Best Configuration for Motion Graphics

Alright some questions for everyone. I'm trying to figure out what kind of upgrades to do to my PC to make it run applications like, Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects(the most important), Premiere, and Maya. I know I'm going to upgrade the ram to 3 gigs of 5400. What I want to know is what is the best type of processor/motherboard that's at a reasonable price, that will get the job done fast. Do you think Dual processors or xeons and so on... Let me know please I have no idea what to do. Thanks!

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by RagnarokX

Alright some questions for everyone. I'm trying to figure out what kind of upgrades to do to my PC to make it run applications like, Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects(the most important), Premiere, and Maya. I know I'm going to upgrade the ram to 3 gigs of 5400. What I want to know is what is the best type of processor/motherboard that's at a reasonable price, that will get the job done fast. Do you think Dual processors or xeons and so on... Let me know please I have no idea what to do. Thanks!

Since you're essentially building a workstation computer, reliability is paramount. Go Intel. The Core2Duo dual core CPU is superbly prices and performs very well. The E6600 model in particular. The only board you'll want for this is Intel D975XBX2, or codename: Badaxe2. Rock solid, stable and is just as fast as any other Socket 775 motherboard. Also, choose some decent RAM. Corsair, Geil, OCZ. You don't want to deal with shit RAM and warranty issues.

PS: If you're going to be running Vista with this setup, you'll probably want 4GB of RAM. (to make it dual-channel as well)

How ya doing, buddy?

I was planning on sticking with XP pro for a while longer, as far as Ram goes I already have 1 Gig of Dual-channel Corsair XMS2 5400, planning on getting 2 GB more of the same kind. Right now I have a P4 3.4 ghz processor, do you think I will notice a big jump in speed with a core 2 duo?

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by RagnarokX

I was planning on sticking with XP pro for a while longer, as far as Ram goes I already have 1 Gig of Dual-channel Corsair XMS2 5400, planning on getting 2 GB more of the same kind. Right now I have a P4 3.4 ghz processor, do you think I will notice a big jump in speed with a core 2 duo?

Just be aware that you won't be able to run the entire 3GB of RAM in dual-channel because of the mismatched pairs. And yes the Core2 will be a significant step up from a single core Pentium 4. If any of your applications are multi-threaded (capable of utilizing both cores) then performance could nearly double.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

I'd just like to point out that the insinuation made my Render that Intel are the only manufacturer to go for for "reliable" CPUs is a flat out lie. There are an awful lot of companies that invest millions of dollars on AMD kit in the professional HPC and server space and they wouldn't get it if it was unreliable. If they're good enough for the likes of Cray (and Apple eventually, or so they say), they're good enough for you. I myself am the happy owner of a dual socket Opteron system and i've had absolutely no problems. I built it myself too, so not a pro job. If you know how to build a machine well, you won't have problems.

If you were to buy a system based on the "4 by 4" initiative by AMD, you'd get a dual socket dual core solution with a painfree upgrade path to a maximum of eight-cores in a few months time, should you want it. I have also seen reviews of these systems that suggests the far greater amount of memory bandwidth offered by the Opteron architecture (which increases as you add a CPU, unlike Intel systems which have to share bandwidth between as many CPUs as you add) is ideal for multi-tasking and especially memory intensive operations such as video editing. You might also want to consider that traditionally AMD processors for whatever reason absolutely fly when you're rendering in Maya (I know, I use it).

The only disadvantage to going with a dual-socket Opteron system at the moment is cost. You'd be getting a professional grade motherboard with a ton of features that would be cheap compared to a similar thing from a year ago, but still a good deal more than a consumer level board for a Core 2 processor. Bang for buck, Intel wins. For overall memory performance and ease of upgrade, AMD wins. If you are after a system right now, Core 2 still has an edge. If you can afford to wait 6 months, you'd probably be able to purchase a true quad-core AMD processor and motherboard for a reasonable price that trashed the Core 2.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Right now, Intel can do it better for cheaper. 4x4 is a joke considering the ridiculous power requirements and amount of cooling it needs to cope. Preliminary tests don't even show it to be any faster than a C2D. Besides, if AMD is changing processor sockets every year, what's the point?

