building a new computer

[budz]

This thread should be locked since the ^^^^ above is totally not related to the OP questions. Just my 2 cents!

[SatStorm]

Yes, but the conversation is somehow interesting.

Of course, we have to stay on topic, you have right.

So people, stay on topic and let's make another thread for that other subjects, ok?

[rallynavvie]

& in what reality does the 790X/PII/DDR2 1066 almost equalling X58/i7/DDR3 1333 in memory bandwith does not make the AMD combo the better architecture?

Is that the fastest, single-socket architecture that each competitor offers?

[ocgw]

& in what reality does the 790X/PII/DDR2 1066 almost equalling X58/i7/DDR3 1333 in memory bandwith does not make the AMD combo the better architecture?

Is that the fastest, single-socket architecture that each competitor offers?

this was in reference to your statement that the i7 architecture could help w/ memory performance

ocgw

peace

[rallynavvie]

this was in reference to your statement that the i7 architecture could help w/ memory performance

Based on the marks you have posted does the i7 architecture help with memory performance? Does it exceed the performance of the current top offering which AMD has?

[ocgw]

This thread should be locked since the ^^^^ above is totally not related to the OP questions. Just my 2 cents!

The OP's EXACT WORDS

"this may sound like a GIVE ME WHAT TO BUY SO I CAN BUY IT post, but i assure you it is not, i want to get some conversation going on new technology and what should be considered when making a purchase. also a side note, i plan on buying newegg, they never have done me wrong. "

I suggested that the OP get a "5 egg" mobo, I didn't even suggest that he get an AMD cpu, I did however show him as an example the mobo I use which is a AMD Dragon platorm mobo

Then intel "fans" lol chimed in about Intel being "King", yeah right, AMD outperfoms everything in it's price range, & all the other intel cpu's are rediculously overpriced for a little extra performance, and you have to buy DDR3 memory which w/ it's high latency and cost makes it not compare well in a cost vs performance analysis

The funniest thing however is the guys w/ low-end Intel cpu's w/ their air of superiority

I personally think the OP is learning a lot about the differences in architectures, and their real world performances, and the controversy of the AMD vs Intel question, and is getting solid confirmable info to help base his buying decision, and as long as the debate is civil why censor the debate?

ocgw

peace

[ocgw]

this was in reference to your statement that the i7 architecture could help w/ memory performance

Based on the marks you have posted does the i7 architecture help with memory performance? Does it exceed the performance of the current top offering which AMD has?

Based on my ss the i7 architecture HURTS memory performance, it takes a Intel w/ DDR3 1333 to narrowly beat an AMD w/ DDR2 1066

I would have to upgrade my memory to DDR2 1333 (which my mobo is rated for) to show AMD SPANKING Intel in memory performance, sadly however I don't plan on doing that soon

Maybe I can find someones elses benchmark, especially when I seem to be one of the few ppl here who likes doing the "leg work"

[rallynavvie]

Based on my ss the i7 architecture HURTS memory performance, it takes a Intel w/ DDR3 1333 to narrowly beat an AMD w/ DDR2 1066

I would have to upgrade my memory to DDR2 1333 (which my mobo is rated for) to show AMD SPANKING Intel in memory performance, sadly however I don't plan on doing that soon

Didn't that first benchmark post show that the i7 was still out beyond the AMD systems with DDR3 and DDR2? Was the fastest [stock] AMD system not on that screen?

[ocgw]

Based on my ss the i7 architecture HURTS memory performance, it takes a Intel w/ DDR3 1333 to narrowly beat an AMD w/ DDR2 1066

I would have to upgrade my memory to DDR2 1333 (which my mobo is rated for) to show AMD SPANKING Intel in memory performance, sadly however I don't plan on doing that soon

Didn't that first benchmark post show that the i7 was still out beyond the AMD systems with DDR3 and DDR2? Was the fastest [stock] AMD system not on that screen?

