MadTracker - Forum - upgrading my comp question

Color scheme

Profile

FAQ

Forum

General discussion

upgrading my comp question

Reply to topic

Post new topic

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Brian
User

Joined: 10 Aug 2003

Posted: Sun Aug 10 2003 20:03 upgrading my comp question
Hello fellow MT users! I am new here, and I have a question for you. I am going to upgrade my comp and i was wondering which route to take. Here's my dilemma. I could do 1 of 2 things: 1. One AMD XP 3200+ at 400MHz bus speed, PC400 DDR ram, and a new HD at SATA 150 2. Two AMD MP 2600+ but only at 266MHz bus speed, PC266 DDR ram, and a new HD at ATA 100 Which would be better do you think, and why? thanks

Yannick
MadTracker Author

Joined: 16 Apr 2003
Location: Belgium

Posted: Sun Aug 10 2003 20:57
I have a dual AMD MP 2400+ myself. The bad point is the FSB frequency and AGP stuck to 4x, but the good thing it's that it's true symmetrical processing. This is the recommended platform for development (for real multi-threading testings). And also, SMP systems never hang; because if one CPU is fully used, you still have another one free. But for a more general use, go for a unique CPU system. SMP systems are hotter, more noisy and more expensive (in both $$$ and power consumption). And the 400MHz FSB is a big plus for games and general use. Also, AGP support is higher than 4x. So if you are a serious developer, go for the MP. Otherwise, go for the XP. Yannick

Sunbuster
Registered User

Joined: 05 May 2003
Location: Finland

Posted: Sun Aug 10 2003 21:53
True! Also, if you aren't a developer or use any proggies that utilize the two processors well, then a single CPU at current standards will be enough to handle most tasks you throw at it (maybe some image processing will take 10mins instead of 5, you get the point), and it will certainly be enough to handle Madtracker I'd say the biggest bottleneck in todays computers are the HDD's, so if you can get a SATA drive by leaving out one CPU then I'd say go for it, since a SATA drive is just about the fastest you can go without turning over to SCSI right now. And if you make sure you get a Motherboard with SATA-RAID support (or a addon SATA-card with RAID), then you have the option of adding a second SATA-drive later on, and putting it in a RAID config to theoretically double your disc speed. But no matter what you do, don't go for ATA100. No use getting a slower drive, when a ATA133 would cost only a couple of dollars more. Also, I'd recommend getting as much RAM as you can afford 512MB almost being a minimum. hope that helped

Inge
Man-At-Arms

Joined: 04 May 2003
Location: Nieuw Lekkerland @ Holland

Posted: Sun Aug 10 2003 23:00

Sunbuster wrote:

True! Also, if you aren't a developer or use any proggies that utilize the two processors well, then a single CPU at current standards will be enough to handle most tasks you throw at it (maybe some image processing will take 10mins instead of 5, you get the point), and it will certainly be enough to handle Madtracker Wink

I'd say the biggest bottleneck in todays computers are the HDD's, so if you can get a SATA drive by leaving out one CPU then I'd say go for it, since a SATA drive is just about the fastest you can go without turning over to SCSI right now. And if you make sure you get a Motherboard with SATA-RAID support (or a addon SATA-card with RAID), then you have the option of adding a second SATA-drive later on, and putting it in a RAID config to theoretically double your disc speed.
But no matter what you do, don't go for ATA100. No use getting a slower drive, when a ATA133 would cost only a couple of dollars more.
Also, I'd recommend getting as much RAM as you can afford 512MB almost being a minimum.

hope that helped Smile

I don't want to start any discussion, but the difference between ata 100 and ata 133 is very minimal, and ata 133 will restrict you to buying Maxtor drives (since they developed it and are the only using party). S-ata is nice, a good & stable board is just as important. If using AMD, go for nforce 2 (asus A7N8X (search for a latest revision) is doing wonderfully fine) and dual channel memory. Nvidia is beating VIA quite hard at the moment (even the KT600 is performing less well).

Another point of interest: hardware publishers of high-end soundcards always use Intel cpu's to show their benchmark-results. Makes you think about how these cards are build, and with what kind of optimizations, isn't it? Smile

If possible, go for Intel P4 2.6 or higher (in combination with MSI NEO 2 865/875 or something). It will cost you quite some though Rolling Eyes

Inge (who hopes he used the right names and all that...just been on vacantion, so I might mixed up some things here).

Care for a game of Monopoly?

Sunbuster
Registered User

Joined: 05 May 2003
Location: Finland

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 00:34
Sorry, you started a discussion Maxtor ain't the only one with ATA133 drives, at least Samsung has them also Anyway, you're right, the performance difference is minimal, but it's there. And considering that a Maxtor 80GB ATA133 drive costs 84.60� and a Seagate 80GB ATA100 costs 84.00� (distributor prices), why not spend the extra cents and gain the few performance points? Maxtor don't afaik have a bad reputation when it comes to HDD's, or do they?

