Pentium D at DVinfo.net

Liam Dempsey · June 27th, 2005, 07:00 PM

Hi,
Does anyone know how well the new Pentium D processors will run in a workstation for editing DV and HDV? Are the Pentiums better than the AMD Opterons?

Thanks

Alex Barabas · July 5th, 2005, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liam Dempsey

Hi,
Does anyone know how well the new Pentium D processors will run in a workstation for editing DV and HDV? Are the Pentiums better than the AMD Opterons?

Thanks

The AMD Athlon X2 will outperform the Pentium D by quite a bit -- check out the benchmarks and wait a couple more months!

Edward Borden · July 7th, 2005, 10:40 AM

The great thing about the new dual-core chips is that they negate the need for dual PHYSICAL processors (unless your dual physical processors are ALSO dual-core). This is a huge thing for customers on the lower end because they can get the dual processor functionality without paying for the expensive boards, bigger chassis, more cooling, more wattage. It's all-around less expensive and JUST AS FAST! The other great thing is that the dual-core chips are using the same chipsets and boards as their single core predecessors - that means that there is no need for us to 'wait' for this technology to be tested because it's the same thing that we've been running.

Liam, you need to consider two things :
#1 : Price. Are you going to buy the dual-core Opterons? I'll assume not because they are incredibly expensive and only people that need extremely high-end workstations and are making lots of money with those workstations are buying them. So then your choice is between the AthlonX2 and the PentiumD's. They are similarly prices and are both dual-core.

#2 : PD or AthlonX2. Big problem that we've always had with AMD is incompatibility with hardware. They are fine with 95% software - it's the hardware like Matrox RTX, Canopus, Bluefish that has always been a problem. If you are not using these types of hardware, the AthlonX2 is performing overall better than the Intel chips.

Glenn Chan · July 7th, 2005, 12:57 PM

The Pentium Ds require some of the newer chipsets? That may be something to look out for.

Some motherboards may also need BIOS flashes beforehand if you are upgrading.

Edward Borden · July 7th, 2005, 02:41 PM

They do require newer chipsets but those chipsets are still based on existing chipset technology. We aren't re-inventing the wheel with these, and that is my point. We are still using the same Pentium architecture that we have been for years. When we moved from Northwood to Prescott we changed more than we are changing with Dual-Core, and that was virtually seemless. This is cake - and that makes it a great thing for our industry because of the fears that people have of incompatibility.

Mark Williams · July 7th, 2005, 05:02 PM

Check out this dual-core setup and let me know what you think. Seems pretty reasonably priced unless I am missing something....

http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...dim91min&s=bsd

Regards,

Mark

Alex Barabas · July 7th, 2005, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Williams

Check out this dual-core setup and let me know what you think. Seems pretty reasonably priced unless I am missing something....

http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...dim91min&s=bsd

Regards,

Mark

The 830 is a good bang for the buck now... are you guys serious that the AMD X2 doesn't work w/ the Matrox RTX?

Glenn Chan · July 7th, 2005, 06:12 PM

Mark:
That Dell would work. Typically with Dell, they make money off the overpriced upgrades (some of them are reasonably priced though).

I would look at throwing in your own upgrades:

Firewire card - $25 or less
should come with a 6pin-4pin firewire cable

DVD burner - NEC, Pioneer, benQ about $50?
Those that come with Nero are nice, because it's a good program for burning DVDs.

RAM: Maybe upgrade this, depending on the program you want to run. Look at recommended specs of your particular program. Vegas is fine with 512MB, although RAM preview would benefit from 1GB.
Optimal performance on Pentium platforms is with pairs of the exact same RAM... it makes a few percent difference (may be a bigger difference with a dual core system, but I don't have any way of checking). Mismatched RAM will slow your computer down very slightly while rendering.
2X512MB DDR2 is ~$89 on newegg.com... maybe throw that in and eBay off the old sticks.

More hard drive space - look at rebate deals / loss leaders, they are pretty common. Try hot deals sites... gotapex.com, fatwallet.com, bensbargains.net, etc.

