Need help with choosing a computer...

[Lunarja]

It's Estonian, Estonia is very small country, about 1,5 million people. And it's location is somewhere near Finland.

[puppynut5]

ASUS mobo's are better than the Gigabyte.

[exartizo]

Estonia!

Thanks for the info about what you want to use it for. I like to try and take an overall "systems" view because your computer system will be only as fast as the slowest component.

I guess we can rule out the hard gaming persona that I had picked out for you Lunarja.

I would definitely pick the Intel machine.

Here's why:

1. Software compatability - You're not gonna have as many software and driver bugs with an Intel chip.

2. The SATA drives are quicker and you'll need speed for video editing. On the flip side of that you'll also need lots of storage capability for the large video files you'll be creating.

You'll most likely need more than just one 200 GB drive for video storage. I'd recommend more like two or three drives for that.

You might want to make them into one "virtual drive" which can be done with hardware or software RAID capability, depending on the motherboard and operating system you choose. The technical aspects of doing that are a little too much to discuss here. The ASUS board you mentioned supports the faster hardware RAID type configurations.

The Gigabyte motherboard doesn't have RAID capability. Check this link for Gigabyte mother board specs:

http://www.dealtime.com/xPF-Gigabyte...800MHz_FSB_GbE

As far as the Operating System you'll use if you haven't thought about it or considered, you should use Microsoft's XP Professional.

3. The memory capabilities of the Gigabyte board are going to make your memory quicker and more responsive which will translate into less time waiting for picture rendering and file manipulation in Photoshop CS2 and other photo/video/graphics applications.

BUT the Gigaybyte board only supports 2GB of 400 mhz DDR memory Lunarja. The ASUS board you mentioned supports 4 GB of 400mhz DDR. So if you want to expand memory later, this might be a factor.

I recommend and use Gigabyte stuff exclusively so I can't tell you much about the quality of an ASUS board.

Check this link for ASUS board specs:

http://www.excaliberpc.comSUS_A8NE-FM_nForce4_Motherboard8N-E-FM_BULK/partinfo-id-553211.html[/url]

Hope all this detail helps you make a decision. Just email me if you need further help.

Cheers

[Lunarja]

Thank you for your help

[zima]

Lunarja, plain and simple...don't listen to his "help"

Reasons below, I'll just say that in photo editing Athlon smokes the P4 and in video editing mostly on par/slightly faster, depending on the exact CPU's used.

Originally Posted by exartizo

As many people know, bigger isn't always better.

That may also be the case in this situation.

Of course...but AMD machine isn't in any particular way "bigger" - you just pick individual compoments in it, for which the case might be true and present it as negatives, and then pick individual compoments in Intel machine for which the case might be true and present it as positives.
We need to look at the whole picture.

First:

AMD chips STILL run hotter than comparable Intel chips so you'll need to make sure you have adequate cooling. I'm assuming that these machines are not "off the shelf". For gaming, AMD is the clear choice.

"Hotter"? Bullsh|t. Total bullsh|t. For quite some time AMD chips run much cooler and consume much less ebergy than Intel offerings.

Second:

Just because it has a larger hard drive doesn't mean its better. That's like saying a six cylinder engine delivers more horsepower than a four cylinder engine.

That may be the case, but not necessarily. You need to know the specs on the engines.

And its definitely NOT TRUE in this case.

As you know, an SATA drive has a faster bus speed than comparable IDE drives. So the first machine with the SATA drive may be a better fit in terms of the hard drives.

A 40 GB difference in drive size may not be a big deal if you'd like a drive with a little quicker access time.

While you are right in the first part, the thing about SATA is also total bullsh|t. Performance-wise, SATA doesn't give any real advantage over paraller ATA - the thing that limits you is hardrive itself, not its interface. Given the scarce info, the HDD in Intel machine might be faster, but not because of its interface - because of it's 8MB cache (but we don't know the specs of HDD in AMD machine). All this forgetting that drives from different manufacturers aren't equal...

Also, All "RAM" is not the same. You will need to consider the specs to determine how quick it is.

Brand names are important in picking memory because "All memory is not created equal". (I'm a Crucial fan personally).

You did not include the memory specs on the second machine. Usually when you write "2x 512 mb" that means to me that you've got 1 GB also. Is that true? Does the first Intel machine have 1 GB memory also? I'm unclear about that.

Given my question above, the memory in the first machine could be two 512 mb chips. if this is correct. Then the memory in the first machine will be faster than the memory in the second machine because DDR memory requires two chips on a Gigabyte board to run in "dual channel" mode.

A dual channel configuration as implicated in the first Intel machine should run faster than a comparable single channel configuration such as is stated for the AMD machine.

