AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

[pwn3dFFXI]

I'm still in process of getting parts for my new gaming rig.

so far i'm looking to get:

Intel Pentium D Extreme Edition 840 LGA775 3.20GHz 2MB 800 FSB Dual-Core
http://www.monarchcomputer.com/Merch...ct_Code=120973

Asus P5ND2-SLI Deluxe
http://usa.asus.com/products4.aspx?l...85&modelmenu=1

OCZ EB DDR PC-4000 2x1024MB Platinum Edition Dual Channel Kit
http://www.ocztechnology.com/product...al_channel_kit

2 x BFG GeForce 7800 GTX OC with Water Block
http://www.bfgtech.com/7800GTX_256_WC.html

That'll be the basis of the system, it's the most solid system i can think of at the moment. I'm thinking of changing the system out to AMD dual core and go with ATI's Crossfire. anyone have a similar system setup currently? what score do you get from FFXI benchmark? or 3d benchmarking program?

[Atacent]

Re: AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

dual core isn't going to give you more performance over single core...all it does is give you the ability to do something else in the background while gaming without hurting performance.

I say keep the SLI setup, and AMD are currently better than intel when it comes to gaming, so if you're really set on dual cores, X2 3800+ and Asus A8N-SLI or DFI NF4 SLI-DR are good choices. For memory, go with Geil One series, TCCD chips.

[kuu]

Re: AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

dual core isn't going to give you more performance over single core...all it does is give you the ability to do something else in the background while gaming without hurting performance.

I say keep the SLI setup, and AMD are currently better than intel when it comes to gaming, so if you're really set on dual cores, X2 3800+ and Asus A8N-SLI or DFI NF4 SLI-DR are good choices. For memory, go with Geil One series, TCCD chips.

Not true. Dual core is simply that. Another chip give or take some bits.

The problem revolves around "threading" To not get into overly computer-geekish, window programs are almost always single threaded due to bad programing, and/or lack of dual/quad processors on the market.

This does NOT mean it's a waste of a chip.

The 1st case and most used is that each program is at least 1 "thread" so if you run 2+ programs, it will use the 2nd core.

The 2nd case is a program that is programed with more then 1 threads. Not only is it more efficent even with a single process if not more work for the programer, but will take avantage of multicore/multi processors.

The last case is of the operating system itself. If the system itself is program with multicore/multi processors, it has many techniques such as scheduling,pioritizing, as well as api sets, etc, etc, to have overall benifits.

Since we got to OS, let's talk about windows and dual core. Sadly, MS sucks and their code base is nowhere near the elegance or had hintsight to impliment these. If you ran MacOSX(near future intel compatible), or linux, then they are already there. maybe if you're planning to get Vista, it'll be good(MS can't lack that much hintsight)

Programs on windows also majority suck. But some programs are easily made multi-threaded, usually, ports from linux groups like VLC, and programs like Adobe, which had to do it for MacOSX.

On games(pretty much the beef of the issue). Yea PC game programers think of multi-thread as a foreign topic. So the most you'll get is is OS on 1 core, and Game on another(not quite that bad for people that multi-task). At worse you'll get maybe a 5-10% performance boast not having the OS in the backround. Though future games are changing, as Xbox360, PS3 are both multi cored, and any decent port, or studios will likely make some of it for PC.

So decide your gaming rig, on what you're going to be doing, and WHAT games you will be playing it on. Big name games like UT and Doom and probably most future MS studio games, that will be on the 360 and/or ps3, will be more then likely to be multi-threaded, no reason not to really, if they have to do it for console.

[neighbortaru]

Re: AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

such expensive, geeky parts. /me drools
I wish I could get.

btw, I think ku's post is pretty much spot on.

[athy]

Re: AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

AMD all the way

[Atacent]

Re: AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

Not true. Dual core is simply that. Another chip give or take some bits.

The problem revolves around "threading" To not get into overly computer-geekish, window programs are almost always single threaded due to bad programing, and/or lack of dual/quad processors on the market.

This does NOT mean it's a waste of a chip.

The 1st case and most used is that each program is at least 1 "thread" so if you run 2+ programs, it will use the 2nd core.

The 2nd case is a program that is programed with more then 1 threads. Not only is it more efficent even with a single process if not more work for the programer, but will take avantage of multicore/multi processors.

The last case is of the operating system itself. If the system itself is program with multicore/multi processors, it has many techniques such as scheduling,pioritizing, as well as api sets, etc, etc, to have overall benifits.

Since we got to OS, let's talk about windows and dual core. Sadly, MS sucks and their code base is nowhere near the elegance or had hintsight to impliment these. If you ran MacOSX(near future intel compatible), or linux, then they are already there. maybe if you're planning to get Vista, it'll be good(MS can't lack that much hintsight)

Programs on windows also majority suck. But some programs are easily made multi-threaded, usually, ports from linux groups like VLC, and programs like Adobe, which had to do it for MacOSX.

On games(pretty much the beef of the issue). Yea PC game programers think of multi-thread as a foreign topic. So the most you'll get is is OS on 1 core, and Game on another(not quite that bad for people that multi-task). At worse you'll get maybe a 5-10% performance boast not having the OS in the backround. Though future games are changing, as Xbox360, PS3 are both multi cored, and any decent port, or studios will likely make some of it for PC.

So decide your gaming rig, on what you're going to be doing, and WHAT games you will be playing it on. Big name games like UT and Doom and probably most future MS studio games, that will be on the 360 and/or ps3, will be more then likely to be multi-threaded, no reason not to really, if they have to do it for console.

i know how it works, and thats why i stated for now dual core will not offer any performance boost over single core other than the ability to multitask without sacrificing performance. games that are programmed to be multi-threaded will come, but not for awhile, taking even more time for multi-threaded games to be mainstream. if you really want dual core, then by all means go for it. didn't you hear developers are having a hard time programming games for the PS3 because of the ridiculous amount of cores it has?

[kuu]

Re: AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

i know how it works, and thats why i stated for now dual core will not offer any performance boost over single core other than the ability to multitask without sacrificing performance. games that are programmed to be multi-threaded will come, but not for awhile, taking even more time for multi-threaded games to be mainstream. if you really want dual core, then by all means go for it. didn't you hear developers are having a hard time programming games for the PS3 because of the ridiculous amount of cores it has?

No I didn't.

Multi-threading is a pain and more work, but it's not rocket science. Even a complier can do it to a certain extent. don't confused how hard it is to "do it" and the "degree" of it. There's a big difference.

Already there are many launch games for 360 2 months away, and most MS studio games will more or less reach PC. Not to mention UT and Doom are shall we say already there. WoW and and other blizzard games, I'm not quite sure, but they should be able to update for multi-thread if the market comes. I'm pretty sure their ports made for Mac are multi-threaded if not basic level.

Anyway dual-core is useful to many gamers. You're trying to theorize a perfect, console like gamer rig, which I rarely meet. Any gamer that does, much less casual user, they almost always have AIM, MSN, IE/firefox, mp3 player, and bit torrent/winny as well.

If it weren't for XP laziness, there would be more benifits from DX and d3d. any API set.

The price of it right now, might not be good for the trade-off, but that's upto the buyer. Dual core is not an easy 2x performance, but it's not for show either.

[Byakko]

Re: AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

I like AMD.

[eriatarka]

Re: AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

as far as i know, pretty straight forward and simple, amd is better at handling more processes and intel just loads Shi564t faster... atleast thats what i was told =P

[TheGrandMom]

Re: AMD or Intel. Building new game rig.

I'm Intel faithful but if your going for a pure gaming rig then go AMD.