CPU and mobo considerations... AMD or ?

[Thomas]

I'm looking at upgrading my socket A mobo + Sempron 2800+.

I'm running XP, and dont plan on Vista, though I realize that at some point I no longer have a choise.

I need more power for home video editing (Pinnacle Studio) and photo editing (PhaseOne RAW, maybe also PhotoShop later). Besides, the system in general is sluggish.

I dont like Intel's monopol-like position, and thus prefer AMD. I also like AMD was first with low power CPU's. Similar, I would like to avoid nVidia chipset and VGA.

But reading an article like this http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/di ... otout.html, it seems like I at least should consider Intel...

Though, prices of AMD processors are very low now, and I'm also a budget guy.

To be specific, I'm considering the following:

Kingston HyperX, 2 x 1 GB, DIMM 240-pin, CL4, 2 V

Athlon 64 X2 4800+ ADO4800IAA5DD (or maybe a 5000+ black edition, not sure if it's worth the extra money)

Scythe Ninja rev. B

Mobo, either ASUS M3A-H/HDMI, AMD 780G, Socket AM2+
or Gigabyte GA-MA69G-S3H, AMD 690G, Socket AM2

I tend to get the Asus, due to AM2+, thus better options for upgrading the CPU later.

We do play games, but the most demanding is UT2004. I dont know if we play more demanding games later on, but then I can slap in a VGA card.

We dont use it as a HTPC.

Advises are appreciated, thanks

[thejamppa]

Consider X2 4850e. Its 2,5 Ghz CPU with 45W consumption. It's not that much slower than X2 4800+ and takes less energy.

I am planning upgrading my X2 4000+ with X2 4850e + Asus M3A-H/HMDI. I really like its layout, all solid caps and one of the few full sized ATX 780G boards. SB700/750 seems to be faster in USB2 transfer than old SB 600 in 690G's.

[Andru]

By the way Thomas, you should be listening to someone a bit more intelligent than me... see what I wrote earlier:

I second my country fellowman's suggestion!

That's not English, it's something else... I meant fellow countryman!
How silly can one be?

Anyway, back on topic.

I checked that article on Xbitlabs, and it's true that the Intel E8000-series is the performance king (according to all other reviews, too of course). Although, after that article was written AMD has released the 4x50 E-series CPUs which have better consumption performance.

I don't like Intel much either, but I guess you will have to make the decision between:

A) AMD: nice performance, best power consumption, cheaper price.
B) Intel: best performance, nice power consumption, higher price.

Life's a bunch of decisions anyway

[Thomas]

Thanks for your comment. Yeah, I also like the layout and IGP.

I'll check out that CPU

Oh, and I forgot to mention a couple of things: Besides more horse power, my main interests are quietness, low power consumption and stability.

I believe the CPU run at max load around 20% of the time. I want ATX, since if I get a VGA card later on, I want room for a passive cooler.

It would be a bonus, if the mobo have a reasonably auto CPU fan controller - I'll check out the Asus manual, but if someone know of a good mobo, well, I'm interested...

Regarding undervolting, I'll start out with cool 'n' quiet. Later I'll most likely get more aggresive...

More comments and ideas are welcome

[Thomas]

Hej Andru

I'm not sure how to explain how heavy (or light?) my video/photo editing are.

I guess I'll be editing videos around 4 times pr. year. By now, it take 2-3 hours for finalizing the video, before burning a DVD. If it can be taken down to a half an hour, I'm satisfied - it's not an every day task. Besides, converting 2x14 gig files into a single 4 GB file, will most likely make the disks the limiting factor at some point...

