include a bigger PSU ... Need 3 sticks of memory ... SATAII (w/RAID) also available with ICHxxR Southbridge. USB 3.0 ports and SATA-III (6Gb/sec) is already showing up on X58 (1366) boards ... PCIe 3.0 is out next year (almost redoubling lane banwidth).

My point is that extra $$ spent on "basic infrastructure" is usually well spent as there is certain overhead required to make ANY MB or PSU or Mouse, etc. So, as a % of the total system cost, a lower end chip on a higher end MB will yeild the best value, over the (now much extended) service and upgrade life of this class of platform ... platform is a very apt term, for what "we" are talking about.

PS: My Receptionist NEEDS a core i5 !!! She is way hot !

February 17, 2010 9:53:18 AM

Alvin Smith said:
Righteous? Yes! Flawless? No! Even Daggs can make a dyslexic typo ... That was meant to read "Socket 1366" (not 1336) picky, picky, picky ! Vindication, however trivial, is still sweet.

=ZZZzzz=

dyslexic people aren't stupid... here is one that was wayyyy more smart then you and I combined: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein
no one is perfect, especially me but if your notion of healthy debate is to try finding small errors from some one's response to you so others wont see that you can be wrong, then go away and come back when you'll mature enough to accept other's opinions.
February 17, 2010 9:57:28 AM

lol oh then thanx for the help
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 10:15:42 AM

Folks never seem to see my tongue poking through my cheek ! Yes, a trivial, petty cheap shot ... dee-liberately immature ! Sue me! Like I don't know a receptionist might do ok with an ATOM ... c'mon, man? Are you one of those folks who take the creation of Genisis literally? (plZ do not answer that! ... it was rhetorical !)

I am just playing the part of the smug gear snob, here ... I could not agree with you more (Albert!) ! You are preaching to yhe (literal fundamentalist) choir, here. I am with YOU, bud! Just don't try to say that i3 AND the i5 are not cobbled/crippled 1366 Nehalems ... don't do it! A cobbled I/O path (fewer bus pins) ... deactivated features ... locked base multiplier (all but the i7 Extreme) ... Looks like i5 does have turbo boost and 64-bit (no surprise) but what about HT ?
I just know that, with a 1366/920, I am getting all the hardware and firmware and instruction extensions that are currently available ... more bandwidth, all around.
Explain, to us, (Friend), how an i5 is not a physically and functionally "hacked down" Nehelem 1366 ... why go with the lobotomy when you can have the whole brain, fully functional, with all intended features? To save a few bucks that would increase the total system cost by 10% ? 12% ?
Just attempting to be logical, but you are not wrong! I agree. Besides, he may be exploiting the last throws of that dead end ... the 1366 will someday, also be at the end of it's life ... I might even bump up the RAM on my P3 933MHz Coppermine and put a hand-me-down AGP4x in there and boot to Linux, for home control and print service ... we all got our reasons and our philosophy. I can upgrade my P3 for almost nothing at all.

= falling off soap box, now =
(don't be so cranky and sensitive ... no fun!)
February 17, 2010 11:07:07 AM

Well we don't know what the OPs situation is. Maybe he's not doing this for fun but to be able to work. And maybe he has to choose between an expensive CPU and buying his kids shoes or something.

An i5 may be a crippled i7 but a crippled i5 is still better than a Core 2 Quad Extreme Edition so who cares. As I said, it's easy to buy the best and most expensive hardware, it's just not always smart.
February 17, 2010 11:17:18 AM

Hi there i recommend you buy i7 920(on ebay you are still buy this for 160£),but graphic card for Maya its poor,because for Maya,3D max most people use ATI FireGL card or Nvidia QuadroFX.Im try use 3D Max with my XFX 5870,but for poor performance in 3d modeling(3D max,Maya,AutoCad),im now using Ati FireGL and for gaming im use 2xXFX 5870,thats my recommendations
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 11:26:46 AM

Yup ... I am just presenting the snob-logic angle ...
... I DO believe that the i7/1366 platform is totally worthy as a confluence of total throughput that has not been seen since the socket 470 HT Northwoods.