No sir, by default the Sandra did not include the AMD DDR3 1333 benchmark w/ my benchmark, I don't know how it chooses which ones to include, you have to include specific benchmarks manually (there are dozens to choose from)

The AMD benchmarks in the Sandra database shows has a 790FX chipset w/ DDR3 1333 w/ exactly the same performance as the Intel w/ DDR3, based on the performance of my 790X chipset w/ my "non-OC'd" DDR2 1066 being closer to DDR3 1333 than DDR2 1066 I would extropolate that if I were running DDR2 1333 or DDR3 1333 I would "blow the doors off" of either the Intel or AMD systems in the database

The real winner here is the 790X chipset, and to a lessor degree I think my OCZ Platinum DDR2 1066 5-7-7-20 memory (cas 3 or 4 @ DDR2 800)

ocgw

peace

[rallynavvie]

No sir, by default the Sandra did not include the AMD DDR3 1333 benchmark w/ my benchmark, I don't know how it chooses which ones to include, you have to include specific benchmarks manually (there are dozens to choose from)

Are you able to select the top AMD and Intel platforms from there? I had the same trouble you did except that once my marks were run it would only allow me to choose from a selection of dual-socket systems in the same area. Perhaps it's a limitation of the free version.

I am going to resurrect this 5 year old post for fun here
https://forum.videohelp.com/topic235269.html

[ocgw]

No sir, by default the Sandra did not include the AMD DDR3 1333 benchmark w/ my benchmark, I don't know how it chooses which ones to include, you have to include specific benchmarks manually (there are dozens to choose from)

Are you able to select the top AMD and Intel platforms from there? I had the same trouble you did except that once my marks were run it would only allow me to choose from a selection of dual-socket systems in the same area. Perhaps it's a limitation of the free version.

I am going to resurrect this 5 year old post for fun here
https://forum.videohelp.com/topic235269.html

That old thread is hilarious lol

i am not just a "fanboy", I also like rooting for the "underdog" lol

All jokes aside it doesn't really matter for 90% of us what you get Intel or AMD, all that matters is getting a good deal on a system w/ all the features and performance you want for YOUR specific applications, I originally started buying AMD mobos not for performance, but because they had the features I wanted @ a good price, then recently AMD's first quads were dissappointing, but I already had some good DDR2 and I may have jumped ship but the Phenom II proved to be a good OC'r, shines on x264 encoding, and it was smart for me to "recycle" my DDR2 and stick w/ AMD

ps Both AMD and Intel are gonna' look better on certain benchmarks @ certain price points, ppl should concentrate on comparing cpus based on THEIR needs

So the smart thing is to keep your mind open, if you only look on 1 side of the street you are cutting your chances of finding an unbelievable deal in half

in my humble opinion

back to the OP, don't buy a mobo unless that sucker is "5 egg" average rated by @ least a few dozen ppl, and don't get cheap w/ the psu, or the memory (imho the 3 things most likely to cause you trouble), also I am a firm believer in plenty of quality hi-cfm low db fans in the case

ocgw

peace

[gooberguy]

I personally think the OP is learning a lot about the differences in architectures, and their real world performances, and the controversy of the AMD vs Intel question, and is getting solid confirmable info to help base his buying decision, and as long as the debate is civil why censor the debate?

ocgw

peace

agreed. it is a lot to read through, but i'm in no rush to purchase. reading this topic is like reading the news. everyone has bias but you read through all the material and make the best informed desicion for yourself, based on EVERYTHING that has been said.

[ocgw]

I personally think the OP is learning a lot about the differences in architectures, and their real world performances, and the controversy of the AMD vs Intel question, and is getting solid confirmable info to help base his buying decision, and as long as the debate is civil why censor the debate?

ocgw

peace

agreed. it is a lot to read through, but i'm in no rush to purchase. reading this topic is like reading the news. everyone has bias but you read through all the material and make the best informed desicion for yourself, based on EVERYTHING that has been said.

thx gooberguy

ocgw

peace

[gooberguy]

i think i have decided on this

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115041

thoughts?

[rallynavvie]

You should probably post the board you plan to pair that up with.