For photo editing, I'm more demanding. By now, it takes around a minute to convert fram RAW to JPG. I would like to see this reduced to 10-20 secs or so. And especially when adding changes during the edit process, like changing sharpness and noise reductions etc., etc., is wher I'd like more speed. I'm using a Nikon camera, and dont want to use Capture NX, because it's not user friendly nor fast. PhaseOnes CaptureOne integrates well with Nikon, and is fast and more userfriendly. I guess I'll edit photos a few times pr. week, maybe more, if it's faster

So, I'm confused if it's worth going the Intel route... I've never tried overclocking, so I dont consider it trivial

Thomas

EDIT: The higher price for HyperX RAM, is insigfinicant (less than 10%), compared to Kingston ValueRam. But CAS latency is lower (4 vs. 5), at the price of 2,0 volt, versus 1,8. That's sligthly higher power, but I dont think we're talking about more than a watt, maybe 2.

And things will be stuffed into my current P180 with 2 x 2,5 S-ATA disks and a Seasonic 380 PSU.

[Thomas]

I checked the AMD Athlon X2 4850E, and price difference is next to nothing. But it's still 65 nm, and the only difference seems to watt spec - 45 vs. 65, which's about full load power usage... what did I mis here?

ANother thought, second generation Opterons, what about them? More second level cache caught my eyes, and not much more expensive, at least for single cores. But how do they perform regarding video- and photo-editing? And if I remember correctly, they dont run cool 'n' quiet - can they be undervolted at all? I think AMD's site could be more clear about CPU differences...

[Andru]

Well, the 4850E has a maximum of 45 watts, I guess there's not much difference otherwise. (That's why I'd pick 4850E).

I don't know much about Opterons, but they are made with the 65nm process as well (afaik).

As I mentioned, if you need much horsepower then you will have to go the Intel way. But you said you're on a budget(?), so I think 4850E + a 780G motherboard would be a lot less expensive than going for an Intel solution.

Of course no system is ever powerful enough -- but AMD really has nice idle consumption compared to Intel. And whichever way you go, you'll be upgrading to a totally new generation of CPUs so there *will* be a significant speed increase. (But if Windows seems sluggish, it should be corrected by a fresh reinstall of the OS. WinXP runs fine on an Athlon Socket-A CPU provided there's a decent amount of memory installed.)

Just remember to get enough RAM (I recommend 2 x 2GB modules)! If you edit photos you know it's important

[amyhughes]

I have both 4450E and E8400 systems and the processors are comparable in power usage. Undervolted they both have about a 30W spread between idle and load. The 45nm Intel chips use far less than their rated TDP.

That said, I still love my 4450/780G system. It was cheap, runs on a silent picoPSU, didn't require a graphics card, and is faster than I thought it'd be.

[juamez]

Hej Andru
By now, it take 2-3 hours for finalizing the video, before burning a DVD. If it can be taken down to a half an hour, I'm satisfied - it's not an every day task. Besides, converting 2x14 gig files into a single 4 GB file, will most likely make the disks the limiting factor at some point...

30 gigs in 2 hours is 15 gig per hour or 250 megabyte per minute. (Recent) harddisks can do better than that. Try the new Samsung 7200rpm F1 series, which can reach 100MB/s sustained transfer rate at its peak. They lower down to around 50MB/s at the slower end of the disk, but that's still OK in my opinion. So you can safely state that the harddisk isn't really the most important limiting factor. Maybe if you have a 2x intel quad combo like the mac pro or a PC equivalent, maybe then. :p

For photo editing, I'm more demanding. By now, it takes around a minute to convert fram RAW to JPG. I would like to see this reduced to 10-20 secs or so. And especially when adding changes during the edit process, like changing sharpness and noise reductions etc., etc., is wher I'd like more speed. I'm using a Nikon camera, and dont want to use Capture NX, because it's not user friendly nor fast. PhaseOnes CaptureOne integrates well with Nikon, and is fast and more userfriendly. I guess I'll edit photos a few times pr. week, maybe more, if it's faster

So, I'm confused if it's worth going the Intel route... I've never tried overclocking, so I dont consider it trivial

Intel is essentially a lot faster when it comes to that kind of work, but also more expensive. The E7200 costs like 100 to 110 euros in belgium, whereas the X2 4850e only costs around 75. But the E7200 can reach +3GHz clocks easily while still retaining very low power consumption. That equals brute but efficiënt horsepower. Too bad the intel total solution isn't as low in power consumption as the AMD one, because of the less efficient chipset and the lack of a decent onboard graphics card. Also it's a lot more expensive. Anyway, nothing new to be said here.

