Core2 Duo vs. Pentium D

[f700es]

I had a little down time so I did a benchmark between my Core2 Duo system and the Pent-D system that my new co-worker will be using. Both are pretty similar except for the cpu's.

Box 1:
Core 2 Duo 2.13 GHz.
2 gb DDR2
nVidia Quadro FX 3450/4000 256 mb PCIe

Box 2:
Pentium D at 3.0 GHz.
2 gb DDR2
nVidia Quadro FX 3450/4000 256 mb PCIe

For a change I used POV-Ray and their benchmark file. I set it for 800x600, AA and .3 (whatever that last one means). Here are the results...

Box 1: 54m 17s
Box 2: 1 hr 14m 11s

Wow, 20 minutes difference on just one frame. That would be a butt-load on an animation render. Nothing earth shattering just thought I would share.

[StykFacE]

dude, i'm ALL ABOUT the C2D's. i mean, those badboys are the best processors ever made, to date (for normal applications). is that C2D overclocked, or stock? you know you can get another 200+ MHz outta those, on stock cooling without hardly any rise in CPU Temps. 8)

[Starkey]

dude, i'm ALL ABOUT the C2D's. i mean, those badboys are the best processors ever made, to date (for normal applications). is that C2D overclocked, or stock? you know you can get another 200+ MHz outta those, on stock cooling without hardly any rise in CPU Temps. 8)

Sounds like car talk...

Well my computer licks dirt right now. I'm on 700mb of memory, LUCKILY getting upgraded to 2gb though. I'm also running a Pentium D with 2.66GHz

[yedan]

can you post a picture of what the test subject was?

[f700es]

dude, i'm ALL ABOUT the C2D's. i mean, those badboys are the best processors ever made, to date (for normal applications). is that C2D overclocked, or stock? you know you can get another 200+ MHz outta those, on stock cooling without hardly any rise in CPU Temps. 8)

No, it's stock. How do you over clock?

[f700es]

can you post a picture of what the test subject was?

Sure can....

http://f700es.googlepages.com/povraybenchmark.jpg

[StykFacE]

No, it's stock. How do you over clock?
just go into your BIOS and look for the Multiplier. For instance, i run a 3.2GHz P4 at home, at a 200MHz bus. so in BOIS you'll look for "Multiplier: 200 x 16" (200MHz x 16 = 3200MHz). well, you can adjust that setting, faster or slower. turn the 16 up to 17, or 18 (200MHz x 18 = 3600MHz), or keep going up step by step, slowly and restart until you are confortable with the new speeds (make sure to check the temps as you go up too). The multiplier might show as different for the C2D's in your BIOS. in fact, i know it will, but i can't remember since i don't own one, but i took a Core2 Duo E6300 1.86GHz up to 2.4GHz and was VERY stable, and still under a full load ran under 45 degrees C.

here's a thread (http://forum.pcmech.com/showthread.php?t=114889) that has some overclocking guides to it. it's really pretty simple, and very safe with the C2D. your system will shut off or restart before anything majoy will ever happen to effect your system. but just think of your processor safely running 400MHz more than it is. and yes, it's possible. Have fun :)

[abulin]

dude, i'm ALL ABOUT the C2D's. i mean, those badboys are the best processors ever made, to date (for normal applications). is that C2D overclocked, or stock? you know you can get another 200+ MHz outta those, on stock cooling without hardly any rise in CPU Temps. 8)

I like the sound of that, but I would not know where to begin? I would be grateful for instruction.
I hope you could bestow more insight, for I am about to build a system from scratch for $1500 to run ADT2007, 3dsMax or Maya and POVray or someother rendering software. I am an architecture student and I am headed up a design and build venture with an 17year architect in our general commercial construction company. On top of architectural renderings I want to expand into characters.
Again I would appreciate any advise, for I want to make a good investment if I can afford it.

THANKS!!!

ABulin

[architecture68-raff]

Just to elaborate more on Styk's excellent description...

Many of the serious overclockers will take it a step further and modify their core voltages in the bios. This can help in squeezing a little more stability out of higher multipliers. Be warned, though, that this is the fastest way to crisp your CPU.

Also keep in mind that if you bought your PC from a manufacturer like Dell or HP, you may not have any overclocking options in your BIOS. But if you have a overclocking-friendly mobo from a company like ASUS (or many others) you owe it to yourself to looking into your options.