No half-bus I/O ... full extended command set ... Dual channel (was a step up)

... Coupled with SSDs, the 1366 offers the most balanced and breathable system (for total throoughput), that the smartest money can buy, and the widest and most sustainable upgrade path for applications, as well as hw/firmware, etc. AND a huge leap in total addressable memory. Even for a poor man, I think it is worth the stretch, at this exact juncture, in the history of PC system platform standards and architecture. snore.

=Al=
February 17, 2010 11:32:25 AM

Alvin Smith said:
I certainly do defer to your superior (and broader) knowledge-base ... I do not deny it, and I am not ashamed to admit that ...

... I skipped-out (knowledge-wise and purchase-wise) on almost everything that has happenned since Pentium4/Northwood (socket470) and XP/SP3 ...

Why? Because nothing of note, and nothing worth buying has happened, since then, ... EXCEPT ...
1) The intro of widescreen LCDs and Drivers
2) The intro of SSDs
3) The intro of the 920+ (uncobbled) Nehelem Architecture

Performance-wise, everything that has happenned, between those two exact points, has been a grossly kludgey and fault-riddled fiasco ... any way *I* look at it. Anybody who did not have an absolute need (fully cost justified) to upgrade anything, it that stated interim, was wasting money and time and effort.

This (Now) is the first "Total Market (cycle) Convergence" that I have seen, since the last of the Socket470 systems and ... because of my firm belief is tight standards and total compatibility, I have NEVER (ever) paid any attention to AMD or APPLE ... I only have so much time ... I am glad they exist (very) and AMD does not get enough credit ... Apple, too much. . . . Xerox PARC ???

For the first time in my life, I am considering an AMD based "thin client" because ATOM/ION costs so much already ... I might as well spend $100 more and have "real" graphics and real speedier cores.

MY LONG-WINDED POINT ??? Who cares about ANYthing between a Thin-Client(ATOM+++) or a Nehalem 920 ??? Either you want a surf-box(+print/NAS serv) ..or.. you want a workhorse/ws/game/edit/CAD.

Maybe ... naw, ... I was gonna say something about complex spreadsheets but a (nearly slow as ATOM) system would do that, fine.

Why should anyone care about (or want) anything in-between.

As for me? I would rather have a 920 with 1GB mem and an 80GB 5400 drive than "less". At least I could build it out, to whatever level. The 920 is *THE* sweetest spot (greater than the ATOMish rank)

= Just my opinion, but certainly not humble, because I am correct =



AMD was better than Intel for quite a stretch of time after the Pentium 4 during the introduction of dual core. Granted, the i7s and i5's are better than current AMD offerings, but its always been a teeter totter effect, just like ATI/Nvidia. Now AMD is competitive with its value because they are getting smoked by the performance in the i5's i7's. To say that the i7 is some kind of great leap is sort of ridiculous, because its just the next progression in Tech. AMD will intoduce something here in the next couple years that undoubtably gives them the edge for a time and all performance nuts will start tooting AMD's horn just like they are with Intel now. I guess if you stopped paying attention over the last couple years I can see why you might think that.
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 12:10:11 PM

antisyzygy said:
AMD was better than Intel for quite a stretch of time after the Pentium 4 during the introduction of dual core. Granted, the i7s and i5's are better than current AMD offerings, but its always been a teeter totter effect, just like ATI/Nvidia. Now AMD is competitive with its value because they are getting smoked by the performance in the i5's i7's. To say that the i7 is some kind of great leap is sort of ridiculous, because its just the next progression in Tech. AMD will intoduce something here in the next couple years that undoubtably gives them the edge for a time and all performance nuts will start tooting AMD's horn just like they are with Intel now. I guess if you stopped paying attention over the last couple years I can see why you might think that.



