AMD or Intel for music production.

M

MarkyBeatz954

New member
I just had a horrible experience with a 3.0GHZ Pentium D computer. And I will need a better faster PC. I was looking at Core2Duo PC's but I also saw some AMD ones. I know absolutely nothing about AMD processors. I just know that my laptop was a AMD Turion 64 and it was pretty stable. I would just like to know what you guys think about the two.
 
First the Intel D cpu's were garbage. The Intel Core2Duo's are far better. Having said that, I love AMD processors. Get an X2 AMD or a Core2Duo. The new Intel's are stronger than the AMD's but the X2's are better than the Core2Duo's.

Get a AMD or Intel dual core, an ASUS or Gigabyte motherboard (motherboard quality is very important), a 7200rpm harddrive, any video card that isn't built in, and at least 2gb of DDR2 ram and you will be fine. DON'T FORGET the audio interface. Anything that supports ASIO drivers. M-audio or something.

Check this website: www.pricewatch.com

and this one: www.pc-infinity.com
 
Last edited:
X2 AMD just got that. works a treat. more stable than my old intel p4
 
Always been an AMD fan personally, and all the PC's I've built since my Slot 2 Pentium 2 (I'm talking the NES Cart style plastic enclosed CPU's!) have been AMD.

Having said that, since Phenom, I have switched to Intel. The C2D and Quad core are just too strong in the desktop/laptop arena, and the Xeons blow the opterons away in the server realm.

But AMD needs to keep doing well in order to keep Intel on their toes and making quality products.

Get whichever you personally decide, neither one is leaps and bounds ahead of the other, unless you're really into computers I doubt you'd really even notice or know a difference between a comparable AMD and Intel chip.
 
WhiteKidsLoveHipHop said:
Get whichever you personally decide, neither one is leaps and bounds ahead of the other, unless you're really into computers I doubt you'd really even notice or know a difference between a comparable AMD and Intel chip.
Click to expand...


given that i went for the AMD. as i got the whole machine (minus monitor) for less than intel chip & MB.
 
oxide54 said:
given that i went for the AMD. as i got the whole machine (minus monitor) for less than intel chip & MB.
Click to expand...
Yes, they are often times a little bit cheaper.

The motherboard is probably going to be a bigger factor than the CPU honestly, find a motherboard in your price range that has the features you want/need, and get the CPU that fits it.

As far as Turions go? I wouldn't recommend them for audio work, I didn't even like it for basic use on an entry level vista laptop.
 
Last edited:
Wow... thanks guys. Good information, what I got from everything is to make sure I have a good Mother Board and after that the X2 and Core2Duo has no major differences. Thanks, I will research more and then make my decision.
 
back in the pentium 4 era (and the piece of garbage pentium d), the fight was pretty much neck-and-neck, maybe amd edging just that little bit in front.

the core 2 is a different story. it's a fantastic chip by all measures and leaves amd's offerings in the dust.
 
Well Core2Duo vs AMD X2 is no battle really.
The Core2Duo kicks the AMDs topnotch processors ass any day.!!!

Dont get a AMD if you want the fastest possible cpu.

AMD Phenom which are 4 cores is also no match compared to the Intels Quad Core which also based on 4 cores.


This is the thing, if you want cheaper machine thats still very strong you got for AMD, something like 6000+ should do the trick.

However if you dont care much about the money and are happy to spend 100 bucks more totally on the mobo and cpu then you obviously should get yourself a Core2Duo, id recommend 8500 which runs at 3.16 and can easily be overclocked up to 4GHZ on stock cooling.

Intel is the way to go at this moment if you got the money and they pretty cheap if you compare what your getting for the money.

I love AMD as well but X2 cores never got the chance to battle the badboi Core2Duo from Intel.

If i was you, id wait until Intel releases their new processor called Corei7( codename Nehalem ).
It should be dropping 31th october, and thats when the prices on Core2Duo gonna drop some.


Your options :

AMD 6000+ 3 GHZ / can be overclocked to 3.2 - 3.3 GHZ.

Core 2 Duo 8500 3.16 GHZ / can be overclocked to 4 - 4.5 GHZ
^^ 8500 is a beast
 
the e8600 even more so, 'cause of its x10 multiplier. that thing tipped 6ghz on liquid nitrogen cooling.
 
True that but no home user can reach much more then 4 ghz since they dont use that stuff plus 8600 costs 150 bucks more and its not worth the price, 8500 is the way to go in his case if u get wat i mean.
 
Hey- need to buy a new desktop but not sure which processor to go with for music production. What would you choose? Quad 2 core or Phemon and why?

Thanks!
 
I love AMD and all but for audio applications their CPU's just suck.

dawbenchdsp980.jpg
 
AMD. More value for the price. Their top of the line quaf is a complete workhorse for $200. Intel's too expensive.

People think less expensive means less powerful... not the case w/ CPU. All that matters is what's under the hood.
 
CPhoenix said:
AMD. More value for the price. Their top of the line quaf is a complete workhorse for $200. Intel's too expensive.

People think less expensive means less powerful... not the case w/ CPU. All that matters is what's under the hood.
Click to expand...

i5 750 = 199$ http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115215&cm_re=i5_750-_-19-115-215-_-Product

AMD 965 = 179$ http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103727&cm_re=AMD_965-_-19-103-727-_-Product

For 20 bucks you can load 50 more multiband compressors into your project before getting sound problems and stuttering. Not 1, 5 or 10. 50 !!! I think that says all. AMD CPU's are not optimized for audio work.
 
Last edited:
musicbird said:
i5 750 = 199$ http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115215&cm_re=i5_750-_-19-115-215-_-Product

AMD 965 = 179$ http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103727&cm_re=AMD_965-_-19-103-727-_-Product

For 20 bucks you can load 50 more multiband compressors into your project before getting sound problems and stuttering. Not 1, 5 or 10. 50 !!! I think that says all. AMD CPU's are not optimized for audio work.
Click to expand...


When I compared these two processors, there's no way I figured a 2.66GHZ quad would outperform a 3.4GHZ, even if it had a few MB more cache. How does the i5 outperform AMD's top of the line?

I'm not posting to challenge... I just honestly would like to know, b/c I didn't find that information when I was researching the difference.
 
In the end, there are vast differences from cpu to cpu even within the same company and same model brand.

The question should be "which can run an audio app to full potential?" The answer would be anything current, lol.

Even with the i5/965 comparison, sure the i5 can run some 30-50 more instances of processing effects, but why care when on runs 120 fx and the other runs 170? When will either ever be pushed to those limits(not accurate calculated numbers, just making a point)?
 
Last edited:
Got bored at about 120 instances.. This is on a Phenom 955 .. At 64 samples which is 2ms.

Not under the same conditions but close enough, I call that chart BS. Pretty sure I could hit 200 without any pops.

The PC with the right components (especially interface) and maintained right is gonna do a good ass job even if its just a old dual core.

I'm gonna build a backup PC soon, gonna use a £30 CPU the AMD Sempron 140, its a single core but you can unlock a second core. I'll have a dual core 2.7GHz with 1GB RAM for about £120... Can't wait to see how many compressors I can load up lol

1279753761.jpg
 
i think dual core AMD or INTEL should be fine for most purposes...

as long as you got two cpu's, you'll be aiight...

(generally speaking)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top