[StykFacE]

Also keep in mind that if you bought your PC from a manufacturer like Dell or HP, you may not have any overclocking options in your BIOS.
this is true. i was thinking that after i posted, but just blew off editing. lol, good point. :)

[abulin]

yeah, i think i will blow off the factory built computer. i have been looking at www.newegg.com (http://www.newegg.com) and www.tigerdirect.com (http://www.tigerdirect.com) and thought i was going AMD on the board and processor. now, i have recieved alot of support for the C2D. my primary concern is the graphics card.

[StykFacE]

go newegg.com all the way. i'm sure it's just a personal issue, but i've had serious troubles with tigerdirect.com before, but never with newegg. stick with the best. :)

and yeah, don't go AMD at all.... ugh, not with these new C2D's.

[f700es]

I keep hearing people say this but everytime I try to build a box from say newegg or whereever I still can't touch Dell's price. I mean, yeah I can put together a cheap box but I usually lose on the OS price.

Today's prices:

Dell Dimension E521:
- Athlon 64 X2 3800+
- 1 GB DDR2
- 160 GB SATA HDD
- DVD-RW
- nVidia 7300 LE 256 MB PCIe
- Vista Home
= $519

The same parts from newegg = $569.94 and I still have to assemble and set-up. Just not worth it to me.

[StykFacE]

I keep hearing people say this but everytime I try to build a box from say newegg or whereever I still can't touch Dell's price. I mean, yeah I can put together a cheap box but I usually lose on the OS price.

Today's prices:

Dell Dimension E521:
- Athlon 64 X2 3800+
- 1 GB DDR2
- 160 GB SATA HDD
- DVD-RW
- nVidia 7300 LE 256 MB PCIe
- Vista Home
= $519

The same parts from newegg = $569.94 and I still have to assemble and set-up. Just not worth it to me.
well, you definitely know your hardware from what i can tell on this board. however, people shouldn't go to newegg.com for "cheap computers". that's exactly what Dell and similar companies are around for - a cheap, decent computer with warranty.

you go to newegg.com to get prime parts to built a completely custom rig to your personal spec. that's the whole point. because the people that REALLY do their homework, and know the hardware they're buying, you can spend a hundred more dollars on parts, and have to assemble it yourself, but the computer itself is usually 30-50% better in performance.

right out of the box, Dell's are slower because of certain OEM hardware choices, and pre-installed software. *Ugh*

The Compaq that i'm on at work is about twice the specs of my home computer, but it's funny because it's twice as slow in AutoCAD. lol, just the way it is.... :)

[architecture68-raff]

I keep hearing people say this but everytime I try to build a box from say newegg or whereever I still can't touch Dell's price.

This has been the trend in the past several years, and why Dell stays in business. Most people I know that build their own systems (myself included) do so because it interests them and they like the customization aspect, not because it will save them money. Almost all major manufacturers are now reducing hardware prices by skimping on good technical support and outsourcing it all. You would have to buy an awful lot of parts in bulk to compete with Dell's prices.

[f700es]

This has been the trend in the past several years, and why Dell stays in business. Most people I know that build their own systems (myself included) do so because it interests them and they like the customization aspect, not because it will save them money. Almost all major manufacturers are now reducing hardware prices by skimping on good technical support and outsourcing it all. You would have to buy an awful lot of parts in bulk to compete with Dell's prices.

Exactly, no small shop has Dell, Compaq/HP or Gateway's buying power. I like "tinkering" with my boxes as well but I for one can't see paying more on the bottom line. I have bought Dell for places that I have worked for since 1998. They have always served me well. Sure you get a lemon every now and then, that's life. 3 years ago when I was planning on a new box for home I decided to go with a Dell instead of building my own (as my last 2 were built by me). Again I just couldn't touch the price. I saved like $200 when it was all said and done.
I agree that technical support has dropped off but I would say that most of us here can handle a driver issue or similar when it comes up. I guess that's why I keep a spare box around to play with ;)
Right now I brought a PowerMac 6500 300MHz back to life. Looking for my next project right now. :)

[f700es]

I agree and disagree with you on this one. I agree about the cheap boxes. They do have the budget solution market cornered but their work stations are of fair prices as well. But if you want to see the real shocker build a Dell workstation with the same specs as the base model PowerMac tower ( 2 dual-core Xeon cpu's) and the mac will be less!!!!! :?