I was in the Submarine Service ... a culture of ultimate standards and redunancy, for compatibility, dependability and stability.
I worked at TRACOR Aerospace, in the outlaw PC lab, we defeated the mainsframe (Sperry) priesthood and introduced the PC's Limited Clones and standardized software packages (for ease of training) ...
Pubs wanted Apples ... they got to keep them and we used Pre-Dells and their stable Phoenix BIOS, as a compatibility standard. Getting two expansion cards (any two) was a feat, in those days !
I worked at CompuAdd, spent months in the Hard Drive Queue, saw loads of "wanna be" crapware.
I worked at DELL (formerly an INTEL(Inside)-only house ... AMD was for kids who could afford compatibility issues, in leu of the higher cost for dependable performance.
I am an AVID HD editor ... I have felt the PAIN of every bottle-neck and the cost of every design compromise in the last 10 years, all while the shift to HD content raised my sys/resource requirements!
I have spent lots of time at VideoGuys.com, and they recommend strictly INTEL main chipsets and industry approved peripherals like SONY cameras and Pioneer DVD burners ... If you don't have a PNY Quatro "model x" workstation class video card, then we won't support you (AVID) ... Adobe and AVID and DELL and HP have even defined exact certified specs, for video edit suites. Dual Socket, bay-bee!

So, no, I have been working with on-site IT reps, putting out network fires and hundreds of people can't work until I/we fix it... And you think I give a Ratz Arse about AMD ??? No matter that INTEL stole/lifted recent critical innovations! AMD might make it up, but INTEL makes it real and, in the end, it ain't real until INTEL says so (PCIe 3.0?)

So ... forgive me if I haven't been watching anything, with baited breath, since the Prescott/BTX heat barrier and leakage issues led to multi-core, the temporary dropping of hyperthreading, reduced clock rates ... stagnant southbridge development *especially in ws platforms) .... WINDOWS VISTA ??? HTPCs" ... and even APPLE switched to INTEL ... They will be first to get Gulftown.

It is not about quality or innovation or even cost ... it is about reliable, conservative standards of reliability. Many Corporations only use INTEL branded MBs and SSCs ... for that reason. Nothing sexy or glamorous about it ... facts-o-lyfe.

Murphy has more sway than Moore ... in the real world, to be blunt.
AMD makes fine server chips and blades and massively parallel systems (global top 10) ... sure, I'm open to saving wads of dough ... if the track record supports the alternative ... all else equal.

I have said I would like an AMD dual core with 512MB PCIe graphics, rather than an IONized ATOM 4xx.
I think AMD will do well with "thicker clients" like ATOMx2 GMAx4

And ... who does not think that INTEL onboard graphics don't (and have not always) sucked beans through a swizzle stick? No defense there ... IONized ATOM450s (w/GMA) are proof..

= wind bag out =

February 17, 2010 12:14:38 PM

Alvin Smith said:
Folks never seem to see my tongue poking through my cheek ! Yes, a trivial, petty cheap shot ... dee-liberately immature ! Sue me! Like I don't know a receptionist might do ok with an ATOM ... c'mon, man? Are you one of those folks who take the creation of Genisis literally? (plZ do not answer that! ... it was rhetorical !)

I am just playing the part of the smug gear snob, here ... I could not agree with you more (Albert!) ! You are preaching to yhe (literal fundamentalist) choir, here. I am with YOU, bud! Just don't try to say that i3 AND the i5 are not cobbled/crippled 1366 Nehalems ... don't do it! A cobbled I/O path (fewer bus pins) ... deactivated features ... locked base multiplier (all but the i7 Extreme) ... Looks like i5 does have turbo boost and 64-bit (no surprise) but what about HT ?
I just know that, with a 1366/920, I am getting all the hardware and firmware and instruction extensions that are currently available ... more bandwidth, all around.
Explain, to us, (Friend), how an i5 is not a physically and functionally "hacked down" Nehelem 1366 ... why go with the lobotomy when you can have the whole brain, fully functional, with all intended features? To save a few bucks that would increase the total system cost by 10% ? 12% ?
Just attempting to be logical, but you are not wrong! I agree. Besides, he may be exploiting the last throws of that dead end ... the 1366 will someday, also be at the end of it's life ... I might even bump up the RAM on my P3 933MHz Coppermine and put a hand-me-down AGP4x in there and boot to Linux, for home control and print service ... we all got our reasons and our philosophy. I can upgrade my P3 for almost nothing at all.