[budz]

^^^Yup,
My suggestion is the Gigabyte UD3R or UD3P mobo.

gigabyte UD3R
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128359

gigabyte UD3P
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128358

Those are the top 2 mobo's to use with any Intel Quad core cpu. I have the UD3P which overclocks my Q9550 to 3.6ghz.
Get a aftermarket cpu cooler since the stock one is crap.

Xigmatek Dark Knight 1283V cpu cooler, $39.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835233029

Make sure the case you're gonna use is able to fit that Xigmatek cpu cooler. Or you could get a CM GeminII S cpu cooler.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103046

Just my 2 cents!

[rallynavvie]

Good lord, is anyone not overclocking their systems anymore?

[TBoneit]

Good lord, is anyone not overclocking their systems anymore?

I'm beginning to think I'm one of the few that doesn't overclock from visiting here.

OTOH I run at stock speeds. It's quiet, it is cool running and performs OK. DID I mention that as it is next to the TV I don't want to hear any fan noise, I don't want to hear any hard drive noise. I did a HD PVR 1280i capture to DVD 720 by 480 two pass and never heard a noise. The air coming out of the back of the case is very close to room temp. Did I mention intel quad core, the older Q6600.

Speed is nice, lower power use is nice, quiet is nice, and stability is king. Reasons I do not overclock.

[rallynavvie]

Speed is nice, lower power use is nice, quiet is nice, and stability is king. Reasons I do not overclock.

I don't overclock either, but I do get aftermarket cooling to quiet down the OEM HSF noise. However the new Xeon HSFs with the PWM fans weren't too terrible. My workstation doubles as an HTPC so it sits in the living room with the TV and I built it to be quiet. I think you can overclock and still keep things quiet but I agree on the lower power consumption, less heat generation, and stability factors. However most overclockers will swear a blue streak that none of those are an issue with their OC

[mrswla]

Your avatar is an icon of AMD 64. So why are you not staying with AMD? You could save $30 and get an AMD 3.0 quad core.

[lordsmurf]

I own an AMD quad-core, and I suggest anybody wanting to do video work stick to Intel. These machines are crappy compared to the Intel. Intel dual-cores can outperform these AMD quads, its pathetic.

[johns0]

i'm very happy with my crappy amd quad core computer for encoding and will never buy intel.

[redwudz]

Please let's not start a AMD VS Intel war here.

I overclock to get premium performance from a economy CPU. My overclocked PCs run reasonably cool, quiet and stable, or I wouldn't do it.

My Intel quad runs 800Mhz faster than stock and speeds HD MKV encoding considerably or the stock settings. My AMD quad with a similar CPU speed has similar performance

But you can damage your CPU if you OC it incorrectly, so you do have the be careful. And it's not for everyone.

[gooberguy]

Your avatar is an icon of AMD 64. So why are you not staying with AMD? You could save $30 and get an AMD 3.0 quad core.

that icon has been there for 6 years also i do believe that higher end intel cpus are better then higher end AMD's

[gooberguy]

^^^Yup,
My suggestion is the Gigabyte UD3R or UD3P mobo.

gigabyte UD3R
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128359

gigabyte UD3P
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128358

Those are the top 2 mobo's to use with any Intel Quad core cpu. I have the UD3P which overclocks my Q9550 to 3.6ghz.
Get a aftermarket cpu cooler since the stock one is crap.

Xigmatek Dark Knight 1283V cpu cooler, $39.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835233029

Make sure the case you're gonna use is able to fit that Xigmatek cpu cooler. Or you could get a CM GeminII S cpu cooler.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103046

Just my 2 cents!

curious, why are those some of the best for intel quad cores?