well, you definitely know your hardware from what i can tell on this board. however, people shouldn't go to newegg.com for "cheap computers". that's exactly what Dell and similar companies are around for - a cheap, decent computer with warranty.

you go to newegg.com to get prime parts to built a completely custom rig to your personal spec. that's the whole point. because the people that REALLY do their homework, and know the hardware they're buying, you can spend a hundred more dollars on parts, and have to assemble it yourself, but the computer itself is usually 30-50% better in performance.

right out of the box, Dell's are slower because of certain OEM hardware choices, and pre-installed software. *Ugh*

The Compaq that i'm on at work is about twice the specs of my home computer, but it's funny because it's twice as slow in AutoCAD. lol, just the way it is.... :)

[architecture68-raff]

Right now I brought a PowerMac 6500 300MHz back to life.

Out of curiosity, what is it that you plan on doing with this???

[f700es]

Out of curiosity, what is it that you plan on doing with this???

Well I was planning on playing with 2 mac only cad/3D applications but this unit is not strong enough to run OSX. I only have a little bit of $$ in this unit so I might try to sell it or something. It does run OS9 very well. It makes a great e-mail/internet/typing computer. I got it at a local university hospital surplus sale for free. They removed the hard drive for security purposes and was going to have to pay to get rid of it so I got it for free. I spend $20 for a Apple ABD keyboard and mouse and a few bucks for a disk from ebay with OS9 on it.

I am looking for atleast a Powermac G3 blue and white unit or a 1st gen G4 to do what I want.

That or finally install OSx86 on my dell and run OSX through it and set up a dual boot.

Edit:
Oh here are the programs I am interested in...

HighDesign
http://www.ilexsoft.com/highdesign/

Cheetah 3D
http://www.cheetah3d.com/

[architecture68-raff]

[/URL]
Cheetah 3D
[URL]http://www.cheetah3d.com/ (http://www.ilexsoft.com/highdesign/)

JFYI, this program chokes on my Mac Mini 1.42 GHz G4 with 1 GB ram and 32 MB video ram. It's only got a 5400 rpm drive and is designed as a "budget" system, but even programs like Sketchup are almost unusable on it. I'd surely stay away from the G3 or older power macs if you want to have anything resembling a pleasant experience.

The way I see it, spending any money on any mac lower than a G4 is a complete waste of money, and I wouldn't expect to get much for your nearly 10 year old Power Mac 6500. At least you didn't invest much :unsure:

[StykFacE]

Get a Core 2 Duo!!! lol

[f700es]

Yeah, I am not looking for a working solution I just want to try them with little or no investment. Yeah once again Steve's short sightedness has missed an opportunity to gain market share. Why cripple the mini with either a crappy 32mb Ati video card or even worse the new mini's with their Intel video solution. How hard could it have been to make the mini just another 2 inches taller and allow a small PCIe slot for video?
Where is the consumer tower from Apple. Sell a single slot Core2 system for under $1000 with a PCIe slot and a few PCI slots with 4 ram slots and Apple would double market share in less than 1 year. Why can he not see this?
Any way back from my rant on Steve Jobs, if I like what I see in Cheetah I might get a used tower or 20" iMac and run a dual boot setup with boot camp, next year. That's the reason. I like the mini's but as you said there are just no strong enough :(
Cool design though.

My 6500, I'd probably let it go for $20. Just to cover the keyboard and mouse cost.


JFYI, this program chokes on my Mac Mini 1.42 GHz G4 with 1 GB ram and 32 MB video ram. It's only got a 5400 rpm drive and is designed as a "budget" system, but even programs like Sketchup are almost unusable on it. I'd surely stay away from the G3 or older power macs if you want to have anything resembling a pleasant experience.

The way I see it, spending any money on any mac lower than a G4 is a complete waste of money, and I wouldn't expect to get much for your nearly 10 year old Power Mac 6500. At least you didn't invest much :unsure:

[abulin]

I would agree that to shell out a few on a Dell is a great economical choice, but i need a powerful system thats hard to get at a fair price and still has every option i hand pick without compromise. Example, at least 512 to 768MB vid card, dual monitors, C2D processor, at least 4GB ram on a 8 to 16GB capacity motherboard. i have found excellent barebones packages to get me started, but if a complete package was available it could save me sweet and tears. the dells i've had were ok, but one literally smoked at the office. and the HPs i am using get "goofy" every so often. they have been unstable and that seems to be the general problem.

