Hi,I use laptop with Pentium 4 3.2Ghz and 1GB RAM. I want to build a new system mainly for video rendering and animation. I dont do gaming. Could you recomend me a good (doesnt have to be best on the market) CPU+mobo??Please. Is there a noticeable difference between CPU single and dual core for video?? I would go probably with AMD which is cheaper and now prices going down. I just don't understant those CPU clocks. I saw AMD X2 CPU which has say 2.0Ghz clock speed.Does it mean its slower than mine laptop??Could someone explain to me?? Also I need a system which lasts for some time ,at least mobo so later (in a few years) I can upgrade for better CPU without to buy new mobo)
I seem to remember Intel chips being slightly quicker for video rendering. Please correct me if i'm wrong.
Not anymore, at least with the Pentium 4's vs. Athlon 64's. The GHz of a CPU is not indicative of it's performance. While Intel has done some massive changes with the Core and Core 2 designs, the Netburst architecture of the Pentium 4 and Pentium D's was designed to scale for high clock speeds. Part of the trade off was doing less work per clock in comparison to what AMD had. A Pentium 4 2GHz is comparable to a 1.4GHz Athlon XP. While the Athlon's performance rating (3000+, 3200+, etc) may end up being roughly where they are in comparison to an Intel CPU, the PR system is basing that Athlon's performance as if a Thunderbird core (a very old Athlon core) if it were clocked at xxxxMHz. In other words, if you see an Athlon 3000+, it's performance is that of a T-bird core at 3GHz/3000MHz.
I have an X2, amazing, though I don't have much experience. But one review I read on the battle between AMD and Intel Dual Cores, AMD won in every event. Lots of people have there own opinions on what companies they prefer for processors and video cards. Myself, I prefer AMD and ATI, which may make me biased.
