Oh Noes! I am building a PC! What CPU do i get? AMD or INTEL?

O.K. i have several people who are ready to walk me through this PC building along with a couple websites.

I want a quad-core. I have a lot of development work to do and need to have several heavy applications going at once.

I have noticed that some of the AMD Quad cores are half the price of the INTEL and have a faster speed rating.

Can someone tell me the differences between these 3 and which is better for what i want to do? I need to be able to run: Blue Mars world, Blue Mars Sandbox Editor, 3DS Max, ZBrush - all at the same time.


- [$245.00] AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103674

- [$354.99] CPU with Motherboard: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.191073

----------------------------------------------------------
- [$219.99] Intel Core2 Quad Q9400 2.66GHz 6MB L2 Cache LGA 775 95W Quad-Core Processor: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115131

- [$394.98] CPU with Motherboard: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.189799

----------------------------------------------------------
- [$279.99] Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz 4 x 256KB L2 Cache 8MB L3 Cache LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115202

- [$532.98] CPU with Motherboard: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.188713
----------------------------------------------------------


See how expensive that Nehalem combo is? $532! Is that really worth it in performance over the other 2?

Assuming the most expensive is the best setup. Which is the 2nd best? Or if i can only spend between 300-500 for a CPU/Motherboard Quad Core Combo, what would be a better route?

I THINK i need a $650w power supply? I don't know...someone said that getting one too big can set your PC on fire... I am only going to use a video card like 9800GT or something in the $100-150 dollar range so whatever that is for nVidia - i think i need a 1GB ram video card since i am using programs that can utilize the extra memory.

Also, i am not buying this all at once. But over several weeks, so I don't know what i should buy first because prices drop over time and new things come out.

Thanks for any help and recommendations you can give!

Maybe this video card: GIGABYTE GV-N250OC-1GI GeForce GTS 250 1GB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814125268

I really have no idea what i am looking at.

I look for key things: GHz speed for CPUs, Memory for video cards... Anything else i am clueless about. But there are so many other weird variables on video cards, like GDDR2 versus GDR3 and whats the other stuff..Oh, 128 bit versus 256 bit.

And what about memory? That stuff looks so cheap right now. But Vista can only see 3GB? Can windows7 see more? How much can Ubuntu 9.04 see?

How do i have it see more ram? Is it worth it having more than 4Gbs of ram, like 8Gbs? Do i need Vista64 for that?

But then if i get a 64bit OS then everything has to be 64bit right? And then what if i don't have 64 bit things like for my Roxio CD/DVD and my HP printer?

See, THIS is why you buy DELL or Gateway or SONY, etc... this stuff makes my eyes water and now i need a cocktail just to de-stress from this.

Be careful about speed ratings. Manufacturers basically make up their own numbers. Check out review sites for A/B benchmark test results. (^_^)Yeah, that thing has a big cache. When running huge chunks of data, it will be faster. I'm still baised to AMD. Without looking at the links, I'd assume they're all 64-Bit capable. If any of them are only 32-Bit, strike them from the list. (^_^)Wattage of a power supply is a matter of capability, not any kind of power that could lead to overheats. For a power supply to last a long time, you want to run it at 60% of its total capacity or lower. I'm running a dual AMD FX74 with dual 8600GT cards on a 1100Watt power supply. Typical idle draw is around 350Watts and heavy usage will bring it up to 475 to 525Watts. I plan on bigger video cards in the future, so, in buying the big supply I have somewhat future-proofed myself. (^_^)

No doubt, go with a 1GB graphics card or better and work with an x800 series on up. To save a bit of money, you can resort to an 8800 instead of a 9800. The processing speed is the same, just, the 8 series card will draw more power and develop more heat. (^_^)Be careful with waiting for prices to drop. The hardware can get discontinued or changed at any time. Considering many hardware providers have horrible service/support reputations, you'll want to be buying things that haven't run up their shelf life. That way it's easier to get a store replacement instead of going through the headache that comes with manufacturer warranty returns. (^_^)

My own machine was a splurge right after my last computer of 7-years decided it didn't want to turn on anymore. $2200 dollars later I pieced together a really good dual-SL-on-Ultra-24/7 computer and no lag on me! (^_^)y

Thanks Immy.