To me, the reliability isn't with the CPU. It's with the motherboard and chipset. There isn't a chipset for AMD boards that I'm actually fond of. Everyone know SiS is shit, VIA is good for people who like Linux but is basic otherwise, and nForce is best but isn't something I'd use in a professional setting. I've had the displeasure to Ghost systems with nForce chipsets with many problems. A $600 Tyan Thunder board isn't exactly appealing either. Meanwhile, Intel does have a reputation of keeping some of their server features on desktop boards, along with their stability. Maybe we'll see if AMD does things right this time with their own chipset.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

You can't reuse your RAM. Your Pentium 4 took DDR; all current CPUs take DDR2.

Intel's CPUs are a better bang for the buck, but their motherboards are insanely more expensive than AMD's right now, so the final cost is a tossup.

And "changing sockets every year"? 940's been around forever.

FELIPE NO

I think he might have last of P4s with the 1066 FSB. They use DDR2 according to Intel's site and he said he's running Corsair XMS2.

Dead sockets in question: 754 (dropped like an anchor), 939, AM2 was DOA with the immediate news of 4x4 and AM2+. Dual-socket 940 boards aren't exactly cheap-as-free either.

I would wait one more month before upgrading. Intel is going to slashing prices of the C2D and quad cores come late April.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

I think for the up coming quarter I was going to upgrade my ram.. Render you said that I won't be able to run the full 3 gb, My old ram is dual-channel and they would both be 5400. Do you mean to get the full effect I would have to get the exact same thing, 2 sticks of 512, or toss that, and get 2 sets of the 2x 1 gb? As far as the processor it sounds like I should wait, but I still don't know which way to go. It sounds like amd with the multi processors would work best, but I'm not sure.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

You'll definitely be able to run all 3GB with no problems, except that it won't run in dual channel. You need all four sticks to be the same size for that. (4x 512MB or 4x 1GB)

Wait until the end of April at least to decide. Intel's going to level the playing field by cutting prices of the Core2 Duos and Quads.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Alright well I guess the bottom line is would a dual processor board of any brand give better performance than a core 2 duo as far as motion graphics goes if I decide to upgrade 6 months from now? And does the video card play a huge role in this or would the one I have now work well enough which is a X800XL.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Thought i would chime in here with me 2 cents:

I myself have a Core 2 and a 975XBX Badaxe board, rock solid stable and Render is right, some of their server features carry over into their desktop boards (IE Motherboard event log)

I run a few Linux servers that have 2 x Opteron 250's + 4GB ECC ram, these servers are rock solid stable..yet they don't have consumer level chipsets in them. That being said i also look after a number of small Linux firewalls (Shorewall) running on Nforce 2 boards and havnt had a problem with them either, yet they don't do a lot other then squid + shorewall.


Right now it makes the most sense to go Intel, plain and simple, especially for a desktop/workstation, you get Rock solid stability from an Intel Chipset as well as great performance for a decent price.

As a rule Nfroce boards have alot more issues with hardware (picky about DDR2 ram, Creative sound cards) their forceware drivers are also are alot more finicky then the Intel INF drivers.

Also look at benchmarks, AMDs fastest chip (x2 6000+) is only just catching up to the Intel E6600/6700 range of CPUs, and with AM2 on the way out and 4x4 being a complete joke, Im afraid i have to agree with Render on this, go Intel. Meanwhile LGA775 is not going anywhere at least till mid 2008 when Socket B (LGA 1366) is released. Now that being said a LGA775 board today may not be able to run the new 45nm Conroes coming out at the end of the year.

Servers are a different story, Opterons and Conroe based Xeons are both great chips, we use both, as a rule we use AMD + Linux and Intel + Windows but there is no real reason for this, just the way it seems to be where i work


/rant

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?