Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD for a programer?

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 14, 2002 11:54:27 PM

hi, I'm about to get a new rig, dunno yet exact specifications, but main idea is on athlon xp 1800+ on MSI nForce with 256 mb ddr-sdram & 40 gb maxtor 7200 rpm..
I tend to use the computer alot for programing, and I guess playing as well (not pro gamer, but want to get reasonable preformance). My main concern is the programing part, I have no experience whats or ever with AMD, does anyone know how it preforms with compiling? I'm talking about C,C++,Java, scripts for bash, tcsh, and perl, no assembly at the moment (till my boss decides otherwise..), if any of you have any experience/advice please let me know. thnx!

when everything else fails read the fine manual

More about : amd programer

February 15, 2002 12:01:27 AM

From what I know and have seen in tests, the AXP is excellent at compiling, and can save you from seconds to minutes in rare cases.
But I would also like to hear from others.
Definitly however the AXP is powerful at such.

--
The other day I heard an explosion from the other side of town.... It was a 486 booting up...
February 15, 2002 12:22:27 AM

I can say my 1800 XP cpu compiles excellent. For small projects and scripting you’re not going to notice that much, but large projects are going to be significantly faster. Remember your drive is going to be the biggest bottleneck when compiling. A dedicated drive or raid will definitely make the biggest difference when compiling large projects. Unless you’re really impatient or have a really huge project the above system should be fine.
Related resources
February 15, 2002 1:42:34 AM

The AthlonXP excels at compile jobs, both in Linux and Windows. The fastest Northwood can't even touch it without a hefty overclock. I should know, I regularly compile entire Linux installations from scratch. :wink:

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
February 15, 2002 9:53:59 AM

If you look around the web, im sure there are benchmark comparisons of compile times. Obviously a dualie setup will be much faster.
But to answer your question. AMD will compile just as fast and just as reliably as any setup.

Benchmarks are like sex, everybody loves doing it, everybody thinks they are good at it.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 19, 2002 2:10:15 AM

depends on which environment you're going to compile in. in environments feeted for thr the p4, a p4 would whoop the AMD's tush, no doubt about it, do to its unique architecture (many piplines.. 20-as far as I know), but otherwise (non p4 env's), p4 would preform "poorly" and AMD would outpreform it, even pIII would out compile faster than the p4.
about that mobo you're going to get, I would reconsider, its got tons of problems coming with it, and I think you'd do better to go with somthing "simpler" like Gigabyte's GA-7VTX-H which also has onboard sound & LAN, and can give you better value for your bucks.

signatures suck!
February 19, 2002 9:54:55 AM

like mentioned, your biggest bottle neck is 1st the HDD and next the motherboard. the athlon xp is an excellent choice, but do get a different HDD and motherboard.

since most of the time you compile the source code and link them into the actual program later (the big one), i would say go with a 15000rpm HDD, but if thats out of budget, it would be alot better to go with two EIDE 7200rpm drives. that will make the biggest difference. as far as the motherboard goes, see if you can go with the abit kr7a_raid, it has raid and the chipset is the best for compiling as it offers the best memory performance.

<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/scamtron2000/Lochel.html" target="_new"> <font color=red>click here</font color=red> </A>
February 19, 2002 11:40:55 AM

ehhh...CPU speed tends to be rather more critical than HDD speed in compile jobs. Just to illustrate, take a kernel compile, time it on a single CPU with make -j1, then time it on a dual-CPU box with make -j2. Just using a second CPU for compilation almost cuts the compile time in half, even keeping all other hardware the same.

<i>If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does it still cost four figures to fix?
February 19, 2002 12:05:09 PM

Dunno about bigger things, but linux kernel fits into 256Mb of memory pretty well. Even if it don't, it takes way more time for CPU to compile things than HDD to read the source. Anyway, I made some tests with linux kernel compiling on T-bird and P4. P4/1.5Ghz on Intel i845 mobo with 256Mb PC-133 CAS2 SDRAM and IBM 60GXP HDD versus T-bird 1Ghz on Abit KG7 with 256Mb PC-1600 DDRRAM (200Mhz FSB) and Seagate Barracuda ATA-IV. Timed "make bzImage". It took 5m20s on T-bird and 6m7s on P4...
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 19, 2002 12:08:46 PM

I'm affraid the raid mobo is a little off my budget, but I looked at the Gigabyte's GA-7VTX-H and it seems to fit my budget constraint... (though it might not be the right forum to ask...) any one knows if this mobo (GA-7VTX-H) is a good idea? I mean is it stable and fast, I read a good review on it, but then again I also read many good reviews on the nForce, so I'm a bit confused... HELP! ;-)

when everything else fails read the fine manual
February 19, 2002 5:56:55 PM

true true. for just compiling yes, but that is not all. compiling is only a small part of it. i would have to say my HDD is more of a bottle neck for me tthan the cpu.

the other thing is i don't want to say go buy a dual processor mb and two cpus. that would be too much. what i did mention should only be about $90 extra.

<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/scamtron2000/Lochel.html" target="_new"> <font color=red>click here</font color=red> </A>
February 19, 2002 7:24:16 PM

HD highperfs for at most a 1MB prog ?

i think you kidding, no ?


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 19, 2002 8:42:16 PM

for <i>little</i> programs/projects this rig is above avg.

note:
C & C++ need <i>high</i> compiles.
Perl need <i>avg</i> compiles.
Java is an interpreted language.
bash & tcsh don't need compiles.