= falling off soap box, now =
(don't be so cranky and sensitive ... no fun!)

where did I glorified the i3 and i5? on the contrary, the i3 is a pseudo quad, I'll never recommend it to anyone.
the i5 is a crippled version (socket crippled) of the i7 I've never said it isn't, I for example won't own a i5 or i3, either an i7 or am3 build.
fact to the matters, the i5-750 is an excellent choice for games, better system builders from you and me say it, benchmarks shows it.
I believe in giving others the best suitable solution for their needs with correlation to wise investment and money saving. if I would answer from my gut, it would have been amd all the way, but that isn't the right solution.
I don't care how poke you tongue can be, I don't like cheap shots, they shine the commentator on a bad light. in my opinion a guy that uses cheap shot has problems respecting others. that's manners 101 dude.
take it or leave it.
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 12:39:06 PM

I'll take it ... without any pithy relies. My sincere apologies. I've hung out in some rude neighborhoods, of late. Didn't mean for my slime to rub off on you (all).

Not gonna water this one down. No excuses. Sorry.

=Al=
February 17, 2010 2:07:00 PM

Alvin Smith said:
I was in the Submarine Service ... a culture of ultimate standards and redunancy, for compatibility, dependability and stability.
I worked at TRACOR Aerospace, in the outlaw PC lab, we defeated the mainsframe (Sperry) priesthood and introduced the PC's Limited Clones and standardized software packages (for ease of training) ...
Pubs wanted Apples ... they got to keep them and we used Pre-Dells and their stable Phoenix BIOS, as a compatibility standard. Getting two expansion cards (any two) was a feat, in those days !
I worked at CompuAdd, spent months in the Hard Drive Queue, saw loads of "wanna be" crapware.
I worked at DELL (formerly an INTEL(Inside)-only house ... AMD was for kids who could afford compatibility issues, in leu of the higher cost for dependable performance.
I am an AVID HD editor ... I have felt the PAIN of every bottle-neck and the cost of every design compromise in the last 10 years, all while the shift to HD content raised my sys/resource requirements!
I have spent lots of time at VideoGuys.com, and they recommend strictly INTEL main chipsets and industry approved peripherals like SONY cameras and Pioneer DVD burners ... If you don't have a PNY Quatro "model x" workstation class video card, then we won't support you (AVID) ... Adobe and AVID and DELL and HP have even defined exact certified specs, for video edit suites. Dual Socket, bay-bee!

So, no, I have been working with on-site IT reps, putting out network fires and hundreds of people can't work until I/we fix it... And you think I give a Ratz Arse about AMD ??? No matter that INTEL stole/lifted recent critical innovations! AMD might make it up, but INTEL makes it real and, in the end, it ain't real until INTEL says so (PCIe 3.0?)

So ... forgive me if I haven't been watching anything, with baited breath, since the Prescott/BTX heat barrier and leakage issues led to multi-core, the temporary dropping of hyperthreading, reduced clock rates ... stagnant southbridge development *especially in ws platforms) .... WINDOWS VISTA ??? HTPCs" ... and even APPLE switched to INTEL ... They will be first to get Gulftown.

It is not about quality or innovation or even cost ... it is about reliable, conservative standards of reliability. Many Corporations only use INTEL branded MBs and SSCs ... for that reason. Nothing sexy or glamorous about it ... facts-o-lyfe.

Murphy has more sway than Moore ... in the real world, to be blunt.
AMD makes fine server chips and blades and massively parallel systems (global top 10) ... sure, I'm open to saving wads of dough ... if the track record supports the alternative ... all else equal.

I have said I would like an AMD dual core with 512MB PCIe graphics, rather than an IONized ATOM 4xx.
I think AMD will do well with "thicker clients" like ATOMx2 GMAx4

And ... who does not think that INTEL onboard graphics don't (and have not always) sucked beans through a swizzle stick? No defense there ... IONized ATOM450s (w/GMA) are proof..