EDIT: The higher price for HyperX RAM, is insigfinicant (less than 10%), compared to Kingston ValueRam. But CAS latency is lower (4 vs. 5), at the price of 2,0 volt, versus 1,8. That's sligthly higher power, but I dont think we're talking about more than a watt, maybe 2.

And things will be stuffed into my current P180 with 2 x 2,5 S-ATA disks and a Seasonic 380 PSU.

I'd go for it.

[Thomas]

30 gigs in 2 hours is 15 gig per hour or 250 megabyte per minute. (Recent) harddisks can do better than that. Try the new Samsung 7200rpm F1 series, which can reach 100MB/s sustained transfer rate at its peak. They lower down to around 50MB/s at the slower end of the disk, but that's still OK in my opinion. So you can safely state that the harddisk isn't really the most important limiting factor. Maybe if you have a 2x intel quad combo like the mac pro or a PC equivalent, maybe then. :p

Yeah, but the disks aint the bottle neck right now, the CPU is at 100% for those two hours...

If possible, I want to avoid 3,5 inch disks, too noisy. And I guess those 2,5" disks are also the reason for sluggishness, but maybe a new CPU could re-gain a little... But that's probably too optimistic...

Photo editing is the main argument for upgrading, faster video rendering is a bonus, because I only do it 4-5 times a year.

I cant find the E7200 around here... Is it a Core 2 Duo? But a Core 2 Duo E4500 2,2 GHz doesnt look too expensive... Are those E-numbers comparable to AMD's 4800+? And is it meaningfull to compare my current 2800+ to a 4800+? I assume I'll also gain something from the integrated memory controller?

Hmmm, not easy to figure out, if it's worth spending more on the Intel...

[Andru]

I cant find the E7200 around here... Is it a Core 2 Duo? But a Core 2 Duo E4500 2,2 GHz doesnt look too expensive... Are those E-numbers comparable to AMD's 4800+? And is it meaningfull to compare my current 2800+ to a 4800+? I assume I'll also gain something from the integrated memory controller?

Hmmm, not easy to figure out, if it's worth spending more on the Intel...

Yes, the E7200 is a Core 2 Duo.
There's a comprehensive and easy to read list of Core 2 CPUs on Wikipedia (I always use it for reference).

The E7200 might be out of stock because it's a very good (and cheap) Intel chip. It's manufactured in the newer and smaller 45nm process.

If you go the Intel way, I recommend you choose one of the 45nm processors: E7200, E8xxx series.

The AMD and Intel performance "names" are not comparable.

You can check some performance tables on Toms Hardware CPU charts for example (and these charts have the memory controller factor incorporated already).

The charts don't have the Intel E7200 "bargain" processor (it should be about 10% slower than the E8200, or something like that).

[Mats]

I think an AMD system will be just fine for you, just make sure you get an AM2+ mobo, not the older AM2.
By doing this you at least have a theoretical chance of upgrading to a faster 45 nm CPU in the future.

I would recommend the 5000+ Black Edition. About the same price, but with an unlocked multiplier. The 4850e doesn't have this.
With this one you simply set the max multiplier a bit higher, maybe to get 3 GHz or more, without overclocking the motherboard.
The high speed kicks in when needed, and otherwise it runs at Cool & Quiet speed, just like any other X2.

I found the Core 2 Duo E7200 here.
It was not easy to find in Denmark, dunno why.

Edit: Here's a good E7200 review. After looking at it, I realize it's pretty much better than the 3 GHz 6000+. Another review, that have both the E7200 and X2's included.
Besides, it's very easy to overclock.

[ZMAJ]

I think an AMD system will be just fine for you, just make sure you get an AM2+ mobo, not the older AM2.

so 4850e is a good choice?

I thought of replacing my brisbane 3600+ with that 4850E....