The chip CL is missing for the AMD machine. This information will impact the speed of the memory in the AMD machine.

But you completelly failed to notice that Intel machine uses DDR (and a chipset that is not top performer), not DDR2, which is much better in case of Intel CPUs. OTOH AMD for sure uses highly efficient integrated memory controller...and it's a bit unlikelly they didn't put two sticks in it for dual channel operation. Also, CL importance is, in reality, overvalued, especially in case of AMD with its integrated memory controller (much contributes to the thing that in reality it's simply a choice between CL2,5 and CL2 - it's EXTREMELLY unlikelly that the AMD machine uses CL3 chips)
As a sidenote, there's most probably no real problem with RAM quality in case of AMD machine - it's made by Siemens. Siemens and suchlike take great deal of care into making sure their machine is stable.

You need to accurately understand the differences in the specs of the products to be able to discuss them knowledgeably.

You are right. Now, please explain me why, without whole info, you automatically jump to conclusions that Intel machine will be better (nevermind misnomer "facts"...)

AGAIN.. IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU WANT TO USE THE MACHINE FOR!

Not really. Currently AMD chips/machines are practically universally better than their Intel price equivalents.

Originally Posted by exartizo

Estonia!

Thanks for the info about what you want to use it for. I like to try and take an overall "systems" view because your computer system will be only as fast as the slowest component.

Sure. But it would help if you wouldn't trick him into thinking that the AMD machine has some serious bottlenecks

...
1. Software compatability - You're not gonna have as many software and driver bugs with an Intel chip.

Bullsh|t, bullsh|t, bullsh|t. This myth is present only because, in the long distant past, there were some problems, usually by app makers/Intel (through their compliler) delibaretely blocking other vendors than Intel in their apps. Definatelly from time of K5 (first design trully made by AMD, not a copy of Intel), there were no technical reasons on side of the CPU for smaller compatibility. Only problems were because poeple usually went really cheap with AMD, meaning cheap board with not very good chipset. But that has changed. Virtually all AMD chipsets now are solid, especially the ones used by manufacturers like Asus/Siemens.

2. The SATA drives are quicker and you'll need speed for video editing. On the flip side of that you'll also need lots of storage capability for the large video files you'll be creating.

They aren't quicker because of interface, but because all of them have 8MB cache. And of course large part of PATA drives also have this amount (but not all, hence the impression that they're slower). We don't know if this is the case with HDD in AMD machine...but the price difference between the two (2MB and 8MB versions of the same PATA drive) is like what, 5$? Surely it's possible to change configuration in such limited matter. But of course you'd like to go with Intel all the way for such reason...

You'll most likely need more than just one 200 GB drive for video storage. I'd recommend more like two or three drives for that.

You might want to make them into one "virtual drive" which can be done with hardware or software RAID capability, depending on the motherboard and operating system you choose. The technical aspects of doing that are a little too much to discuss here. The ASUS board you mentioned supports the faster hardware RAID type configurations.

The Gigabyte motherboard doesn't have RAID capability. Check this link for Gigabyte mother board specs:

http://www.dealtime.com/xPF-Gigabyte...800MHz_FSB_GbE

Depends how serious he is into video editing (not much apparently)...besides attaching second HDD is irrelevant in scope of the choice of buying Intel vs. AMD.
As a sidenote, RAID arrays you propose are better left alone. Software and cheap hardware solutions (such as integrated on motherboard) don't give much, and harddrives are plenty fast for video editing anyway nowadays.
If you do want some real boost, separate RAID controller should be chosen.

As far as the Operating System you'll use if you haven't thought about it or considered, you should use Microsoft's XP Professional.

He doesn't have much choice in this regard...however I'd aslo suggest looking at Windows 2003. Less bloat, more snappy, newer codebase (basically the last two things apply also to Windows XP64bit, but in this case there are slight compatibility problems...)

3. The memory capabilities of the Gigabyte board are going to make your memory quicker and more responsive which will translate into less time waiting for picture rendering and file manipulation in Photoshop CS2 and other photo/video/graphics applications.

Bullsh|t. integrated memory controller in AMD chips is worth much, much more - nevermind that AMD machine probably has basically the same type of RAM.

I recommend and use Gigabyte stuff exclusively so I can't tell you much about the quality of an ASUS board.

Oh, you surelly know that the Asus is as best as you can get. You just don't want to say that to him.

Hope all this detail helps you make a decision. Just email me if you need further help.

Cheers

Lunarja, I hope the details which he ommited and which I provided will help you in making true decision (making decision implies knowing the situation - exartizo only made the situation more muddy)

[monclo]

the second one