= wind bag out =


Saying that Intel is better for video editing is like saying that Apple is better for Photoshop or something. It may be true at some specific time, but not always. I suspect it would not be difficult to get a superior performing AMD platform for video editing at times in the past. I dont doubt your knowledge or credibility, I just partially disagree with you. The whole Intel centric thing bothers me especially since Intel is undergoing Anti-trust problems is three different countries. They don't play fair with standards and muscle fair competition out of the way with back-room business tactics, so why wouldn't you expect manufacturers, benchmarks, ect. to perform better with Intel. AMD is rock solid, and I have never had a single compatibility problem with any of their products since the K7 series (which was the first time I actually owned an AMD personally). The only times I had any issues were with the NForce chipsets or graphics drivers, so that was specifically Nvidia or ATI issues. Granted, I guess you could say then that some AMD compatible chipsets have had issues. In the past at work, I still made the decision for others to go with Intel periodically, especially the Pentium 4 and cheaper Core 2 Duo's. I usually went with AMD for a higher end platform because they don't demand such premiums for good hardware or 10% increases in performance, such as with some of Intel's products. I worked IT in the past for a University-wide IT department, now I do research and we use Intel server clusters for our computations. Im not saying Intel is a bad product, I just think you underestimate AMD.
a b B Homebuilt system
February 17, 2010 2:56:16 PM

Naw, I don't disagree with anything you are saying ... I don't think you grokked the nut of what I was attempting to convey.

"This" standards thing has nothing to do with logic or speed or quality or performance or price ... It has everything to do with marketing partnerships and standards certifications (and exclusions) as a marketing bludgeon. Do I like it? Nope! Will I swallow? If the price is right and the purchase is not just an invitation to perpetual tail-chasing (for a working solution). It is like trying to make a movie in L.A. ... Not without this guild and that union and such-n-such liability insurance and local permit fees and lawyers and accountants and ... ... ... etc.

If you want to make a film in L.A. ... that is what you must contend with. Here, in Austin, we don't have so much entrenched corruption and greed and protectionism.

INTEL sets the standards (mostly) and approves the certifications (with help). They decide the pace of development and marketing ... timing, etc. Some, here (really old farts) might even remember the S-100 system bus architecture. Pre-IBM-PC ... A superior specification that was approved by the IEEE and promptly destroyed by IBM.

I built two S-100 systems IMSAI and Heath/Zenith-100 ... and bought and expanded a couple of TANDY (Radio-Shack) successors, before providing 3-Com/IBM Lans (in'84) and PCs LTD clones (with Novel Netware).

These were all fairly rigid platform standards and without them, no two cards would work in the same system and apps would not have proliferated. Period. Reality.

Folks can get pretty idealistic and philosophical about tech ... me too. Pragmatism (tho) trumps innovation, just about every time. Solid standards underpin the whole mess. Gotta have them and defacto-default standards (like the Apple II) are just plain rare.

Oops ... Fire alarm, I must trouse and Exit the Building !
February 17, 2010 4:25:12 PM

Alvin Smith said:
Naw, I don't disagree with anything you are saying ... I don't think you grokked the nut of what I was attempting to convey.

"This" standards thing has nothing to do with logic or speed or quality or performance or price ... It has everything to do with marketing partnerships and standards certifications (and exclusions) as a marketing bludgeon. Do I like it? Nope! Will I swallow? If the price is right and the purchase is not just an invitation to perpetual tail-chasing (for a working solution). It is like trying to make a movie in L.A. ... Not without this guild and that union and such-n-such liability insurance and local permit fees and lawyers and accountants and ... ... ... etc.

If you want to make a film in L.A. ... that is what you must contend with. Here, in Austin, we don't have so much entrenched corruption and greed and protectionism.

INTEL sets the standards (mostly) and approves the certifications (with help). They decide the pace of development and marketing ... timing, etc. Some, here (really old farts) might even remember the S-100 system bus architecture. Pre-IBM-PC ... A superior specification that was approved by the IEEE and promptly destroyed by IBM.

I built two S-100 systems IMSAI and Heath/Zenith-100 ... and bought and expanded a couple of TANDY (Radio-Shack) successors, before providing 3-Com/IBM Lans (in'84) and PCs LTD clones (with Novel Netware).

These were all fairly rigid platform standards and without them, no two cards would work in the same system and apps would not have proliferated. Period. Reality.

Folks can get pretty idealistic and philosophical about tech ... me too. Pragmatism (tho) trumps innovation, just about every time. Solid standards underpin the whole mess. Gotta have them and defacto-default standards (like the Apple II) are just plain rare.

Oops ... Fire alarm, I must trouse and Exit the Building !



I understand what you mean now.
!