[StykFacE]

That's my whole argument. i mean, people don't "buy" a racecar that's prebuilt - you get part for part yourself and put it together to your personal spec, and it's always better.

in the same breath, people would not build a "budget car" piece by piece - same with computers. i LOVE me some Dells for normal practical computer uses. but power users like AutoCAD guys, a home built machine isn't the only way to go, but it is defintely the better way, only if you're comfortable will building it. people who are not literate in general computer hardware should stay far, far away. :)

Dell and the other top manufacturers of computers just don't offer the type of specs you get when shopping around on Newegg.com or something similar. every tiny bit of design of each part makes a differece in stability and performance. the top brands out there that make Mobo's, hard drives, vid cards, etc etc don't have their "best" product line availiable at normal computer manufacturers, and that's why i swear by a home built. BUT, you will definitely have to fork out a bit more cash... haha

[f700es]

I don't know guys, I have always used Precision workstations at work and they offer anything you can get anywhere else. Mine at work has just about all you could need. Core 2 Duo, Quadro FX PCIe, SATA Raid, up to 4 GB of ram. I run dual monitors on it as well.
I personally would not ever order a Compag/HP computer. They might be good now a days but their past issues are hard to ignore. I love HP printers but I would not have one of their PCs. Same with Gateway, no respect for them. I guess we agree to disagree ;) :p

[StykFacE]

haha, good stuff. i agree with the HP printers, hands down the best. i've always had great luck with them. i'm a performance nut with computers so that's why i stick to my guns about it. haha :lol:

[abulin]

okay, see if this sounds good:

PNY GeForce 8800 GTS 640MB (Multi-Monitor Capable)
Intel Barebone Kit-
ATX Mid-Tower Case w/ 500 watt pwr supply
Intel socket 775 board (4Gb space avaioable)
Core 2 Duo E6600 2.40Ghz
CPU Fan
Ultra 1Gb DDR2
Samsung 17" 5ms 1000:1
*Windows Vista 32 bit
Lite-On DVD-RW
Maxtor 500Gb SATA hard drive

i will start with this. as mentioned above, i can max to 4Gb and a 3.8Ghz processor. i can also add a monitor to this set up.

*does anyone see an area needing improvement (windows:unsure:vista)?? i have THOUGHT about Linux. i need encouraging words before i jump into that one.

[StykFacE]

AutoCAD doesn't work on Linux, so rule that out. and i wouldn't go with a 8800 GTS. it's a VERY expensive video card, but it's for gaming - not AutoCAD. stick with nVidia brand chipset, but go with the Quadro series. if you go ATI brand video card, go with the FireGL cards.

and a 17" monitor?? haha, THIS is where i would spend the money on. get you a 19" or 21" minimum. haha, my opinions only tho... :)

and i ran a dual monitor setup for years, but did away with it because it got really annoying. i thought i liked it at first using AutoCAD, but only when i used two viewports did it make a difference. two monitors just got in the way, so one big one does good for me.

and watch out for Vista, unless you plan on getting AutoCAD 2008, there's been lots of talk about Vista giving AutoCAD some serious stability issues. all the other compenents are dead on. great system. :)

[CromCruithne]

Quite right about the video card. It's something I've been spending a lot of time researching since I'm about to build a box myself. Pixel Pipelines and memory bandwidth are significantly more important than gross amount of RAM. I'd also go with a better Motherboard. A 4GB max is pitiful these days for RAM. The type of is also very important. DDR2 800 is the current top dog and while it's a little more expensive I'd go with it to stay on top.
Take a look at this mother board instead:ASUS P5N-E SLI LGA 775
Take the money you save by not buying that video card and get another GB of RAM instead and definitely get a bigger monitor. You can pick up a 21" for under 250$ now-a-days.

The set-up I'm looking at building is:
CPU: AMD x2 5200+
RAM: 2 GB Kingston HyperX DDR2 800
MoBo: ASUS M2N Plus SLI edition
Case: Cooler Master Praetorian or Mystique
Graphics: EVGA Geforce 7950GT
HDD: 320 SATA, either Seagate or WD Caviar
PSU: Antec 550W

The card is more of a gaming card, but it's got the pipelines and memory bandwidth to tear through CAD also.