I tried reading review sites, but they are really confusing and extremely technical. Most of the jargon is way over my head and they are showing all kinds of numbers and crazy stuff like "over clocking".

I still don't know what CPU / mother board combo to order, i think everything else after that is easy to decide.

This is mostly compatibility specifications. It's the "More letters+higher numbers = better" game for the industry. In the end, for an SL machine, just about any currently available RAM form factor will be fine. (^_^)32Bit XP, Vista, Win7 will only see up to about 2 or 3 GB. 64Bit OSs will see much more. (^_^)Yes. Big RAM = good. You'll need a 64Bit OS to see all of it. (^_^)This isn't as much of a problem as it sounds. I've been running Win7x64 for weeks and I've been tossing every app I have at it. I only ran into one driver that was 32Bit only and that was my outdated Kensington Mouseworks driver. I found a work around using MS Intellipoint drivers to get my 4-button layout back. Other than that, odds are, your devices will work. (^_^)Honestly? You're right. There are people who like building computers and there are people who don't like it. It's not even a matter of knowing how. Personally, I'm yet to find a computer that really chugs on SL. I use 3 computers at work and 2 at home. Each has their own FPS issues, but, nothing more than that. How much do you want? How much are you willing to pay for it? And, are you willing to work at it? (^_^)

~Buying~ a computer these days usually means you're getting it with the hood welded shut since the OEM that built it has made of lot of their own definition of how it will be operated and serviced. Especially if onboard sound and graphics are included. (^_^)

Really, so far all the items you're looking at will make for a nice hot SL runn'n machine. Just make sure all the bits are compatible and have at it. (^_^)y

To use more than 4GB of memory, you'll need a 64-bit OS. 64-bit Windows will run 32-bit software. Check with the manufacturer for hardware compatibility. If a device has 32-bit Vista drivers, it probably has 64-bit Vista drivers, too. I like having 8GB of memory to run a bunch of stuff at once.

As for the numbers, with most things computer, more is better. All other things being equal, GDDR3 is better than GDDR2. 256-bit is better than 128-bit. You're basically getting more bandwidth so it can transfer more data faster.

Motherboard & CPU... I'd probably lean towards buying something less than top of the line, and spending more money on a faster video card. The money saved going with the Core 2 Quad over the Core i7 would let you upgrade to a significantly faster video card like the Nvidia GTX260 or 275. The Q9400 isn't exactly a slouch.

I flip between Intel and AMD on a regular basis. Right now if I was getting a PC I'd get an Intel.

Its not a mystery that I prefer AMD, and why is not that hard to figure out, I and the occasional customer want the biggest bang for the buck

AMD fits that bill perfectly, for the small margin of difference in cpu power I can get more ram or that slightly better Geforce on my practically non existent budget

If asked to biuld my dream machine heres what I do, make a list like you did, then hit someplace like toms hardware and look at some benchmark results

Just looking at Max 9 benchmark, and how long it took the chips in question to render a predefined scene (doesnt matter what or how big, as long as its the same on all) shows some insight

the AMD chip produced the scene in 47 seconds
the Core 2 Quad did it in 40 seconds

Now heres the thing

The AMD chip is based on AMD's most recent socket design, so theres plenty of room for future improvement, later on you can just drop in a new chip

the Core 2 Quad is based on Intel's "last gen" sockets and motherboards, and I really dont see much more breathing room

In that case WINNER AMD (imo)

When you start getting into the Intel i7's its a whole new game, that is on their most recent socket / motherboard design, there is plenty of breathing room and it did the benchmark in 30 seconds (10 faster than the core2 and 17 seconds faster than the AMD)

If it is in your budget, and by that i mean being able to afford the cpu, the board, top end DDR3 ram and a bitching video card, then I suggest you go with your 3rd option, you would get the most satisfaction from that machine

EDIT PS:

Your hp printer, how old is it, we have a all in one office jet, that HP does not make 64 bit drivers for ... its really a pos and old tho, i need to look at it on my electronics bench (and by that i mean dismantle it into the parts bins)

I keep telling myself that, but when I go to do it I inevitably find that I waited too long and the only place I can find a compatible upgrade chip is on eBay.

need any socket A chips lol

socket A rocked ass, i went from 800mhz, 850mhz 1.3 ghz and a rigged up 2000XP all on the same mobo, then it died and i went 3 more chips on a new socket a

No, you want some Opterons for the server in your life?

