Author Topic: Prelimary specs for my new system. (Read 2834 times)

« **Reply #45 on:** March 23, 2004, 12:03:13 AM »

http://www.tomshardware.com/motherboard/20020211/dualathlon-10.html

Better in some ways. Worse in others. A worthy read, and it may change my mind on some issues.

Edit: Though most apps do not take advantage of it. Others do. I personally still prefer the dual and lots of ram. "In fact, anyone who regularly runs several applications in Windows 2000 or XP at the same time may also benefit from two processors." Which is what I typically do, and perhaps why it works for me.

§ôµÏG®ïñD · « **Reply #46 on:** March 23, 2004, 12:12:25 AM »

As you can see, gaming gets less but graphic animation and rendering improves. As i said, if you\'re planning on buying a dual cpu system in hopes of better gaming. You\'re a clueless moron

If its for graphics etc.. then more power to you.

What we need to find is a scpu vs dcpu in more gaming results. That would change most gamers minds on whats better for gaming.

This is what i hear in the Single vs Dual cpu debate.

Dual processors are like dump tracks. Slower but can take more.
Single processors are like ferrari, fast but can\'t take the load.

« **Reply #47 on:** March 23, 2004, 12:24:51 AM »

I would not go so far s moron. It depends on the coding. With the advent of hyper-threading. Has anyone heard talk of more optimization, or since it is xeon only I think. Will it have zero effect for a bit?

EDIT: Long day. I will pick up this conversation when I have more sleep.

Living-In-Clip · « **Reply #48 on:** March 23, 2004, 12:25:54 AM »

I asked about opinions on the DVD-R and so on. For cryin\' out loud, I did not ask about 20 posts worth of why you think I\'m wasting money.

I also mentioned that this computer was going to be used for video editing - which even in Tom\'s Hardware article, they mention the fact that plenty of video editing programs take advantage of dual CPU\'s to the max. Now take in account that ID software is known for taking advantage of DUAL CPU\'S (Quake III,hello? - and I am building this for one reason *of many* to play DOOM 3) and you will come close to getting the point.

MP3 Encoding? Dual boards , using MP3 Maker also won that.

Quote

The chart clearly demonstrates that both boards have a speed advantage of just less than 13% in dual mode.

Video Encoding?

Quote

The encoding of MPEG 4 videos runs exactly 80% faster with two processors - the systems reach a maximum frame rate of 54 frames per second.

But then again, I guess Souly knows more than the writers at Tom\'s Hardware.

And while the article does say that for the price DUAL boards are not quite worth it and they are a niche\' - they do have their advantages and disadvantages. It depends on what you are doing with them....So - let\'s see here.

Video Editing? Check!
MP3 Encoding? Check!
DOOM 3? Check!

Another post from a different article.

Quote

On the other hand, a second CPU ensures that sufficient performance reserves remain when running office applications under Windows 2000, particularly when several applications are running at the same time.

This also applies to XP PRO.

Read the friggin\' article.

Nowhere did I say DUAL was the be all end all setup, but it does have its advantages and it has its disadvantages. Instead, you chimed in and have taken a thread completely off-topic.

§ôµÏG®ïñD · « **Reply #49 on:** March 23, 2004, 12:44:23 AM »

For starters, read their summary. what part of graphic rendering improves etc didn\'t u understand. Games not encoded for dual cpus will suffer, as you saw in Q3A benchmark results.
If u didn\'t notice, that review is based mainly on multimedia and rendering apps. It isn\'t a gaming comparing review. As i said, Dual cpus are good for running MANY apps at the same time, its a dump truck. But single is better for gaming. Its a ferrari.

If you\'re under the impression that because Doom3 will take advantage of dual cpu systems, every other game will. Then your sadly mistaken. I really hope your not buying a dual cpu system for a very few games.
If you\'re buying it mainly for rendering, multimedia etc. Then go for it. If its for gaming, then well.. You know my opinion.

« **Reply #50 on:** March 23, 2004, 01:57:44 AM »

wow 80% increase for DV encoding. I think I may have to go dual CPU my next system!

« **Reply #51 on:** March 23, 2004, 04:23:31 AM »

do not buy a dvd-r drive right now, dual layered drives are right around the corner.

Quote

Sorry, you\'re a clueless moron

no comment

dual CPU\'s are a waste unless your using an app that takes advantage of them, like high end graphics or multimedia encoding

like we said all along, its your money. buy whatever the hell you want. it\'s all gonna be obsolete in a week anyways

§ôµÏG®ïñD · « **Reply #52 on:** March 23, 2004, 04:57:51 AM »

lol. He quoted it out of context dammit

Living-In-Clip · « **Reply #53 on:** March 23, 2004, 05:08:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by mm
do not buy a dvd-r drive right now, dual layered drives are right around the corner.

no comment

dual CPU\'s are a waste unless your using an app that takes advantage of them, like high end graphics or multimedia encoding

like we said all along, its your money. buy whatever the hell you want. it\'s all gonna be obsolete in a week anyways

I\'m glad someone gets the point. And you have a good point on the dual layer burners. Do we have a firm date and possible price on those yet? And as for the comment about it all being out-dated in a week - nothing truer has been said.

And Soul - where in my post did I say I expected every game to take advantage? I don\'t. I just know that ID has been one to take advantage of DUAL CPU\'s, have openly said they will take advantage of 64bit CPU\'s and DUAL CPU\'s. They are always one to push the hardware to a limit.

§ôµÏG®ïñD · « **Reply #54 on:** March 23, 2004, 05:15:19 AM »

All i\'m saying is its a waste of cash to build a gaming rig with dual processors.
But if you will be using it for Multimedia and rendering just as much as for gaming it\'s not a waste. Nothing more. nothing less.

« **Reply #55 on:** March 23, 2004, 07:44:29 AM »

I think LIC was pretty clear right off the bat that this sytem was for video editing and gaming.

So dual CPU isn\'t going to hurt.
When editing = better.
Supported games = better.
Unsupported games = same as single or slightly worse.

Gee, it\'s like a no brainer to me. Especially as more and more modern games have at least rudimentary support for multiple CPUs.

You can\'t ask everyone to go out there and aim for the "perfect balance" of money and speed. Not everyone does that... if they did, nobody would buy top of the line, ever, it\'s just too damn expensive. But there are those of us who are willing to pay that little bit extra and get top of the line. We\'ve got the money, we\'ve got the desire, and there is no right and wrong when you look at opinions.

§ôµÏG®ïñD · « **Reply #56 on:** March 23, 2004, 08:35:17 AM »

Slightly is a understatement, 20fps in q3a is more then slightly. Some games will take quite a hit. Remember, only software that will take advantage from dual processors are ones encoded for it.
Don\'t go thinking all multimedia and rendering software will. Because if it doesn\'t support dual processors, you won\'t get improvements. You have to have the programs that use the dual cpus. Its really that simple. Other wise you\'ve got a nice paper weight.

« **Reply #57 on:** March 23, 2004, 09:35:14 AM »

Doesn\'t the almighty Sony use dual proc\'s in the ps2?

§ôµÏG®ïñD · « **Reply #58 on:** March 23, 2004, 10:11:57 AM »

nope. It has a EE (cpu) GS (gpu) and the spu.

« **Reply #59 on:** March 23, 2004, 02:54:48 PM »

i thought i read dual layered dvd-r\'s are being shown at Cebit

june is the last timespawn i read also for release

Hello

Author Topic: Prelimary specs for my new system. (Read 2834 times)