-Crom

[StykFacE]

Crom, great setup. I would definitely use your parts for a new rig, but i'm not an AMD fan at all. that would be the only thing i would change (me personally). but correct me if i'm wrong, doesn't the video cards like that only have the MiniGL driver, and not the full OpenGL driver extentions like the Quadro FX series? you're right about the pipelines etc etc but they're geared for gaming, not for rendering or CAD standard apps. everytime i read my Cadalyst magazine they NEVER mention these types of cards.

just throwing that out there is all, i'm no pro at selecting video cards, but i'm just relaying the messages from what i read in my monthly CAD magazines. Still, great setup fa sho. :)

[architecture68-raff]

correct me if i'm wrong, doesn't the video cards like that only have the MiniGL driver, and not the full OpenGL driver extentions like the Quadro FX series?

I think that it does have opengl 2.0 support -- see here (http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html)

But you are right in questioning it, because it is not on the Autodesk approved list. However, it surely will work, you might just have some flakey issues and autodesk wouldn't support it.

I run ADT 2005 on a 7900 every day with no issues, even though it is not "approved" by Autodesk. If you are planning on doing any gaming at all, I think a 7950 would be an excellent choice.

I would also echo Styk's opinions on the AMD....great proc in the past, but why would you consider it when the C2D's spank them in nearly every benchmark? $0.02

[CromCruithne]

The reason for the card is mostly that I can get it for $100's cheaper than a work station class card like a good FireGL or Quadro. The lack of Autodesk support doesn't bother me in the slightest. Having looked at their "support" forums I can't see myself ever being so bad off as to need that kind of headache.
The reason the CAD mags never mention these cards is the fact that they aren't work station cards. Yeah, those FireGLs and Quadros will rip through CAD, but the price is outrageous. The top Quardo right now is over 2400$.

I know that the C2D is the chip right now, but AMD has one thing that Intel hasn't bothered to touch and that's L1 cache. It's the reason an AMD chip can match an Intel chip that's 600MHz faster. Also, price is always a consideration and the 5200+ is much cheaper than a comparable C2D.
Another reason I go for AMD is that the Motherboards for them are setup better than the 775 Intel boards and cheaper to boot. To get the features I want on a board would be about 100$ more for the Intel than the AMD.

I can do the setup I showed with 22" widescreen LCD for about 1600 whereas the C2D versions would be closer to 2200$.


-Crom

[abulin]

now Crom is sitting right on my budget price. i would like to see more commentary about this, for you all have really done your homework on this.
personally, i think the only reason i might need two monitors is if i'm running more than one program; but what are the chances of that?

[f700es]

My geForce 6600 is 2.0 compliant and it ran 2007 (demo) just fine or seemed to.

[CromCruithne]

Abulin, the best thing you can do is research things with the help of some serious computer enthusiasts. I'm not disparaging anyone here, but I found a forum that's centered on building your own PC with some very helpful guides.

http://www.hardwareforums.com/

Just look around and read the stickies in the different sections, especially the ones for Power Supplies and Video Cards. After going through there I changed my mind on both the PSU and the Case. I actually ended up going for parts that were cheaper, but better overall.
I probably will hook up a second monitor (I'll have three extras when I build this) because I'm always running about 12 things at once. If I'm doing 3D work, I'll have PhotoShop open to do texture work. I frequently jump around the net while working, looking for blocks or standards.

I also noticed your setup includes a case that comes with a power supply. Just about anyone who builds their own will tell you to throw that PSU out and buy a different one. Enermax (Except the Liberty series), Raidmax and Cooler Master all make quality PSUs. You'll have to pay attention to some things with the PSU in relation to your video card. The card you listed requires 26amps on the 12V rail. You're better off finding a PSU with that much on one rail. PSUs mostly come with multiple 12V rails now-a-days that will supposedly supply their combined amps but somehow never do.

I'm starting to get fairly lengthy here so I'll stop. Abulin, if you've got anymore questions, just ask.

