ddrueding
Fixture
throw in "Addled" and "Retired" and you get "OLDFART"
Anyone Building AMD Systems?
- Thread starter sechs
- Start date
time
Storage? I am Storage!
Thanks Dave, next time I'll remember to be more obvious. :roll:
paugie
Storage is cool
somebody called?
ddrueding
Fixture
Sorry, I was at the end of a very long day.
paugie
Storage is cool
nah, don't worry David. just kidding. i'm old but I don't think I'm a fart. hahaha
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
My budget system starts at a higher price, with a X2 250, 4GB RAM, 320GB drive, Gigabyte board, CoolerMaster case, and Win7 disc. As for being competitive, it isn't always easy at the budget level, but I can make a profit on the system and beat a comparable system from Dell and the component cost from newegg.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I actually like the challenge of setting up a decent budget build. Making an awesome desktop is really easy as the available pool of money becomes larger, but it's always nice to see my low-end setup vs. the big OEMs'.
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
I totally agree . . . you know it's a better system, for less money and with better support. My budget Intel system starts with an i3 530, and I can beat Dell with that too. There is also my high-end dual Xeon system with 24GB of RAM, and it's a good deal too.
paugie
Storage is cool
built one last night
bought a budget gigabyte mobo, an X2-245 and budget Geil DDR3 2gb stick
typing this on that. running Prime 95 in the background to stress. no hiccups on WinXP pro
bought a budget gigabyte mobo, an X2-245 and budget Geil DDR3 2gb stick
typing this on that. running Prime 95 in the background to stress. no hiccups on WinXP pro
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
Nice one Paugie. Will you be overclocking? 3.5GHz isn't out of the question. Do you Fold(@Home)?
paugie
Storage is cool
Thanks, Pradeep.
The last thing I overclocked was a socket 754 Sempron 2600. That was a very long time ago, I can't even remember the year. I've never Folded, though I once tried looking for Primes. But the cost of electricity was too significant to ignore.
The last thing I overclocked was a socket 754 Sempron 2600. That was a very long time ago, I can't even remember the year. I've never Folded, though I once tried looking for Primes. But the cost of electricity was too significant to ignore.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3920/amd-benchmarks-zacate-apu-2x-faster-gpu-performance-than-core-i5
The new CPU/GPU integrated chip delivering substantially more then the Intel Core 5s, should deliver a big bump up in the netbook-$500 dollar market, coming Q4.
The new CPU/GPU integrated chip delivering substantially more then the Intel Core 5s, should deliver a big bump up in the netbook-$500 dollar market, coming Q4.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
Ontario/Zacate IGP 80SP
Llano 320-480SP
4x or 5x more performance in the yet to be revealed higher consumption/performance Llano.
Llano 320-480SP
4x or 5x more performance in the yet to be revealed higher consumption/performance Llano.
ddrueding
Fixture
Gaming on a netbook...good times ahead
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/phenom-ii-x6-1075t-x4-970-x2-560.html
Review of the latest cpus from AMD.
This was an interesting graph:
Review of the latest cpus from AMD.
This was an interesting graph:
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I wish it were still easy to do an apples-to-apples comparison from a performance rating number or, you know, actual CPU frequencies.
ddrueding
Fixture
Those are all so amazingly cheap, now I remember why I used to build AMD systems...
Santilli
Hairy Aussie
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2002
- Messages
- 5,278
I think Tech Report do a better graph, perf/$$, because the xbit graph doesn't tell you how the relative cpus perform. Frequency is interesting if you run single thread apps, but fall down mightily for threaded apps.
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/18799/15
http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/18799/15
Santilli
Hairy Aussie
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2002
- Messages
- 5,278
"On the other hand, to be a real downer, AMD's accomplishment here is essentially to match the Core i7-940, a product Intel first introduced in the fall of 2008. Against Bloomfield, Thuban is slower in lightly threaded applications and in cases where memory bandwidth is the primary constraint. The 45-nm Bloomfield chip is substantially smaller than Thuban, too. Now, Intel is building an even smaller 32-nm Gulftown part with six cores and, as you've seen in the preceding pages, otherworldly performance. AMD is once again contending in the middle range of the CPU market with a compelling product, but technology-wise, they still have a long, tough road ahead before catching Intel.
We're not convinced that fact will matter to most folks, though. If you have between $200 and $300 in your budget for your next CPU purchase, the Phenom II X6 merits serious consideration, because it's a solid value for the money"
We're not convinced that fact will matter to most folks, though. If you have between $200 and $300 in your budget for your next CPU purchase, the Phenom II X6 merits serious consideration, because it's a solid value for the money"
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I was given a budget of $850 each to assemble four "nice" workstations for one of my customers. I was thinking initially that I'd go with Sandy Bridge i7s, but I ran in to issues of motherboard availability.
I took a look at what $300 will buy in an i7 CPU and I spec'd out a machine based on that. Turns out it's not THAT impressive: i7-860, 8GB RAM, 2x1TB drives, Win7 Pro.
So I took a look at an AMD rig at the same price point: 6x3.2GHz, 8GB RAM, Win7 Pro, 80GB X-25M + 1TB drive. Yowza.
There's no question that a 2600k would blow that AMD 1090t out of the water, but CPU benchmarks generally put the i7-860 within 10% of the Phenom, on one side or the other. Beyond that, there's no question in my mind that the system with the SSD is a better overall workstation for the money.
Since C2D stuff is becoming a little harder to find and i3s are not yet appealing at lower price points, I suspect I might need to transition to AMD-based systems for budget machines as well; a $130 i3 with an $85 motherboard doesn't stack up very well against a $110 x4 640 on a $60 board.