[thejamppa]

4850e is wonderful choice ^^

[Thomas]

Thanks for all the replies

I don't like Intel much either, but I guess you will have to make the decision between:

A) AMD: nice performance, best power consumption, cheaper price.
B) Intel: best performance, nice power consumption, higher price.

Life's a bunch of decisions anyway

I think you're right...

CPU; I'm now considering the E7200 vs. 5000+ Black Edition.

I tried the comparator at Toms, and I like it. I used an old Sempron 64 2800+ as a substitute for my Soc. A Sempron 2800+, a a Core 2 Duo E6750 instead of E7200 and a 5000+ and a 6000+ (=OC'ed Black). I tried the Pinnacle and PhotoShop benchmarks, and they conform what's already said - much faster than my current setup, and the E7200 / 5000+ / 6000+ coming in close with something like 10% differences...

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu- ... 247%2C1309

Though, SW versions, OS choises, codecs and other stuff throws in some inaccuracy, when I compare to what I have on my own system. But the again, those CPU benchmarks, seems very consistent from reviewer to reviewer. At least when looking at the big lines

GPU I really like the Asus ASUS M3A-H/HDMI due to AM2+, Radeon HD3200 and layout and 780G. But which separate VGA card equals the HD3200? A Radeon HD 3450 with 256 MB is dirt cheap, and - without going in details - it seems that LGA775 boards are cheaper, than AM2 boards... Depending on VGA cards, I'll guesstimate the total Intel budget with E7200 to be 10-15% more expensive, than a AMD 5000+ Black Edition solution... Am I wrong here?

Overall, I'm leaning towards the AMD solution. Low power, sligthly lower price, sligthly slower...

I guess I'll get better airflow with an IGP too. And then I dont have a cheap separate VGA to throw away later, if I need more GPU power someday... Good for the environment.

RAM I was planning on 2GB, which should be more than enough for XP and my current applications. Why 4GB? Vista? Wouldnt I be fine with 2GB, and the option of adding 2GB more later on, if/when I go Vista...?

Power According to the earlier mentioned XBitLabs review, Intel consumes less power, than an AMD... But in the real world it seems AMD is better. Why? Due to chipset options? Due to XBitLabs forgetting something about Cool 'n' Quiet or undervolting? According to this review http://www.anandtech.com/printarticle.aspx?i=3293 - Intel again should have less power consumption than AMD. I dont understand this...

Thanks,
Thomas

[Erssa]

This thread should have been made under system advice...

Anyway I would go the budget route with Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H and X2 4850e.

Why Gigabyte over Asus? Better features like eSata, DVI-I, firewire, optical S/PDIF... Plus it's cheaper. AMD system will also be at least 25% cheaper then any E7200 + decent intel motherboard with IGP, or E7200 + motherboard + graphics card combination. Spend the extra money to get 4GB of memory, it's so cheap.

[juamez]

CPU; I'm now considering the E7200 vs. 5000+ Black Edition.

I tried the comparator at Toms, and I like it. I used an old Sempron 64 2800+ as a substitute for my Soc. A Sempron 2800+, a a Core 2 Duo E6750 instead of E7200 and a 5000+ and a 6000+ (=OC'ed Black). I tried the Pinnacle and PhotoShop benchmarks, and they conform what's already said - much faster than my current setup, and the E7200 / 5000+ / 6000+ coming in close with something like 10% differences...

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/cpu- ... 247%2C1309

Though, SW versions, OS choises, codecs and other stuff throws in some inaccuracy, when I compare to what I have on my own system. But the again, those CPU benchmarks, seems very consistent from reviewer to reviewer. At least when looking at the big lines

Keep in mind that a Sempron 64 tends to use less power than the socket A one. And that the E6750 uses more power than the E7200. So that comparison is biased twice towards AMD when comparing power usage. Performancewise I dunno really, but I guess it fits almost right compared to your situation.

GPU I really like the Asus ASUS M3A-H/HDMI due to AM2+, Radeon HD3200 and layout and 780G. But which separate VGA card equals the HD3200?

I think its based on the Radeon HD2400 or something, which is the precedent of the HD34x0 series.