Glenn Chan · July 7th, 2005, 06:19 PM

Quote:

The 830 is a good bang for the buck now... are you guys serious that the AMD X2 doesn't work w/ the Matrox RTX?

I think he's just saying they may not work with the Matrox RTX.

Then again, there have been posts about Intel systems not working with particular hardware acceleration cards.

I'd just do your research anyways if you think you might want to use one of those cards.

Mark Williams · July 7th, 2005, 06:29 PM

Glenn,

Great advice the way you have configured it. The Dell is looking like a really good dual-core deal.

Thanks,

Mark

Glenn Chan · July 7th, 2005, 06:37 PM

Liam:
Performance will depend on the specific things you want to do.

Encoding DVDs: single-core Pentium (fastest) > Pentium Ds > AMD X2 in the Main Concept MPEG2 encoder.
A licensed version of encoder is used in many software packages out there (i.e. Vegas/DVD Architect). For some reason it doesn't seem to benefit much from dual core processors.
MPEG2 encoding can go really fast anyways (close to RT), so that may not be a big deal. And it probably won't hurt your productivity much.

Vegas: Both single-core Pentiums and AMD processors run neck to neck in the rendertest.veg benchmark. The highest-clock speed AMD X2 should be faster, but it's a bit unfair because Intel doesn't have a Pentium D offering in that price range.

Premiere Pro: Some of the hardware review sites out there have benchmarks, and AMD processors are faster. I don't know why (I would've expected Pentiums to be faster).

You can also get hardware acceleration for Premiere Pro (i.e. matrox RTX100), which makes things faster in a different way.

Right now both platforms are close in performance for video editing. I don't think you'd be making a mistake to go with either platform. However, do check compatibility
A- AMD platforms can use lots of the older technologies (DDR ram, AGP video card, doesn't need a huge PSU like a Pentium D does), so it may be cheaper/better because you can cannibalize your old system.
B- Some editing programs may be picky about your system's hardware (i.e. Avid, Premiere).

At the end of the day:
A- Upgrade often, because newer and faster computers make today's stuff obsolete. It's not a big deal if you go with Intel/AMD and find out it's a little slower. When you upgrade, it won't matter.
B- Does your system work?
C- Are you productive with your system? AMD and Intel right now perform very similarly so it's not a big difference in productivity if you go with the "wrong" platform (I'm not even sure which one that is; it also depends on your budget, and your needs so there's no universal right answer).

Edward Borden · July 7th, 2005, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Barabas

The 830 is a good bang for the buck now... are you guys serious that the AMD X2 doesn't work w/ the Matrox RTX?

The Athlon64 platform will not work with the Matrox RTX hardware. I guarantee it. From the experience of building many many Matrox RTX-based computers.

Monty Heying · July 31st, 2005, 09:23 PM

[QUOTE=Edward Borden]... The other great thing is that the dual-core chips are using the same chipsets and boards as their single core predecessors QUOTE]

I'm trying to configure my system, and I don't get the use of the term "chipset". Is this the same as "instruction set"? I've seen 955 (I think) mentioned in conjunction with the P4 D-series. Why do I (or someone building a computer) need to know what chipset is involved in a particular processor? If I've chosen a software program (PP1.5) and a capture board (say Matrox NX10 or whatever) and a processor that goes with them. The next step ought ot be to select a motherboard (properly configured) that works with the captuer board and processor, and the proper RAM (e.g., DDR2/400)?

Why get bogged down in needless detail about chipsets?

Glenn Chan · July 31st, 2005, 09:55 PM

Chipset is not the same as "instruction set". In this case we're talking about the motherboard's chipset. It's the chipset, the motherboard's socket, and the BIOS that determines what processors will work in that particular motherboard.

The Matrox RTX100 happens to be incompatible with many/all of the chipsets for AMD64 processors (I believe it's incompatible with all the chipsets that support AMD64). So... if you want a system with the RTX100 in it, you (may) need to look at the Intel/Pentium side.

Another scenario:
Suppose you have a Pentium system already. If you want to upgrade to a dual core Pentium processor, you may need to upgrade the motherboard (because the chipset doesn't support the newer processors) and the power supply. And the new motherboard may not support your video card and RAM anymore, but that's digressing here.