[ocgw]

Your avatar is an icon of AMD 64. So why are you not staying with AMD? You could save $30 and get an AMD 3.0 quad core.

that icon has been there for 6 years also i do believe that higher end intel cpus are better then higher end AMD's

Of course, they cost 5 times more, but dollar for dollar AMD matches or edges out Intel cpus in its price range in performance w/ dual channel memory mobos

For budget you can go either way and do well, but if I had the bread to burn I would go Intel i7 w/ triple channel memory, triple channel is where Intel is King

It just doesn't make sense to say "Intel is better", and go buy a sub $250USD cpu because AMD well have a competitor in that price range, now if your budget can squeeze in a i7 920 then by all means go Intel

I avoided the Intel vs AMD quad debate when one guy said "you need to get a Intel budget quad", if you are getting a budget quad don't limit your search to just Intel platforms, you just may find the mobo that fits your needs perfectly that supports AMD cpus

When I build a rig I don't start w/ the cpu, I start w/ the mobo that has everything I need on it, all the expansion slots I think I will need, good layout, and is proven reliable by many average joes ("5 eggs") as well as the professional reviewers

Just my 2 cents

ps, budz is "dead on" about those "2 ounce" Gigabyte mobos, I have 1 and love it, they are feature rich, great OC'rs, and super reliable

edit: If I am not mistaken lordsmurph has a original Phenom Agena core cpu which actually is kinda' crappy (known poor overclockers) so I understand his angst w/ AMD, he should have waited like I did, the Deneb core Phenom II's are an entirely different processor core w/ 3 times the cache

btw AMD cpus can't be too crappy, my Phenom II 940 @ 3.792ghz got the highest fps in the first pass of the x264 benchmark of all results submitted in the x264 benchmark thread including out performing a OC'd Q9550 on the 1st and 2nd passes and my cpu costs $40USD less than the Q9550

ocgw

peace

[gooberguy]

well would the intel q9550 be considered an budget quad? can i do better for just a few bucks? or can i do better with the same money by going amd?

[ocgw]

well would the intel q9550 be considered an budget quad? can i do better for just a few bucks? or can i do better with the same money by going amd?

While inexpensive the Intel Q9550 is "mid-level" in performance

btw I didn't start buying AMD cpus because I thought they were better, I could have went either way, I started buying AMD cpu's because their chipsets employed more "pipelines" enabeling a more rich feature set, and host of expansion slots

for example: My 2nd PC has a 6000+ @ 3.4Ghz cpu mounted on a MSI "quad-crossfire" mobo I bought last year, it has full heatpiping, firewire and optical spdif out, it has had excellent reviews and has "5 eggs" @ newegg, all that for $109USD

I stuck w/ AMD because I was able to upgrade from a dual core cpu to a quad w/o buying a new mobo or memory

If I were building a new PC from scratch today I would not buy anything less than a i7 920 and take advantage of that triple channel memory, if my budget would not stretch that far I would design my PC based on the best mobo I could find regardless of cpu supported

So, to answer your question directly, the Q9550 is a fine cpu, but for the money I personally would prefer a AMD 955 and OC it up around 4Ghz, but I would still go w/ the Q9550 if I really liked a particular mobo for it better

ocgw

peace

[budz]

well would the intel q9550 be considered an budget quad? can i do better for just a few bucks? or can i do better with the same money by going amd?

I don't know much about Quad AMD cpu's since I stop using AMD since socket 939.
The price of the Q9550 has dropped and probably will continue to do so. If you've got big bucks to shell out then by all means buy a I7 cpu/system. If money is the issue then buy the Q9550 and nothing less because IMHO that cpu will be more than what you need for the next few years until another faster cpu is released. If you've got a microcenter in the city that you live in they currently have the Q9550 for $179.99 in store pickup. You can order it online and pick it up in the store.
Just my 2 cents!

[DarrellS]

Wish we had a Microcenter in Phoenix. Newegg has the 9550 for $219.99. Tempting, hopefully it will come down more.

btw AMD cpus can't be too crappy, my Phenom II 940 @ 3.792ghz got the highest fps in the first pass of the x264 benchmark of all results submitted in the x264 benchmark thread including out performing a OC'd Q9550 on the 1st and 2nd passes and my cpu costs $40USD less than the Q9550

Yeah but she was afraid to put a decent overclock on her 9550. She barely had it higher than stock. I would've liked to have seen it at 3.8Ghz or higher. Maybe Budz can post one.