-Crom

[abulin]

Quite right about the video card. It's something I've been spending a lot of time researching since I'm about to build a box myself. Pixel Pipelines and memory bandwidth are significantly more important than gross amount of RAM. I'd also go with a better Motherboard. A 4GB max is pitiful these days for RAM. The type of is also very important. DDR2 800 is the current top dog and while it's a little more expensive I'd go with it to stay on top.
Take a look at this mother board instead:ASUS P5N-E SLI LGA 775
Take the money you save by not buying that video card and get another GB of RAM instead and definitely get a bigger monitor. You can pick up a 21" for under 250$ now-a-days.

The set-up I'm looking at building is:
CPU: AMD x2 5200+
RAM: 2 GB Kingston HyperX DDR2 800
MoBo: ASUS M2N Plus SLI edition
Case: Cooler Master Praetorian or Mystique
Graphics: EVGA Geforce 7950GT
HDD: 320 SATA, either Seagate or WD Caviar
PSU: Antec 550W

The card is more of a gaming card, but it's got the pipelines and memory bandwidth to tear through CAD also.

-Crom


um, problem, the board your calling is for an itel cpu. there is a different sku for the amd cpu board.

[CromCruithne]

I plan on getting the M2N board which is for AMD chips. The set-up you quoted is what I plan on building not what I was suggesting for you.

I suggested you look at the ASUS P5N-E SLI LGA 775 which is for C2D chips which is what you have listed in your previous post.

-Crom

[abulin]

okay, i got it. i think i lined up everything on www.newegg.com (http://www.newegg.com) and i will probably order it today or tomorrow. i dont know where i would be without this wealth of knowledge. :)

[abulin]

by the way, i AM saving a bundle going AMD, thanks!

[CromCruithne]

Something I was previously unaware, but found out recently (Just after ordering the full version of XP Home) is that XP Home doesn't have any support for dual core CPUs. If you're getting a dual-core processor make sure you're using XP Pro, or you might as well have saved 200$ and got a single core.

-Crom

[f700es]

Something I was previously unaware, but found out recently (Just after ordering the full version of XP Home) is that XP Home doesn't have any support for dual core CPUs. If you're getting a dual-core processor make sure you're using XP Pro, or you might as well have saved 200$ and got a single core.

-Crom

Not 100% accurate on that. IIRC, yes, no support for multi CPU's but multi core CPU's will work I am told. Still only 1 CPU socket.

[CromCruithne]

Believe me, I'm researching this quite heavily right now and all the info I'm finding says that Home will treat a dual core like a single core. If anyone can show me proof that Home will treat a dual core correctly, I'll be ecstatic.

-Crom

[StykFacE]

Believe me, I'm researching this quite heavily right now and all the info I'm finding says that Home will treat a dual core like a single core. If anyone can show me proof that Home will treat a dual core correctly, I'll be ecstatic.

-Crom
the last Intel C2D built about 3 months ago for a guy had WinXP Home on it and it shows both cores within windows. plus, the computer was a budget video editing machine with Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 and it showed both cores within there too. whether the performance is there or not, i dunno, but if that is the truth, then i would hate to see both cores running on that computer in Premiere cuz one core alone kicked the living crap outta any other processor i've seen rendering high def video/audio... :lol:

[f700es]

That sounds correct. Let's all remember that XP Home would also show HT (hyper-threaded) cpu's as well, as 2 CPU's.


the last Intel C2D built about 3 months ago for a guy had WinXP Home on it and it shows both cores within windows. plus, the computer was a budget video editing machine with Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0 and it showed both cores within there too. whether the performance is there or not, i dunno, but if that is the truth, then i would hate to see both cores running on that computer in Premiere cuz one core alone kicked the living crap outta any other processor i've seen rendering high def video/audio... :lol:

[StykFacE]

well, Windows XP is over 5 years old now. after reading my two "nerdy" computer magazines i get monthly, i believe there was an update along the way to accept dual core processors. so, the reality is WinXP Home, the earlier releases, did not see them because these processors didn't exist back then. much like you had to install SP2 to read drives above 120GB. i'm not disputing the fact WinXP home at one time did not see dual core, but i've personally built machines where Windows does infact see two cores. if you Ctrl+Alt+Del it even would show up on the Task Manager performance tab. :)

[CromCruithne]

OK, after a good bit more researching I've found that there is a significant amount of confusion concerning the difference between dual core and cual processor.
So F700es, I stand corrected. XP Home will indeed support a dual core, but not a dual CPU set up. It's merely a matter of liscencing.