Tim Brechlin · August 1st, 2005, 10:11 PM

Whoa, whoa, whoa -- so a dual-core Athlon X2 4200+ won't encode DVDs faster than my current 2.53 GHz Pentium 4?

July 7th, 2005, 10:40 AM	#3
Edward Borden Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Budd Lake, NJ Posts: 49	The great thing about the new dual-core chips is that they negate the need for dual PHYSICAL processors (unless your dual physical processors are ALSO dual-core). This is a huge thing for customers on the lower end because they can get the dual processor functionality without paying for the expensive boards, bigger chassis, more cooling, more wattage. It's all-around less expensive and JUST AS FAST! The other great thing is that the dual-core chips are using the same chipsets and boards as their single core predecessors - that means that there is no need for us to 'wait' for this technology to be tested because it's the same thing that we've been running. Liam, you need to consider two things : #1 : Price. Are you going to buy the dual-core Opterons? I'll assume not because they are incredibly expensive and only people that need extremely high-end workstations and are making lots of money with those workstations are buying them. So then your choice is between the AthlonX2 and the PentiumD's. They are similarly prices and are both dual-core. #2 : PD or AthlonX2. Big problem that we've always had with AMD is incompatibility with hardware. They are fine with 95% software - it's the hardware like Matrox RTX, Canopus, Bluefish that has always been a problem. If you are not using these types of hardware, the AthlonX2 is performing overall better than the Intel chips. __________________ Edward Borden President, Tantus Computers Post Production Solution Providers Video Editing/3D Workstation Integrators http://www.tantuscomputers.com 877.826.8871

July 7th, 2005, 02:41 PM	#5
Edward Borden Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Budd Lake, NJ Posts: 49	They do require newer chipsets but those chipsets are still based on existing chipset technology. We aren't re-inventing the wheel with these, and that is my point. We are still using the same Pentium architecture that we have been for years. When we moved from Northwood to Prescott we changed more than we are changing with Dual-Core, and that was virtually seemless. This is cake - and that makes it a great thing for our industry because of the fears that people have of incompatibility. __________________ Edward Borden President, Tantus Computers Post Production Solution Providers Video Editing/3D Workstation Integrators http://www.tantuscomputers.com 877.826.8871

July 31st, 2005, 09:23 PM	#13
Monty Heying New Boot Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Alameda, CA Posts: 6	What is Meant by "Chipsets"? [QUOTE=Edward Borden]... The other great thing is that the dual-core chips are using the same chipsets and boards as their single core predecessors QUOTE] I'm trying to configure my system, and I don't get the use of the term "chipset". Is this the same as "instruction set"? I've seen 955 (I think) mentioned in conjunction with the P4 D-series. Why do I (or someone building a computer) need to know what chipset is involved in a particular processor? If I've chosen a software program (PP1.5) and a capture board (say Matrox NX10 or whatever) and a processor that goes with them. The next step ought ot be to select a motherboard (properly configured) that works with the captuer board and processor, and the proper RAM (e.g., DDR2/400)? Why get bogged down in needless detail about chipsets?

June 27th, 2005, 07:00 PM	#1
Liam Dempsey New Boot Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Santa Clara, CA Posts: 8	Pentium D Hi, Does anyone know how well the new Pentium D processors will run in a workstation for editing DV and HDV? Are the Pentiums better than the AMD Opterons? Thanks

July 7th, 2005, 12:57 PM	#4
Glenn Chan Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 4,750	The Pentium Ds require some of the newer chipsets? That may be something to look out for. Some motherboards may also need BIOS flashes beforehand if you are upgrading.