I took a look at what $300 will buy in an i7 CPU and I spec'd out a machine based on that. Turns out it's not THAT impressive: i7-860, 8GB RAM, 2x1TB drives, Win7 Pro.
So I took a look at an AMD rig at the same price point: 6x3.2GHz, 8GB RAM, Win7 Pro, 80GB X-25M + 1TB drive. Yowza.
There's no question that a 2600k would blow that AMD 1090t out of the water, but CPU benchmarks generally put the i7-860 within 10% of the Phenom, on one side or the other. Beyond that, there's no question in my mind that the system with the SSD is a better overall workstation for the money.
Since C2D stuff is becoming a little harder to find and i3s are not yet appealing at lower price points, I suspect I might need to transition to AMD-based systems for budget machines as well; a $130 i3 with an $85 motherboard doesn't stack up very well against a $110 x4 640 on a $60 board.
ddrueding
Fixture
I just got my first AMD product in quite some time. A Lenovo H405 that looks well spec'd for the price.
time
Storage? I am Storage!
Presumably due to Sandy Bridge being off the menu, Intel i5 760 has gone up by 15-20% here. It's getting easier and easier to come to the same conclusion as LiamC.
Not sure about comparing the AMD X4 640 to the Intel i3. The former only has a quarter of the cache per core so benchmark comparisons are all over the place. If AMD doubled the cache, I think the i3 would be a lot less competitive.
The i3 uses less power under load, but they're both okay at idle. I'd prefer to use the AMD solution because you'd expect a 4-core CPU to have a longer useful life than a 2-core, and I have more confidence in AMD graphics.
Not sure about comparing the AMD X4 640 to the Intel i3. The former only has a quarter of the cache per core so benchmark comparisons are all over the place. If AMD doubled the cache, I think the i3 would be a lot less competitive.
The i3 uses less power under load, but they're both okay at idle. I'd prefer to use the AMD solution because you'd expect a 4-core CPU to have a longer useful life than a 2-core, and I have more confidence in AMD graphics.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I'm still fairly convinced that Intel-based motherboards are manufactured to higher standards. Or may just Intel branded ones. But that $45 worth of price difference is still an awfully compelling argument against the i3.
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
You can go with a Phenom II for the same price as an i3. In my lists, the X4 955 is priced within 2$-3$ of the i3 550, but it's a significantly faster processor. And nothing prevents you to use an 85$ AMD motherboard. It will have a lot more features than the 85$ H55 Intel motherboard. You can have USB3 and eSATA for that amount of money on AMD's side.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
USB3 is an available option on some $60 boards. Looks like solid caps don't start showing up until a lot higher on the food chain, but they're not on cheap Intel boards either.
In general, I'd rather buy a slower CPU and pair it with generally nicer parts like a better PSU and a second hard disk, than spend a ton of cash on a processor whose greatest computational challenge will probably involve Flash based web advertisements. That's why I'm still building C2D machines a lot of the time.
In general, I'd rather buy a slower CPU and pair it with generally nicer parts like a better PSU and a second hard disk, than spend a ton of cash on a processor whose greatest computational challenge will probably involve Flash based web advertisements. That's why I'm still building C2D machines a lot of the time.
Reading Anandtech/HOCP/TechReport and a few others gives the general impression that quad is starting to supplant higher clocked duals in games as well as multithreaded apps, and as these are the only things that really need to be sped up, then there isn't really a reason to go with dual core. HyperThreaded dual cores are more like quads so will ignore those.
If something only runs for a couple of minutes (MP3 encode), who cares if there is a 20 or 30% slowdown from going from dual at higher clocks to quad? On the other hand, if you want to convert a DVD to an MP4/XVID/DIVX, you'd be crazy going with a dual, so in the cases that matter, quad all the way.
In the power department, yes, Intel chews through less 'lectrickery. But unless you fold 24/7, you aren't going to make the money back given general usage. So I'd go with the AMD solution on the low end, and either pocket the $$$ or, as Merc suggested, use the difference on parts that will make a difference, like an SSD, a blu-ray player instead of DVD, 80+ power supply, more memory or upgraded video.
Merc, next time your in the buying mood, pick up an Athlon X4, 4GB of low latency DDR3 1333 (only a few dollars more than the C9 stuff) and an 880 or 870 based mobo from Asus, Asrock or GB. You'll probably be surprised how snappy it is. Sometimes the Phenom II is a fair bit speedier than the X4, but generally I don't think it justifies the price--and the people buying these systems wouldn't notice the difference either I'd guess.
If something only runs for a couple of minutes (MP3 encode), who cares if there is a 20 or 30% slowdown from going from dual at higher clocks to quad? On the other hand, if you want to convert a DVD to an MP4/XVID/DIVX, you'd be crazy going with a dual, so in the cases that matter, quad all the way.
In the power department, yes, Intel chews through less 'lectrickery. But unless you fold 24/7, you aren't going to make the money back given general usage. So I'd go with the AMD solution on the low end, and either pocket the $$$ or, as Merc suggested, use the difference on parts that will make a difference, like an SSD, a blu-ray player instead of DVD, 80+ power supply, more memory or upgraded video.
Merc, next time your in the buying mood, pick up an Athlon X4, 4GB of low latency DDR3 1333 (only a few dollars more than the C9 stuff) and an 880 or 870 based mobo from Asus, Asrock or GB. You'll probably be surprised how snappy it is. Sometimes the Phenom II is a fair bit speedier than the X4, but generally I don't think it justifies the price--and the people buying these systems wouldn't notice the difference either I'd guess.
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
I've built a few Athlon II 250 X2 systems lately with SSDs and 4GB of RAM. With the 880GM chipset, they've work great!