Which Processor for New Computer

[stepchild]

I'm getting ready to buy a new computer and was wondering which way to go on processors...AMD or Intel. I'll be using it for mainly image processing (Photoshop) and general office programs. I would like your opinions and recommendations of which way to go.

Thanks

SC

[Ghost_Hacker]

I have never noticed a difference. I've noticed a great improvement in performance when I up the amount of memory. But otherwise the type of processor didn't seem to really matter.
However, Adobe says they do "optomize" PS for the Intel processor.


Hope this helps :)

[ranchdog]

A persons financial situation has a lot to do

with the answer on this one......

AMD being easier on the pocketbook when starting from
ground zero. Remains that way later on when it's time
to upgrade.

AMD gives an excellent bang for the George Washington.


RD.

[stepchild]

Thanks for the input.

SC

[Paleo Pete]

Same as G_H I haven't really noticed a great difference except for price. Then again I haven't used many AMDs, but those I have used haven't shown any noticable difference when compared to comparable Intel chips.

I'm sure a lot of people place a lot of importance on benchmarks, but when you're talking differences of milliseconds, your human senses will never be able to tell...

What is running during the comparison makes a big difference as well, sit down in front of a 700MHz w/64MB RAM machine running winME with everything the company can think of running as well as system restore, then go to a 233MMX w/128MB and very little running, the 233 will win every time...both Intel chips...

So...it basically boils down to price and preference. At one time I would have recommended against AMD due to a high ratio of problems seen here on the forums, but that eventually was found to be due to a particular and specific (and very popular) combination of hardware and drivers, and it seems the drivers and chipset involved are getting a bit better...

The only thing I will note as far as benchmarks, several of the benchmark and review sites I've taken a look at seem to mostly agree that the AMD chips perform a bit better with games and the Intel chips do better for office and graphics type programs...the workhorse versus the racehorse...

Still, at the speeds we're dealing with today, the difference is so minimal I seriously doubt if you'll be able to see it with human senses, only sensitive electronic instruments. So get the one you like or can afford.

[stepchild]

Again thanks for the info. I guess it's a matter of price. Which makes it easy, at least I think it does.

SC

[saphalline]

I'll be using it for mainly image processing (Photoshop) and general office programs.

Like Paleo Pete said, if you're doing actual work then Intel chips are better, and cooler for that matter. Also, AMD platforms have quite a bit of "extra chores" to do before they're rock solid (ie installing mobo/vid drivers in parts). Don't get me wrong, AMD has its charms as well, or I wouldn't be using an Athlon myself. For one thing, you don't have to worry so much about what type of RAM you use, it's all DDR. With the P4, you have to make the RDRAM vs DDR choice, which is no fun.

Still, for most content creation benchmarks that I've seen, the P4 wins. And the amount of RAM in these cases matters more than the type, so just get enough of it.

[stepchild]

I have heard that AMD machinces are better for graphics then intel. Is this true or are they both about the same. This is getting harder all the time.

SC

[deemac]

I, too, was bemused by the choice you are facing and it is pretty critical to the rest of your project.
I went to my local computer retail and repair shop, (NOT a national chain place), and asked him the question.
'Intel", he said, straight away.
Apparently he spends most of his time building PC's for clients to their specification aand the rest of his time repairing PC's whose owners had chosen Athlon.
This, he explained, was because they ran too hot and he was forever putting extra fans in them.
This problem would be more likely if your CPU usage was biased towards the graphical interface that you wish to operate.
So I agree with your previous correpondent, Sapho something
Good luck with your enterprise. If I can do it etc etc.
Its quite gratifying and you learn a lot on the way.
Derek McBride

[Nooyawkah]

OK, what do I know? The AMDs I've built run flawlessly. As well as any Intels I have used (I owned 5 or 6 Dell computers before building). As long as you use a decent heatsink/fan, it shouldn't run hot.

I agree that RAM is a big issue. The difference between 128 and 512 is staggering and RAM is pretty well priced now.

My wife does mostly graphics, and thanks to advice from forum members, I installed a Matrox video card. It's been excellent (clear as a bell) and from what I understand is a big seller among photographers and graphics users. In fact, at any one moment in time she may have Print Shop, American Greetings, Adobe Photshop, Word and Quicken, plus a scanner, running at the same time. The AMD chip with 512 RAM and Matrox vidcard are winners in my book.

Good luck whatever you do.

[stepchild]

Thanks for your replies and the info. Over in a digital forum they seem to love the AMD. They thing it is much better for graphics. They also agree with matrox as the best in graphics card for image processing.

Again thanks for info.

SC