Brian
User

Joined: 10 Aug 2003

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 00:50
Wow, thanks for all your suggestions and insight! To clear up some questions you all had, here is what I'm thinking of doing (my first option): 1 AMD XP 3200+ processor (400Mhz FSB) 1 Asus A7N8X Deluxe 2 512MB Kingston PC400 DDR ram (Dual-Channel) 1 Soundblaster Audigy2 Platimun Ex soundcard 2 120GB Seagate SATA drives (in RAID) 1 NVidia GeForce4 Ti 4600 video card (AGP 4x) 400watt power supply Asus' official site says the A7N8X board can handle up to an AMD XP 3000+ processor, so I don't know how a 3200+ would work on it.... I will be using Windows XP Pro, Pro Tools, Reason, Sound Forge, Cool Edit, Calkwalk SONAR, and of course MadTracker! So if you think this set-up is better than a dual proccessor set-up (losing the ability to use SATA150 RAID, losing the 400Mhz FSB, losing the Dual-Channel ram, etc -- but gaining an extra processor) then that's what I'll do!

Tom
Registered User

Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Location: Germany/Munich

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 06:42
I would recommend to replace the audigy against a Terratec EWX 24/96 if you only want to make music with your PC because this card has ASIO-Support for low latency on playing for example software synths in Sonar or Madtracker 3 (which should arrive soon ) I found the Terratec card here in germany for 133 EUR. Cheaper than the audigy platinum... You use Pro Tools!? I hope this helps, Servus Thomas

Brian
User

Joined: 10 Aug 2003

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 07:06

Tom wrote:

I would recommend to replace the audigy against a
Terratec EWX 24/96 if you only want to make music with your PC because this card has ASIO-Support for low latency on playing for example software synths in Sonar or Madtracker 3 (which should arrive soon Very Happy

)
I found the Terratec card here in germany for 133 EUR.
Cheaper than the audigy platinum...

You use Pro Tools!? Shocked

I hope this helps,

Servus Thomas

Well that card looks nice, except that nowhere does it say anything about Windows XP driver support... And yes I plan on using Pro Tools, it's a bit much for my current set-up

Yannick
MadTracker Author

Joined: 16 Apr 2003
Location: Belgium

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 09:19
I'd go for a Terratec also. They have a very good quality/price ratio. And if you ask me, I'd work with Windows 2000. Yannick

mikx
Registered User

Joined: 05 May 2003
Location: Melbourne

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 09:32
hi! i think go for a GeforceFX rather than Geforce4. even the cheapest FX still outclocks a 4600, even though its really not by much, while keeping up with new rendering technology.. (uh, hope i'm right, that news is about two months old as far as i'm concerned..) -mikx

Sunbuster
Registered User

Joined: 05 May 2003
Location: Finland

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 09:36
Does Pro Tools work on WinXP? Afaik it doesn't work on systems based on the NT kernel. On Digidesigns homepage, where you can download the free version, they only talk about win98/Me support... I once tried installing the free version on my win2kpro computer, and the install proggie promtly said it won't work. Don't know, maybe it does work on winXP, maybe you know something I don't Anyway, that setup you listed (with one processor) looks sweet. I wouldn't worry too much about the Mobo officially only supporting CPU speeds up to 3000+ only. That's usually a minimum they quarantee, but often it's possible to run CPU's higher than the recommended. And besides, I'm sure if you try it out and it doesn't work, you can bring the stuff back to where you bought it and replace it with something else and about the Terratec, you could always fire away an e-mail to their customer support, or read the FAQ here. It's in german, but the list at point 2 lists all supported OSes, winXP is very much on that list Would be my choice if I was buying

Sunbuster
Registered User

Joined: 05 May 2003
Location: Finland

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 09:38

Yannick wrote:

And if you ask me, I'd work with Windows 2000. Wink

Yannick

why? What would be the advantage of Win2k over XP Question

Brian
User

Joined: 10 Aug 2003

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 09:43
Sure they always say that after you pay $200 for Windows XP Pro! Thanks for the suggestion though

Brian
User

Joined: 10 Aug 2003

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 09:52
Makes me wish I could read German... oh vell. So you all like the Terratec EWX 24/96 sound card eh? I like it now that I look at it. I certainly want a sound card I won't have to upgrade from for many years to come. The EWX 24/96 is the highest pick you think?

Sunbuster
Registered User

Joined: 05 May 2003
Location: Finland

Posted: Mon Aug 11 2003 10:17
well, I haven't used it myself, but I have only heard good things about it from people. But I was surfing around the Terratec site, and came across the DMX 6FIRE 24/96, which also seems pretty neat IMO. But I don't know if the EWX 24/96 would have better sound reproduction or something. They're both based on the same technology, which would suggest that there is no notable difference in sound quality (their technical specs are exactly the same). When comparing the two imo the DMX 6FIRE has a better set of connectors, since they're in the break out box. What especially caught my eye is that the EWX 24/96 would require a midi-splitter cable for you to be able to connect a midi-device, whereas the DMX 6FIRE has in and out connectors in the break out box directly (no need for splitter cables). Plus it has a few more inputs and outputs, again because of the break out box. Maybe someone with more knowledge and visdome on Terratec could shed some light on the matter?

Reply to topic

Post new topic

Page 1 of 5

All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next