New computer

[JoshSpence]

I am comparing the following processors: Intel® Pentium® Processor Extreme Edition (http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentiumXE/index.htm), Intel® Pentium® D Processor (http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentium_D/index.htm) and Intel® Pentium® 4 Processor Extreme Edition supporting Hyper-Threading Technology (http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentium4HTXE/index.htm)

Now I'm not sure if I'm reading all this correctly but I believe that the best processor would be the Intel Pentium Extreme Edition, because it is dual core (is it?) and has hypterthreading (does it?). The only disadvantages I can see to having it is it only has a clock speed of 3.2Ghz compared to the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition supporting Hyperthreading, which goes up to 3.73Ghz. Another disadvantage compared to the Pentium 4 Extreme supporting Hyperthreading is the bus speed is only 800Mhz compared to 1066Mhz. Looking at all this information, what processor would be the best?

Also - are any of these processors 64-bit, I'm not quite sure myself. And why is it good if you have a 64-bit processor?

I will do a variety of things with my game - word processing, video editing (and everything related), occasional gaming, etc.

Thanks in advance,
Josh

[Soopafresh]

AMD isn't an option ?

[JoshSpence]

It can be.... but why would I choose AMD? (that is a serious question, I know nothing about AMD)

[TooLFooL]

for the same price you can get dual-core 64 bit AMD

[ROF]

Right now, 64 bit isn't going to help you. Next year, 64bit still isn't going to help you, in 2007, a 64bit might begin to show some promise. In 2008, a 64bit processor might be useful, but if purchased today, you'll probably looking at an upgrade by that time. All the chips and supporting boards are too expensive today for what amounts to nothing. Intel's Dual Core is a good investment, but with a steep price tag. The problem with 64bit is nothing is currently 50% functional for it. Games are pretty much outta the picture as most don't even work in the 64bit environment. Some may be too young to remember the switch from 16 to 32 bit computing, but once again those applications written for 32 bit will in most cases fail to function properly in the 64 bit environment.

Those are just my observations. I've assembled approximately a dozen AMD 64 systems and a handful of Intels. I'd go with Intel, but stick with a 32bit OS environment for now. Vista may offer more compatibility in the future, but I can almost guarantee a good chunk of your software applications are going to be relegated to a cardboard box storage bin.

[TooLFooL]

whether or not 64 bit catches on soon doesn't matter. an AMD 64x2 will outrun any pentium.

[ROF]

Too true, but that's usually the case with any AMD product when compared to a comparable Intel from my observations. I used to be a devote Intel person, but after assembling a few systems in the 90's, I realized my blindness to AMD was unjustified. AMD simply runs cooler, runs faster, uses less power, and in the long run, lasts longer when overclocked.

[funsoul]

I think one question that needs to be answered is whether you're comfortable (or will/can be comfortable) overclocking your gear. The Dothans are excellent overclockers.

Hyperthreading's basically a joke as far as video encoding goes. Never seen anyone get better results with it turned on vs. leaving it off. The 800/1066 is not real relevant for anything except gaming and editing (previewing transitions and that kinda thing...not encoding).

The current 64bit Intel's suck....I'll leave it at that.

The dualcore AMDs kick serious butt! Folks using these are getting 90+% cpu utilization even on programs that aren't multithreaded. The downside is that all the socket 939 mobos have some issues.

Net net...if you want a great multipurpose pc with an upgrade path...go with the AMD.

Just my couple cents

[rallynavvie]

whether or not 64 bit catches on soon doesn't matter. an AMD 64x2 will outrun any pentium.

False. The Pentiums still have an edge over every AMD chip available in many multimedia applications. The gap is a lot narrower than it has been in the past however. Silly AMD/Intel fanboys always say whatever their favorite chip is the best on the market all the time

The choice between those two chips will depend on what you plan to do with the computer. The 3.73 uses the new 1066 FSB doesn't it? If so that is one FAST chip and the Pentium D will only surpass it in cases where you are truly multitasking, even though they both have HT. HT is a poor substitute for SMP but dual-core chips are almost the same as SMP now. The dual-core chip would be handy if you're running a lot of DCC apps and are runnig a filter on one while actively working with another program or something. The 1066 FSB Pentium is going to really excel at video apps like Vegas and Premiere, as well as be a hefty contender in gaming even against some stiff AMD competition. The AMD FX processors still lead the pack for gaming last I checked though.

[funsoul]

I'd love to see how the P4 3.73 ($1060) stacks up against the AMD64 X2 4800 ($880) for video stuff. Always been an Intel guy but have seen some amazing results from the X2's.

[glockjs]

http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q2/athlon64-fx57/index.x?pg=1