hardware Q, dual intel or dual amd64

[linux-works]

I wonder if XP really cares if the 2 cpu's are intel or amd64?

is there a general consensus about the class (vendor) of cpu when it comes to video rendering? I am most concerned with being able to convert dv->mpg in software and having it run quickly.

I am tending toward amd64 since I know it has a stronger cpu, overall. and I also know that intel chipsets tend to be more stable. maybe I'd use an intel box (a slower one, an extra that I have) for the capture. and then the fast new box (that I am trying to decide on) for the actual mpeg conversion.

bang for buck - big single intel? big single amd64? dual??

is there a quick answer?

TIA,

.bl

[Leoslocks]

is there a quick answer?

No quick simple answer.

The software that does the encoding should dictate which processor to use.
Fo instance, TMPGEnc is geared for Intel SSE3 instructions and Hyperthreading but does not like AMD64 (Yet). “TMPGEnc 3.0 XPress” optimized for the new Intel Pentium 4 processor with HT Technology . . . 8 to 12% speed increase thanks to the SSE-3

Hardware is changing too fast for the software to mature or even get developed adequately.

[BJ_M]

unless you buy a dual xeon with 800fsb system , which is big bucks still .. you will be stuck with dual amd something -- otherwise a "standard" dual xeon system will only be 400/533 fsb and in that case , the amd is the clear winner .. just for bus speed ..

both systems work well though ... leoslocks is right , no quick answer ..

[studtrooper]

If you can afford it, go dual Opteron. If you have patience, wait until Opteron boards get PCI-e, then you should be fairly future-proof...

[linux-works]

I didn't know tmpgenc didn't 'like' amd64. well, I guess that means that the sse3's aren't in the amd chip? maybe its the gen before (sse2?) plus their own 3dnow that they do have.

I've not been impressed with HT. its a freebie that, if its there, fine, but I won't pay more for it. just not sure its really a big enough win.

but I'll take your word that some apps are written more for intel.

just wanted to know if what I gain by bus speed and internal cpu speed (amd wins here) is lost due to not having sse3.

finally, the stability of the chipset is kind of important. it used to be that intel would be more 'smooth' and less jerky when switching tasks or doing interrupts. maybe that was way back in the early k7 and k6 days. but still, I hear problems with the ethernet side of the nvidia chipsets and ide problems with others.

well, as my main encoder seems to be tmpgenc (from what I understand, its pretty much the thing to use for overall best quality) - maybe I should stick with intel. its just that xeon systems are so expensive for what you get...

[rallynavvie]

800 FSB Xeons cost the same as the 533 FSB Xeons did only a few months ago. You're looking at spending $300 each for a 3 GHz Nocona Xeon which is almost the same as a 3.06 GHz Prestonia Xeon. I'll be switching to Noconas later this month, but so far the Prestonias have been splendid for video production work. Honestly I don't see the bus being much of a factor when encoding, though it must help when mastering/editing. Encoding is all still raw processing power, and SMP-aware encoders like TMPGEnc and MainConcept love Xeons. Adobe more or less recommends you use Intel procs for their software.

Forget HT. When you have a dual-proc system it just seems a little redundant. Enable it if you need to run more than two instances of an application, otherwise just leave it disabled.

Opteron systems are still pricey and there still aren't any good workstation platforms that I've seen for them yet. For servers I wouldn't recommend anything else but an Opteron system. Once chipset and board manufacturers start making workstation platforms for them we'll see more advances but even then I think they'll still only beat the Intel offering for DCC, 3D, and CAD work. I think they do that now with just their server platforms. Video instruction sets still seem to favor Intel. I guess it'll depend on what Intel does with their processors when they start releasing true 64-bit consumer procs.

I'm curious to see how a dual Xeon system is more expensive than a dual Opteron system. Opterons are $$$. I feel I got my money's worth when I built my latest workstation. If you build it right you'll have plenty of computing power on tap.

[BJ_M]

BOXX has some very nice dual Opteron systems -- they often have products before anyone else -- thier stuff is really well built ..

i use xeons -- see profile ..

[ViRaL1]

BOXX has some very nice dual Opteron systems -- they often have products before anyone else -- thier stuff is really well built ..

i use xeons -- see profile ..

Just curious, where would I find their stuff for a look-see?

EDIT: Found 'em. Resorted to Google as boxx.com and boxx.net didn't work.

http://www.boxxtech.com/ for anyone else interested.