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 19, 2002 9:15:08 PM

A little advice: if you are thinking on Java, get more memory (256 MB is not enough). When you are programming in Java, you usually need a graphical enviroment (JDeveloper, Forte, JBuilder,...) and likely you want write servlets, then you run Tomcat (or Jserv) and these tools use a lot of memory. 512 MB is enough, but 256 MB is not sufficient.

Salu2 (Regards)
February 20, 2002 11:27:10 AM

like i said, this would just be a better up for about$90. he mentioned he will be doing other things too. i know what C++ and the others do, but i'm not tring to beat you guys by having the best answer on just compiling. yes the more cpu power= faster compiling.

<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/scamtron2000/Lochel.html" target="_new"> <font color=red>click here</font color=red> </A>
February 20, 2002 11:44:01 AM

Quote:
like mentioned, your biggest bottle neck is 1st the HDD and next the motherboard. the athlon xp is an excellent choice, but do get a different HDD and motherboard

well, can you explain "HDD bottle neck" & "do get a differente HDD" ?


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 20, 2002 12:55:27 PM

i can't belive i said get a different HDD!!???

i don't know why i said that. i even said to one other guy to get one of those, but as far as HDD bottleneck goes, i think every one here knows that your HDD is a bottleneck.

have you guys seen the news about serial ata?? 600mb/s ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh damn other than the latency its only 200mb slower in bandwith than pc100 ram per second.

<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/scamtron2000/Lochel.html" target="_new"> <font color=red>click here</font color=red> </A>
February 20, 2002 4:26:22 PM

get a P4 and learn SSE, SSE2 programming on top of your C,C++ look foward to the future not the past.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
February 20, 2002 5:09:32 PM

I’m not the most qualified person to explain this but I’ll give it a shot.

Depending on the size of your project your HD will play a significant roll in your compilation.

Lets look at the various areas of compiling so we can get a handle on what’s going on.

Assume we are dealing a sizeable project with various sub parts.

Parsing – Code is passed through the compiler in various stages. First macros are expanded throughout the code. Then functions and variables are identified and assigned identifiers. These are stored in a map table and further categorized by local and global scope. There are many subparts to this but for the most part it is very CPU intensive.

Object Code Generation –The parsed code and map tables are filtered down; stack frames and machine code are generated. Stubs are added for external elements for further resolution. This again is very CPU intensive.

Dependency Resolution – This is constantly active. As the compiler parses through the various subprojects, the tables, maps, precompiled headers and object code; these items are passed down the dependency tree giving each piece of the project the chance to identify, reference and add to the various elements as needed. This is very disk intensive as it involves elements scattered throughout the scope of the project.

Linking – All the various pieces of the project are identified. External libraries are statically linked, dynamic libraries are provided with run time references, object code is combined and the final output is made. This also is very disk intensive.

This is a very simplified version of a modern compiler. Depending on use of templates and interface definitions the above can be drastically different.
February 20, 2002 5:49:08 PM

Quote:
Dependency Resolution – This is constantly active. As the compiler parses through the various subprojects, the tables, maps, precompiled headers and object code; these items are passed down the dependency tree giving each piece of the project the chance to identify, reference and add to the various elements as needed. This is very disk intensive as it involves elements scattered throughout the scope of the project.

Linking – All the various pieces of the project are identified. External libraries are statically linked, dynamic libraries are provided with run time references, object code is combined and the final output is made. This also is very disk intensive

there is just a little diff between those 2 stages.

the first one involves most read disk access. (need less disk pw)
the second one involves most write disk access. (need more disk pw)

at the end you should have a very huge project to see the diff between using a high end hd & a 7200 rpm hd.


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 21, 2002 5:29:02 AM

i belive i didn't make my self clear.

Quote:
since most of the time you compile the source code and link them into the actual program later (the big one)


when i use borlands compiler my HDD goes crazy. i'm not talking about the compiling part, it gets confusing since the name has compiler, but for the other parts. my two friends that are also programers said the same. cpecialy for the huge programs. there are lots of small programs that make the big one.


and again i will say, for $90 that is still the best option. keep in mind that you will get faster bootup, better gaming, and much more.

<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/scamtron2000/Lochel.html" target="_new"> <font color=red>click here</font color=red> </A>
February 21, 2002 5:50:33 AM

Borland its just one case among compilers.
it is knowing to use a lot of HD resources but IMO, its because it isnt optimized.
(it use too much resources even with a "little" project)

moreover, we talk more generally about C,C++,Java,... & compiling.


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by labdog on 02/21/02 02:54 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
February 21, 2002 7:01:38 AM

Quote:
My main concern is the programing part, I have no experience whats or ever with AMD, does anyone know how it preforms with compiling? I'm talking about C,C++,Java, scripts for bash, tcsh, and perl, no assembly at the moment (till my boss decides otherwise..), if any of you have any experience/advice please let me know. thnx!

if there is something you dont understand, buy a good dictionary :) 


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 21, 2002 7:32:56 AM

why you reply me twice now ? lol

maybe to become an <i>oldhand</i> quickly ? :) 




<i>John Webster, English Playwright :) </i>

if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 21, 2002 8:43:04 AM

why not ? :) 


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 21, 2002 11:09:49 AM

you bother me, quickER <i>oldhand</i>.


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 21, 2002 12:49:15 PM

you caught me, ROFL.
but maybe a little soft. :) 



if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
February 21, 2002 1:06:59 PM

awesome!


if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy.
!