July 7th, 2005, 05:02 PM	#6
Mark Williams Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Deep South, U.S. Posts: 1,526	Check out this dual-core setup and let me know what you think. Seems pretty reasonably priced unless I am missing something.... http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...dim91min&s=bsd Regards, Mark

July 7th, 2005, 06:12 PM	#8
Glenn Chan Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 4,750	Mark: That Dell would work. Typically with Dell, they make money off the overpriced upgrades (some of them are reasonably priced though). I would look at throwing in your own upgrades: Firewire card - $25 or less should come with a 6pin-4pin firewire cable DVD burner - NEC, Pioneer, benQ about $50? Those that come with Nero are nice, because it's a good program for burning DVDs. RAM: Maybe upgrade this, depending on the program you want to run. Look at recommended specs of your particular program. Vegas is fine with 512MB, although RAM preview would benefit from 1GB. Optimal performance on Pentium platforms is with pairs of the exact same RAM... it makes a few percent difference (may be a bigger difference with a dual core system, but I don't have any way of checking). Mismatched RAM will slow your computer down very slightly while rendering. 2X512MB DDR2 is ~$89 on newegg.com... maybe throw that in and eBay off the old sticks. More hard drive space - look at rebate deals / loss leaders, they are pretty common. Try hot deals sites... gotapex.com, fatwallet.com, bensbargains.net, etc.

July 7th, 2005, 06:29 PM	#10
Mark Williams Trustee Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Deep South, U.S. Posts: 1,526	Glenn, Great advice the way you have configured it. The Dell is looking like a really good dual-core deal. Thanks, Mark

July 7th, 2005, 06:37 PM	#11
Glenn Chan Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 4,750	Liam: Performance will depend on the specific things you want to do. Encoding DVDs: single-core Pentium (fastest) > Pentium Ds > AMD X2 in the Main Concept MPEG2 encoder. A licensed version of encoder is used in many software packages out there (i.e. Vegas/DVD Architect). For some reason it doesn't seem to benefit much from dual core processors. MPEG2 encoding can go really fast anyways (close to RT), so that may not be a big deal. And it probably won't hurt your productivity much. Vegas: Both single-core Pentiums and AMD processors run neck to neck in the rendertest.veg benchmark. The highest-clock speed AMD X2 should be faster, but it's a bit unfair because Intel doesn't have a Pentium D offering in that price range. Premiere Pro: Some of the hardware review sites out there have benchmarks, and AMD processors are faster. I don't know why (I would've expected Pentiums to be faster). You can also get hardware acceleration for Premiere Pro (i.e. matrox RTX100), which makes things faster in a different way. Right now both platforms are close in performance for video editing. I don't think you'd be making a mistake to go with either platform. However, do check compatibility A- AMD platforms can use lots of the older technologies (DDR ram, AGP video card, doesn't need a huge PSU like a Pentium D does), so it may be cheaper/better because you can cannibalize your old system. B- Some editing programs may be picky about your system's hardware (i.e. Avid, Premiere). At the end of the day: A- Upgrade often, because newer and faster computers make today's stuff obsolete. It's not a big deal if you go with Intel/AMD and find out it's a little slower. When you upgrade, it won't matter. B- Does your system work? C- Are you productive with your system? AMD and Intel right now perform very similarly so it's not a big difference in productivity if you go with the "wrong" platform (I'm not even sure which one that is; it also depends on your budget, and your needs so there's no universal right answer).

July 31st, 2005, 09:55 PM	#14
Glenn Chan Inner Circle Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 4,750	Chipset is not the same as "instruction set". In this case we're talking about the motherboard's chipset. It's the chipset, the motherboard's socket, and the BIOS that determines what processors will work in that particular motherboard. The Matrox RTX100 happens to be incompatible with many/all of the chipsets for AMD64 processors (I believe it's incompatible with all the chipsets that support AMD64). So... if you want a system with the RTX100 in it, you (may) need to look at the Intel/Pentium side. Another scenario: Suppose you have a Pentium system already. If you want to upgrade to a dual core Pentium processor, you may need to upgrade the motherboard (because the chipset doesn't support the newer processors) and the power supply. And the new motherboard may not support your video card and RAM anymore, but that's digressing here.

August 1st, 2005, 10:11 PM	#15
Tim Brechlin Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Dubuque, IA Posts: 39	Whoa, whoa, whoa -- so a dual-core Athlon X2 4200+ won't encode DVDs faster than my current 2.53 GHz Pentium 4?