Which processor better as far as graphics and performance. I have an AMD ANthalon 3000 2.16 processor. Would a pentium 4 2.6 ghz be better?
Printable View
Which processor better as far as graphics and performance. I have an AMD ANthalon 3000 2.16 processor. Would a pentium 4 2.6 ghz be better?
Your processor doesn't have all that much to do with graphics performance. Your video card does. Think of your processor as the "Main Brain" of your computer. It does all the thinking, for all your programs. Your graphics, however, require a ton of processing. So, a good video card has it's own processor built on it, and it's own memory. Everything goes in a row, sorta like this.
Normal, non-fancy graphics card system:
Processor->memory(for the graphic) ->processor(does rendering)->graphics card(translates graphics to monitor "language")-> screen.
Now, reading from the main memory is relatively slow. And rendering graphics (putting it all together) takes some doing, too. So your main processor is wasting a lot of time rendering the graphics while it could be doing the other things that your game needs.
Now, with a decent graphics card, with an on-board processor and it's own memory (the more the better), the graphics, textures, etc, are stored on the graphics card, which is a lot closer and faster to access by your video card. It goes like this:
Processor -> graphics card ->processor does other stuff
.....................................L>Graphics card ->Graphic's card memory->graphics card processor ->renderer ->screen
In short, get yourself a good Nvidia GeForce card with at least 128 megs of memory (the more the better), and forget upgrading your processor for a while. Personally, I like AMDs, Intels are way overpriced.
I like intel better I just bought a 3.4Ghz extreme edition w/2mb cache. cost a pretty penny but it works great. I also have Nvidia 256mb video card. my dvds view great maybe look into one of those video cards but if ur processor and memory sucks then forget about it buy a new computer it would be cheaper. and if ur computer is to old then newer component might not be supported my ur mother board :wg:
check out this link....amd vs intel
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1194
Good article max....
I'm running an Amd but i don't play video games or do tons of graphics on my home machine..so its just fine for simple processes..but I'd go Intel if i was a gamer or graphic artist....
AMD is better for games. They're about even for graphics now.Quote:
Originally Posted by purplelaceteddy
AMD is better for games but bench marking test show video and audio editing are better using Intel.
Yeah, but AMD is catching up and is real close. It also depends on what applications you want to run.Quote:
Originally Posted by manwithin
Intel is coming out with a new 64 bit processor this summer, no programs are set to run 64 bit yet it will be a couple years. So go with intel P4 HT and 3.0 and above with a 800mghz FSB. make sure you geta motherboard that has PCI express slot they blow away AGP for graphics.
When you say pci express blows away agp card do you have any bench marking facts, because I've never seen any.
Second what do you mean no programs run in 64 bit?
Windows runs in 64 bit, and PhotoShop CS 8.0 Adobe 64-bit
BlackICE 3.6 Internet Security Systems 64-bit
Command Antivirus 4.9 Authentium 64-bit
Encyclopedia Britannica 2000 Deluxe 1 Encyclopedia Britannica 64-bit
eTrust EZ Armor 1 Computer Associates 64-bit
Live Motion 1 Adobe 64-bit
MapSend DirectRoute 1.0 Magellan 64-bit
MPEGcraft DVD All Canopus 64-bit
Norman Personal Firewall 1.4 Norman 64-bit
All run in 64 bit.
And don't get me started on linux.
Quote:
Originally Posted by heem
yea you show me youur 64 bit system with every thing configured to those specs. I know programs will work but technology has not caught up with 64 bit technology yet and will not for a couple years. As far as pci express goes it blows away agp twice the speeed bud . tell me your setup and i put a sorce on it that pci express is better than agp justlike sata is better than IDE and if you run raid 0 stripping on SATA drives its faster than almost all SCSI configurations .thencomesSATA 2. oh what do you as ar as jobs go
peace bro
brett PM me
Quote:
Originally Posted by heem
All I asked for was bench marking facts that shows PCI-E is faster then AGP. I know the speed is greater on PCI-E and it is bidirectional but show me a some facts. And as far as you saying PCI-E blows away AGP twice the speed it’s not a bench mark.
And I never said SCSI was faster then SATA in fact here are some bench marks that prove that SATA is not only faster the 10000 RPM SCSI drive but the beat the 15000 RPM drives in most test.
And you said
“no programs are set to run 64 bit yet it will be a couple years”
I just gave you a short list of programs that do run in 64 bit.
My job I’m a network admin for a colocation data center and I have minor programming skill in C++, Cobol, and FoxPro but what does that have to do with anything?
What do you do?
Yes, PCI-E does have a higher possible data transfer rate when compared to AGP, but honestly, the cards that are on the market now don't utilize all this extra bandwidth. PCI-E was designed so that future graphics cards will have the ability to transfer the amount of data that they need to. None of the cards on the market today are capable of pumping out enough data to max out the AGP bus. I actually have read articles that show the same GPU with an AGP interface out-performing PCI-E. Yes, PCI-E is where everything is headed, but right now there really is no advantage as far as performance goes.
I compared my Pentium 4 2.8GHZ with HT Tech to my AMD Athlon XP 2600+. Both were setup with 1GB PC3200 Ram, and using a 7200 SATA Drive, with a ATI 9800 Pro graphics card. On all bench marks my AMD setup outperformed the Intel. Aquamark score with Intel: 25,000. With my AMD i pushed something around 37,000. 3DMark03 showed similair results.Quote:
Originally Posted by marshall_81