One thing I like about Intel's Core 2 CPUs is they overclock like crazy. I'm running an E2180 2Ghz CPU @ 3.2Ghz with the stock cooler. Pretty sweet for a $60 CPU.

If you've got the money, I'd go for the i7. It's more future-proof than anything else on your list. Plus tri-channel memory kicks ass. A system with 6GB of triple channel memory will be significantly faster than an otherwise similarly spec'ed system with 8GB of dual channel memory. If I'm remembering right from the last article I read on the subject, the difference in speed can be anywhere from 10-40%, depending on the type of application. That's huge.

In any case, I agree with Argent about Intel being the better choice than AMD right now. Intel's pretty much been setting the pace the past couple years, while AMD's been struggling to keep up. That hasn't always been the case -- they do tend to flip-flop every few years -- but it is the case right now.

Here's a pretty good article about the state of the CPU landscape for 2009. It's six months old, so things have changed a little, but overall it holds up pretty well. If nothing else, it gives a solid overview of the significant differences between Nahelem and older Core2 architecture. I think after reading it, you'll probably agree that i7 is worth the investment. It's designed to be a multitasking monster. http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2334516,00.asp

That said, I don't actually own an i7 myself (yet), so understand I'm not speaking from personal experience. I'm just going by what I've read, and by what colleagues have told me about their own experiences.

I think the article's closing two paragraphs sum things up nicely. "It's that longevity item that makes choosing a CPU most difficult. No one wants to be saddled with a product that can't run next year's applications. On the Intel front, the news is mostly good. While a Core i7 may be the fastest desktop CPU on the planet, last year's Core 2 processors are still highly capable and cost-effective.

"On the AMD front, the only current advantage the company has is price, and even that margin is fairly slim. Sure, the new 45nm line looks promising, but it's unlikely that AMD can keep up with Intel's relentless product push. For the time being, AMD will be the lower-cost provider."

So if price is no object in the short term, Intel's latest and greatest is the best way to go, and will probably actually save you money in the long term, since you'll likely keep it a bit longer. If you're on a budget in the short term, though, then as Osgeld said, there's certainly nothing wrong with AMD. Nothing in your list is bad, so you'll likely be happy with any choice you make.



As for your OS/memory question, as others have already pointed out, the amount of RAM you can use is not a Vista vs. 7 thing. It's a 64-bit vs. 32-bit thing. Windows XP, Vista, and 7, all have 32-bit and 64-bit versions.

If you're using a 32-bit OS, then by definition, you're limited to 4GB of memory in the system. (2^32 addresses = precisely 4GB of addressable memory) That includes device memory and system RAM combined, which is why you're seeing a 3-ish upper limit on RAM. Your devices are using the first gigabyte or so.

With a 64-bit OS, the memory limit is more like 17 billion gigabytes. Yes, that's billion, with a B. (2^64 addresses = approximately 17.2 billion gigabytes, 16.8 million terabytes, or 16 exabytes of addessable memory) No OS on the planet currently comes anywhere close to supporting that limit, though. But that hardly matters, since if even if they did, you'd need well over 4 billion RAM sticks, at 4GB per stick, to hit the limit. Good luck finding a motherboard that big.

Different versions of Windows Vista x64 allow for anywhere from 8 to 128 GB of RAM. MS has said that 7 will follow a similar version scheme. It's a safe bet that 7 Ultimate x64, if that's what they'll call it, will allow 128 GB, just like Vista Ultimate x64 does now.

I wanna pair of Socket-F Opteron quads. (T_T)

It is a HP C4385 All-in-One. I got it last year. it isn't that old.

Thanks!

the i7 sounds really cool.

And i could stretch my budget to get the cpu/motherboard combo. The problem comes with the ram being DDR3, which is way more expensive than DDR2 - so i would never be able to get 8 gigs and barely afford 3gigs.