[Thomas]

Keep in mind that a Sempron 64 tends to use less power than the socket A one. And that the E6750 uses more power than the E7200. So that comparison is biased twice towards AMD when comparing power usage. Performancewise I dunno really, but I guess it fits almost right compared to your situation.

Thanks - I didnt compare power consumptions, though.

I think its based on the Radeon HD2400 or something, which is the precedent of the HD34x0 series.

Thanks a lot, now I can better compare

[Thomas]

This thread should have been made under system advice...

You're probably right - when I originally posted, I thought it was a simple CPU/mobo question, but things evolved a bit... If moderator read this, you're welcome to move the thread.

Why Gigabyte over Asus? Better features like eSata, DVI-I, firewire, optical S/PDIF... Plus it's cheaper. AMD system will also be at least 25% cheaper then any E7200 + decent intel motherboard with IGP, or E7200 + motherboard + graphics card combination. Spend the extra money to get 4GB of memory, it's so cheap.

I've decided to go the AMD route. But I'm not finally decided about CPU. Regarding mobo, I see your point to some extent.

- I dont care about S/PDIF.
- eSata? Dont see any use, except experimenting with 3,5" disks in homemade external enclosures. But most likely, I'm too lazy, and besides, I already have a PCI card with dual eSata.
- DVI-I - as far as I can see, neither of the mentioned mobo's have a dedicated DVI-I connector, instead they require a HDMI -> DVI-I connector. So I believe they're even in this regard.
- Firewire - could be nice for my video cam. However, I already have a noname FW PCI collecting dust, because it wasnt compatible with my video cam. Though, the Gigabyte uses a TI-chip for FW, increasing the chance of success. And I already have a Adaptec PCI FW, which runs great with my video cam.

So, from my point of view, the Gigabyte have FW and eSata as nice touches, but they are not needed. The price is lower, yes, but it lacks AM2+. And what's more important, I'm a bit worried about if the X1250 IGP is good enough. Would be dissapointing, if I instead of saving a few bucks on mobo, end up paying for a separate VGA adapter...

But your input made me check out the Gigabyte GA-MA78G-DS3H - HD3200, firewire and native DVI connector... For like 5% more than the Asus equivalent

So my next step, is to check the manuals regarding fan controller and undervolting. If someone have experience with these boards about this, I'll appreciate it. Also if someone know about stability...

Thanks again.

[Erssa]

- eSata? Dont see any use, except experimenting with 3,5" disks in homemade external enclosures. But most likely, I'm too lazy, and besides, I already have a PCI card with dual eSata.

I use eSata to make clones of my hard drive on my external hard drive. Should my HD fail, I have a bootable backup ready. It has limited usage, but in my opinion it's a great addition on any motherboard.

- DVI-I - as far as I can see, neither of the mentioned mobo's have a dedicated DVI-I connector, instead they require a HDMI -> DVI-I connector. So I believe they're even in this regard.

You are mistaken. GA-MA78GM-S2H indeed has DVI-I, Asus does not. Picture courtesy of newegg.com. This is the best I/O panel on any sub 100$ motherboard.

The price is lower, yes, but it lacks AM2+. And what's more important, I'm a bit worried about if the X1250 IGP is good enough. Would be dissapointing, if I instead of saving a few bucks on mobo, end up paying for a separate VGA adapter...

Nope the motherboard I'm speaking of has exactly the same chipset as your Asus. It is AM2+ and has HD3200 IGP.

Check it again please: Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H

[Thomas]

Check it again please: Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H

Auch, my bad, I overlooked the model name, and thought you're speaking of the Gigabyte mobo I first mentioned...

But this one i m-ATX - and if I later on add in a separate VGA card, I want a passive cooler, most likely the passive Arctic-Cooling Acceleros... Then there's no room for PCI cards... And if that FireWire on the Gigabyte aint compatible with my videocam...

eSata, I do backup another way than cloning, so I'm comfortably with USB. But thanks for the inspiration

The Asus dont have a dedicated DVI-I connector, but Asus homepage says: "With bundled HDMI to DVI conversion adapter, this motherboard can support both DVI and HDMI output"

But then again, the Gigabyte GA-MA78G-DS3H is ATX, have DVI-I, firewire...