[linux-works]

I always build from scratch, so I can choose the motherboard and parts that work not only with xp, but also freebsd (and occasionally linux). this almost mandates a self-build. esp. when you're picky about the network and disk stuff.

my server runs 64bit pci cards and I tend to like having a fat pci bus its not available on typical 'workstation' motherboards, even for amd64. what a shame. that would be the selling point for me. to get 64bit pci (no, I don't care as much about pci-x yet) you have to spend 3x and more compared to even a high end workstation board.

server usually tends to mean dual cpu, so that's why I was wondering if dual amd is considered production-stable or not, given today's assortment of boards and the very few chipsets that are worth anything for non-intel cpus. I hear the nvidia stuff has bugs, and via stuff is always slightly buggy and I won't even touch sis for a chipset.

on my server, I run real hw raid (3ware). again, on my double fast double wide pci slot. for my bsd server, it seems to really work well. but - I'm not sure if that's overkill or not for a windows box... how often are you streaming i/o to the disk AND also needing lots of cpu? I am of the mind that even sw raid (99% of the chips are all regular ide controllers that hide the raid in software) is probably good enough for windows since you're really single tasking and doing a file save or an encode or somthing - but usually doing only 1 serious task at a time.

you can see - I am trying to weigh the benefits of all the current techs before I plunge and build my next generation video pc.

maybe wait for the next gen of opteron boards? I really think the current crop are long on the tooth and there should be new stuff coming for dual amd real soon (I hope..)

[ViRaL1]

my server runs 64bit pci cards and I tend to like having a fat pci bus its not available on typical 'workstation' motherboards, even for amd64. what a shame. that would be the selling point for me. to get 64bit pci (no, I don't care as much about pci-x yet) you have to spend 3x and more compared to even a high end workstation board.

Do you mean PCI-X or PCI-E? Whatare the differences between PCI-X and 64-bit PCI?

[linux-works]

my server runs 64bit pci cards and I tend to like having a fat pci bus its not available on typical 'workstation' motherboards, even for amd64. what a shame. that would be the selling point for me. to get 64bit pci (no, I don't care as much about pci-x yet) you have to spend 3x and more compared to even a high end workstation board.

Do you mean PCI-X or PCI-E? Whatare the differences between PCI-X and 64-bit PCI?

I meant pci-express. the tiny narrow connector.

pci-x, technically, is pci at 100 or 133mhz instead of the 33 or 66mhz.

then there's double wide pci which is 64bits instead of 32. the normal pci connectors typically found are only 32bits wide yet the bus might run at 33 or 66mhz.

what I wanted was the 64bit wide and 66mhz (or faster) bus so that my raid (and gig-E) would run at their best and not be bus-limited.

currently, I don't know of any device that really justifies pci-e yet, for me. I'm more into network and i/o speed than graphics - so pci-e isn't a draw for me, at all.

[rallynavvie]

I run an Iwill DH800 now. That's got two PCI-X slots (not PCI-E, though PCI-E will also accept previous PCI cards IIRC) and two 32-bit PCI slots in addition to the AGP slot. It uses Adaptec Host RAID so I don't think that's a true hardware RAID controller or not; I don't use RAID so it doesn't concern me much. It does use the 6300ESB ICH which was a big selling point over the popular ICH5R chips. I've been told it's one of the best ICH chipsets. It also uses Intel's CSA GbE controller that bypasses the PCI bus and goes directly to the ICH.

You may also want to look for news on the Asus NCCH-DL which should be out soon. I can't recall if it's a 9xx chipset platform though.

[linux-works]

the CSA networking is as good as gig-E gets on regular pc's, I think. only way to get better is to have a private pci bus (servers often have 2 non-shared pci's) and use the double wide, double fast pci protocol.

the adaptec raid isn't true raid unless there's a block interface (at the API level) that the cpu talks to ANOTHER cpu (not a controller, but a real cpu) on the raid card. that cpu then dispatches the reads/writes and is fully asynch. from the host cpu. the adaptec stuff is most likely a slave controller combo and can't function entirely on its own (not a fully detachable subtask, as I understand it).

but again, for windows, host-based raid and asic-based raid may not differ much in the real world. on windows.

(hope I didn't get too offtopic here.)

[rallynavvie]

It's your own thread so I think you're allowed to change the topic as much as you want.

I actually think the answer to your initial question is pretty easy for the moment. If you want a workstation for multimedia get a Xeon system. If you want a server or CAD station get an AMD system. I'd say wait and see what platforms come out for the Opterons but you can always tell people to wait for the next best thing and you'll be waiting forever. Since it sounds like you want a Windows multimedia workstation look into the Iwill board I mentioned. The only complaint I have of mine is the lack of headers for front USB and audio (though it does have one for FireWire which is better for multimedia workstations anyway) and it doesn't have a very good heatsink on the MCH from the factory. The pros on it far outweigh those cons though.

[ViRaL1]

I run an Iwill DH800 now. That's got two PCI-X slots (not PCI-E, though PCI-E will also accept previous PCI cards IIRC) and two 32-bit PCI slots in addition to the AGP slot.

PCI-E is not backward compatible with PCI. PCI-X is backward compatible with most PCI card (although they will only run at 33MHz / 32-bit). Seating between PCI and PCI-E is a bit off.