I think Q9400 2.66ghz will have to be the choice.

If i luck up on $300-400 bucks i will splurge for the i7 with that insanely priced DDR3 ram.

EVGA 132-BL-E758-TR LGA 1366 Intel X58 ATX Intel Motherboard
Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz LGA 1366 130W Quad-Core Processor
Scythe Katana III CPU Cooler
OCZ Gold 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800)
WD VelociRaptor 300GB 10000 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s HD
CORSAIR CMPSU-850TX Power Supply
Antec Three Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case
(2)ASUS VW224U Black 22" 2ms(GTG) Widescreen LCD Monitor

I put the above together about a month ago and I haven't looked back. This cost me about $1200. Lag is almost non-existent, and I have graphics maxed out.

tiger direct has a 6 gig tri channel 2000mhz kit for 120 bucks

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4417173&CatId=4332

or 3gb tri channel 1866mhz kits for 70 bucks

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=4350435&CatId=4333

im sure newegg has similar

Oh wow, thanks Osgeld!

The prices i found were 3GB DDR3 for $150, so i thought that was the cheap stuff for the i7. I think i may have to ask my MOM for some $....though she did buy me the Dell last Junel, so i will have to come up with some really good half-truth.

This may turn out to be a good system after all!

ebay the dell and pay her something back

or if she needs a better computer ...

or get a job (lol kidding, i know its rough out there)

tween newegg and tiger you can exploit the best deal at the cost of shipping .... but doing that can bite you in the end if your not mindful

heres a quick example, where the board and ram is cheaper, the cpu is cheaper on newegg, and the video cards (note 2 of them for sli) are about par in cost

http://cheesefactory.us/filecenter/quick.jpg

course then tiger direct has 1.99 shipping and newegg charges me sales tax, and the economy blah blah blah you have to make your own calculations on whats best for you

AMD Opteron 1354 Budapest 2.2GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache 2MB L3 Cache Socket AM2 75W Quad-Core Processor - OEM

$74.99

Foxconn A76ML-K AM2+ / AM3 Ready AMD 760G Micro ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail

$49.00 after $10 MIR

OCZ Fatal1ty Edition 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory - Retail

$49.00 after $10 MIR

MSI N9600GT-2D512-OCv2 GeForce 9600 GT 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Supported Video Card - Retail

$69 after $20 MIR

All prices are from newegg.

Add in a decent HSF for $20, and whatever other parts you need.

Hard disk of choice, I recommend any SATA3 Western Digital.

I have/are using all these components and have had excellent results with them.

PCWizard 2008 Glocal Benchmark for the system is over 33,000.

By Comparison an AMD 4850e Based system with 2G DDR2-800 with a 9400GT/512

gets a benchmark of about 3,800.

For more specifics on Multitasking on this class of machine view this discussion:

/111/8a/321921/1.html

Intel has nothing even close to this from a price/performance standpoint.

And, contrary to what some say, I have had excellent reliability, especially from the AMD CPUs that I have been using for the past 15 years . . .

But what about 2 years from now?

That CPU looks kinda small and slow compared to the i7 Intel which has a huge 8MB cache compared to the 2MB cache of the AMD.

Isn't there a great speed and performance difference?


What is MICRO ATX - does that mean i need one of those teenie tiny cases that look little hot boxes??

I need a better motherboard than the one in this combo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.188713

It has lots of bad reviews, so i do not want to get something that arrived DEAD for 2 different people.

I have no idea what i am looking for in a motherboard.

I think i want:

- Fast memory slots
- Expandable to SLI
- 1 extra PC slot for i dont know what? right?
- Expandable to 8GB+ memory
- i7 Quad Core Nehalem compatible


- What about USB 3.0? I was told getting a board with the Nehalem was a waste because it didnt have USB 3.0 yet which was coming soon.

You can get a USB 3.0 card if you need one. When you need one. If ever.

Any external hard drives are going to want to be ESATA anyway, and anything else that you might get that needs the speed of USB 3.0... if you really need it... you'd already be using FW800 for it.