[Mats]

I think an AMD system will be just fine for you, just make sure you get an AM2+ mobo, not the older AM2.

so 4850e is a good choice?

I thought of replacing my brisbane 3600+ with that 4850E....

It's a good CPU, but it's not really much of an upgrade for you, the same CPU type running 600 MHz faster than the 3600+.
A 5000+ Black Edition (or a 45 nm X4 when they show up) is a better choice.

[Mats]

But then again, the Gigabyte GA-MA78G-DS3H is ATX, have DVI-I, firewire...

No not DVI-I, see link:

Back Panel Connectors
1 x PS/2 keyboard port
1 x PS/2 mouse port
1 x D-Sub port
1 x DVI-D port (Note 5)
1 x HDMI port
1 x optical S/PDIF Out connector
1 x IEEE 1394a port
4 x USB 2.0/1.1 ports
1 x RJ-45 port
6 x audio jacks (Center/Subwoofer Speaker Out/Rear Speaker Out/Side Speaker Out/Line In/Line Out/Microphone)

(Note 5) The DVI-D port does not support D-Sub connection by adapter.

[Thomas]

But then again, the Gigabyte GA-MA78G-DS3H is ATX, have DVI-I, firewire...

No not DVI-I, see link:

Back Panel Connectors
1 x PS/2 keyboard port
1 x PS/2 mouse port
1 x D-Sub port
1 x DVI-D port (Note 5)
1 x HDMI port
1 x optical S/PDIF Out connector
1 x IEEE 1394a port
4 x USB 2.0/1.1 ports
1 x RJ-45 port
6 x audio jacks (Center/Subwoofer Speaker Out/Rear Speaker Out/Side Speaker Out/Line In/Line Out/Microphone)

(Note 5) The DVI-D port does not support D-Sub connection by adapter.

Huh, lots of details... Thanks for clearing up. Have to think about DVI-D is enough, or I need DVI-I...

[Mats]

Why would you need DVI-I when you already have a VGA connector?

[Thomas]

The above image seems to be incorrect - according to the manual, it's DVI-D...

[Thomas]

Why would you need DVI-I when you already have a VGA connector?

Meanwhile, I figured the same...

[Erssa]

But this one i m-ATX - and if I later on add in a separate VGA card, I want a passive cooler, most likely the passive Arctic-Cooling Acceleros... Then there's no room for PCI cards... And if that FireWire on the Gigabyte aint compatible with my videocam...

Quite many ifs there. But IIRC Accelero only blocks 1 slot, so you'd still be left with one pci-slot, even if Gigabytes firewire wouldn't work (unlikely), but do as you like. I'm sure GA-MA78G-DS3H is just fine, I just prefer mATX.

[Mats]

For plenty of reasons... Maybe you want to use a decent monitor for photo editing and decide to buy an Apple Cinema Display. They use DVI-I. Most LCD monitors have native DVI-D connectors, they are compatible with DVI-I. Maybe you want to use 4 displays simultaneously... I could list more, but if you don't know the reasons yourself, then you obviously have no need for it.

AFAIK, DVI-I means that carries analog and digital signals, but it's no indicator if it got dual link support or not (which is needed in displays with higher resolution). Am I wrong?

[Erssa]

For plenty of reasons... Maybe you want to use a decent monitor for photo editing and decide to buy an Apple Cinema Display. They use DVI-I. Most LCD monitors have native DVI-D connectors, they are compatible with DVI-I. Maybe you want to use 4 displays simultaneously... I could list more, but if you don't know the reasons yourself, then you obviously have no need for it.

AFAIK, DVI-I means that carries analog and digital signals, but it's no indicator if it got dual link support or not (which is needed in displays with higher resolution). Am I wrong?

I didn't mean 30" Apple cinema display that needs dual link. Even "low" resolution 23" Apple Cinema Display is good for serious photo editing.