-Crom

[StykFacE]

OK, after a good bit more researching I've found that there is a significant amount of confusion concerning the difference between dual core and cual processor.
So F700es, I stand corrected. XP Home will indeed support a dual core, but not a dual CPU set up. It's merely a matter of liscencing.

-Crom
okay now that does make sense.... because out of all the versions of windows, it was always NT 4.0, 2000 Professional, or XP Pro that could only accept a physical dual processor rig, never 95, 98, ME, or XP Home. cool beans. 8)

[f700es]

No worries Crom, like I said I was not 100% sure. Cheers all :)

[abulin]

Well, I am determined to go Vista; and Crom, we will get to see your idea for a good CAD system design in working order in about 2 weeks. I've been shopping the egg and bought some toys. :P

NOW... ADT 2007 or 2008: truely vista compatible?? (:glare: or any other prog I like to use?!?)

[CromCruithne]

2007 isn't currently Vista compatible and I don't expect it will be. 08 should be Vista compatible, but why hassle with a new OS, one proven to be extremely buggy at that, when XP is here, stable and cheaper?

-Crom

[f700es]

Like I said before, I installed 04 in Vista with no issues what so ever. 07 upgrades on the way and I imagine that I will install it too so we'll see how it goes. I am hearing both sides. Some it works for and some it doesn't.

[abulin]

I have heard that one is more likely to have problems when installing Vista on running systems more so than a fresh system; but I am sure I will not be alienated from all inconveniences with my newly built system.
by the way, in what month does Autodesk normally, if there is a norm, release the latest, greatest CAD progs?

[StykFacE]

March.....

[abulin]

oh snap..:o .. someone please tell me that AutoCAD works on a brand, spanking new, home-built, 64 bit system. I know there are Vista issues, but hopefully I have only heard bad info about 64 bit systems.

[architecture68-raff]

Are you running Windows XP/Vista 64 bit edition, or are you just wondering about your new 64 bit processor?

just because you have a 64 bit proc. does not mean you should run XP or Vista 64 bit editions. Unless you need more than 4 GB's of RAM I'd stick with 32 bit versions, which Autocad will run fine on. Otherwise you will find incompatibilites with many programs like anti-virus, and it is tough to find 64 bit drivers for some hardware.

[abulin]

I have been purchasing 64bit everything. The cd/dvd+rw, for instance, is the same manufacturer as the MoBo to save me from compatiblity issues.
I wanted to slowy upgrade in the next year, so my build thinking was to push the better MoBo and 64 everything. For example, I can pile up to 8Gb of 800Mhz ram. I plan on using 3ds Max and/or Maya and progs of the like.

[f700es]

Ummm...AutoCAD is not 64-bit yet. Which does not mean that it will not run on a 64-bit system and OS just that it will not use the benefits of a 64-bit system

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?siteID=123112&id=5128606#section7

[abulin]

hooray! my toy is assembled and in good working order. my very first build and a first with ACAD in mind. soon i will have AutoCAD Architecture 2008 installed and we will see how this beast works.

my build was greatly influenced by suggestions from crom (see parts list in previous posts on this thread.) Thank you so much for your input.

i love the system and, so far, vista is great. it will improve once i install a prog to take the place of the "defender." the version of vista is the 64 bit ultimate version, but i purchased a system builders software and saved a bundle. unlike retail, it does not have all the "trial" programs that litter and try to control the system. it also does not have the support b/c it is completely up to the system builder to be knowledgeable.

new egg had a sale on the 3.0ghz amd x2 @ $235! i lucked out!
the only major change i made was on the mobo. i found an ASUS m2m32-sli vista premuim. the asus package and company, i think, made this build so easy and straight forward. i purchased the retail package and received awesome tools.
everything was vista cetified, for REAL, except the dvd-rom. i used asus and had them pick one for my board @ $40. good start, but eventually i will want dual layering capabilities.

bottom line, expert advice from wonderful people here (thanks again to crom and everyone else that put their 2bits in!!), the manufacturer web and phone support, cross-compatibility checks BEFORE assembly and "getting what you pay for" awareness WILL MAKE OR BREAK YOUR BUILD.

[StykFacE]

great man.... i'm glad you got it up and running. you won't be dissapointed. i still personally woulda went with the Intel C2D chip... but no worries, it's still a rockin' system. Have fun with it... :)