TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- AMD X2 6000, or wait for Quad Chips???
Pages (2): [1] 2 »
AMD X2 6000, or wait for Quad Chips???
i'm so on the fence, becasue i need a new computer stat for producing. The thing is i have time now, and will have time until august, but beginning in august, i won't have much time again to even touch producing.
I'm considering going with the AMD X2 6000 chip (http://canadacomputers.com/index.ph...13&cid=CPU.9070) but the new chips will be coming out for quad core in the fall. Only problem is i will have no time in the fall and the opening price will probably be rediculous anyways.
So do you think its a bad move to go the X2 6000 route, or should i be fine. (i use lots of demanding programs, so i am going for an optimal setup with 4gb of ram)
Wait until the quads come out, THEN get an X2 6000 
lol, i hear ya! just sucks how its always a waiting game, and i don't want to lose the time i have now to actually produce.
What is your cpu at the moment?
an old AMD single-core 1.8ghz. Surpringly i managed to write music for a documentary on this computer, but it was quite painful doing so. When i have to work on my next project, i don't want to be faced with the same limitations i had this time around.
currently i would go with core 2 duo e6600 or faster..
Doesn't AMD get shit on by Intel in the Quad-Cores?
I'd honestly only go intel core2duo right now, but thats just me. I hate 64bit technology after realizing that half of my installations wouldnt work because of the unsupported framework.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by thecYrus currently i would go with core 2 duo e6600 or faster.. |
If you need to build RIGHT now, go for the Core2Duo line. There is no substitute and AMD cannot compete.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by djbruuen judging by specs, the x2 6000 looks better at around the same price. intel - 2.4 $278CDN amd - 3.0 $291CDN |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by djbruuen judging by specs, the x2 6000 looks better at around the same price. intel - 2.4 $278CDN amd - 3.0 $291CDN |
thanks for the feedback...i know theres more to it than the clockspeed, but haven't done a good comparison yet. I've always been an AMD supporter over intel, but maybe intel wouldn't be the worst move to make.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by djbruuen thanks for the feedback...i know theres more to it than the clockspeed, but haven't done a good comparison yet. I've always been an AMD supporter over intel, but maybe intel wouldn't be the worst move to make. |
this is more than i wanted to spend on the cpu
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 $663
http://canadacomputers.com/index.ph...2505&cid=CPU.84
but do you think its worth it, to pay the little extra, will i get that much more power to make the doubled price worth it?
if yes, can anyone recommend a good motherboard to put with it? (hopefully cheaper to componsate the expensive chip)
Ive got the E6700 and its a beast if that helps
| quote: |
| Originally posted by djbruuen this is more than i wanted to spend on the cpu Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 $663 http://canadacomputers.com/index.ph...2505&cid=CPU.84 but do you think its worth it, to pay the little extra, will i get that much more power to make the doubled price worth it? if yes, can anyone recommend a good motherboard to put with it? (hopefully cheaper to componsate the expensive chip) |
looking at stats, the e6700 seems to be quite good.
now the e6700 is $400 and the x2 6000 is $300 ...is it worth the price jump to get the intel? looking at comparison reviews, the intel doesn't seem THAT much better to go $100 higher, unless theres something i'm missing
Get a Core 2 Duo E6600 (dual core). There's a reason they're selling like hotcakes right now. They're almost as fast as the top-of-the-line chips, they have a nice big L2 cache, they overclock like mad, and most of the mobos that support Duos right now also support Quads. When the quads come down in price, it'll be an easy upgrade to make.
I used to be an AMD fanboy myself, but there's no denying the superiority of the Core 2 chips (and the corresponding quads). The E6700 is a waste right now (IMHO) and so are the quads - for the time being. It never pays to buy at the very top end; it's always well past the point of diminishing returns.
I would go Intel all the way this time.. I have e6600, and are very satisfied. I woudn't mind the quad 
that's just mega load of plugin power to spare, especially the way I work. Like Diginut said, it overclocks like mad if you feel the need for that..
Take a look at this page for some info on cpu preformance..
http://www.dawbench.vze.com/
and this one as well..
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/
And you mentioned that your running a 1.8 ghz system right now.. so by looking at the benchmarks in the second link - the intel e6600 would be around - 5.9 times fater than your current machine.. and if you have the extra money for the quad 2.4 ghz intel- than that quad would be 10 times faster than your current machine.. So you do the math.. 
And hopefully your production software supports duall or quad cpu..
Just wanna add, I run intel 2.66ghz p4 as my studio machine and an amd 64 4000+ cpu as my gaming rig before jumping on both systems to intel e6600, and the performance dieferance was nothing sort of spectacular. the first night I loaded up cubase and my plugins, I could not believe how much more I can just throw at this thing. Now I had a play with a quad, it's even more jaw dropping performance.. But to be honest I am one happy e6600 user, the way I work, I just don't go past 50%cpu use on the thing..
If you want to go the AMD route. Wait for their Quad Core. I installed Cubase 4 on a Intel Quad machine, and it ruled. It was hot watching Cubase take advantage of all four virgin cores.
Dude, I bought a Core2Duo machine a few weeks back. Even back then I was faced with this problem.
The decision I made was to get an E6300 (1.8) NOW and upgrade to a super dooper quad core at the beginning of next year when they're mad cheap. In your case you would get the E6320, which is the same thing, but with more cache.
Moving from an XP2400 to a Centrino 1.73ghz to a Core2Duo, the Core2 annihilates the other two obviously... So I would assume you would have a similar experience.
I'm with everyone else. The C2D is a beast, even the lower end models.
I use the 2.16Ghz laptop one and the perfomance is stunning compared to my old AMD.
ok, i'm sold!!! thank you very much for everyones input! the core2dual e6600 is what seems to be the best route, $100 cheaper than the e6700 which doesn't seem to be 'enough' better to make it worth that extra cash. Thanks again everyone for helping me make this decision!
if i could ask one other thing, could you please recommend a good motherboard to compliment this cpu? thanks
Asus p5b-e
or
Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3
They're basically the same thing and the same price. The only difference is the Gigabyte has the PCI-E slots under the video card, whereas the Asus has them at the bottom. Also, the Gigabyte comes with a Texas Instruments firewire chipset, which is better than the one on the Asus if you plan on using a firewire audio card
I'm actually upgrading shortly and have already gotten an Asus P5B Deluxe for this (no fan = no noise = good for production).
If you can actually find one (I can't), I'd personally recommended any of the MSI boards based on the 650i chipset. That's either the P6N-SLI FI or the P6N-SLI Platinum. The FI is not passively cooled, so it's very cheap; the Platinum is passively cooled, and it's a bit of a better buy than the P5B Deluxe, but harder to find.
If you don't care about passive cooling, get either the Asus P5B-E or the MSI P6N-SLI FI.
Re: Firewire, I have an Asus card right now for my Athlon single core and a MOTU 808mkII hooked up through firewire and have never had a single problem.
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.