LinuxQuestions.org
Did you know LQ has a Linux Hardware Compatibility List?
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware
User Name
Password
Linux - Hardware This forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?

Notices



Poll: Which processor should I choose?
Poll Options
Which processor should I choose?

You must log in and have one post to vote in this poll. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
Results will be available after the polls close.

The nominees are:

Pentium 4
Pentium D
An AMD
Other

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 08-02-2006, 10:35 PM   #31
IsaacKuo
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA
Distribution: Debian 4.0 Etch
Posts: 1,349

Rep: Reputation: 49

I've managed to underpay

Three of my current machines are thanks to Fry's deals for $70 and $80 on Sempron 3100+/nForce3-A CPU/motherboard combo deals. Normally, just the processor costs that much! The best thing was, they were straight sale prices (no messing with rebates). I think Fry's sometimes has deals which are below cost to generate interest.

I also got several fancy heat pipe based tower heatsinks on closeout--$15 each for Coolink BAT1VS heatsinks on par with $40-50 heatsinks.
 
Old 08-03-2006, 02:47 PM   #32
drkdick
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Distribution: Fedora, custom LFS, Ubuntu Studio (RT)
Posts: 37

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD-user
dkrdick,

Ran some demos on Doom last summer - had a few glitches at the highest resolution, but for ~$600, I'll take it. Processor stays cool and the fans adjust speed depending on the heat / processor demand. Good stuff and quiet.

SD
Thanks for the info SD-user.

Cool and quiet runnings are big factors for me since the next machine I'm getting will also act as a home server of sorts.

Definitely leaning towards an AM2 X2 processor since I think dual cores would benefit my "typical usage". The energy efficient models can't be found anywhere where I live though and when they arrive I bet they'll be quite expensive.
 
Old 08-03-2006, 11:45 PM   #33
SD-user
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Mar 2005
Posts: 22

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by drkdick
The energy efficient models can't be found anywhere where I live though and when they arrive I bet they'll be quite expensive.
If you're going to build - check out newegg.com. They should have all the parts you need. Fast service. Competitive prices. Good return policy for DOAs too (not that that is really a problem). I did a lot of research into this last summer. A lot of people are very hapy with newegg's service . . . personally I've had zero problems with my box and I've been running it over a year now.
 
Old 08-04-2006, 02:30 AM   #34
drkdick
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Distribution: Fedora, custom LFS, Ubuntu Studio (RT)
Posts: 37

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD-user
If you're going to build - check out newegg.com. They should have all the parts you need. Fast service. Competitive prices. Good return policy for DOAs too (not that that is really a problem). I did a lot of research into this last summer. A lot of people are very hapy with newegg's service . . . personally I've had zero problems with my box and I've been running it over a year now.
Unfortunately they don't ship outside the U.S.

I'm sure the service/price ratio is good, but looking at their line of AMDs: I can get the 4600+ (X2 AMD) for $20 less "over here", which is still way over the $240 that is on AMD's own price list, which in turn is more than I think you should have to pay for a processor they are phasing out.

The one I've been looking for lately is the 4600+ EE(65W) model. However, even if it's been out for some time, it (or any recent reviews of it) are hard to come by. It's not among those on newegg. If I could find that model at a reasonable price, maybe I wouldn't have to wait X months for 65nm or quad core or become an involuntary test pilot for Intel.

Has anybody actually seen these energy efficient models in action?

EDIT: Seem to have found a review myself:
http://www.hothardware.com/viewartic...leid=854&cid=1
and here's another one:
http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/dis...efficient.html

Last edited by drkdick; 08-04-2006 at 11:50 AM.
 
Old 08-04-2006, 09:17 PM   #35
Penguin of Wonder
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: West Virginia
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 1,249

Rep: Reputation: 45
Why has engery efficiency become so important suddenly? I've never had a processor of any kind over heat. I've never even met a person (in person) that overheated a processor. Are you guys running low-watt power supplies or something? I understand that heat is a killer, but i've never ran into it as a problem. And the people I've met online who have, 99% of them eventually admitted to OC'in anyway.
 
Old 08-04-2006, 11:53 PM   #36
Electro
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penguin of Wonder
Why has engery efficiency become so important suddenly? I've never had a processor of any kind over heat. I've never even met a person (in person) that overheated a processor. Are you guys running low-watt power supplies or something? I understand that heat is a killer, but i've never ran into it as a problem. And the people I've met online who have, 99% of them eventually admitted to OC'in anyway.
The reason why energy efficient has become more important is some states in the US going to have or had black outs. The black outs occur more in summer than other seasons. Calinfornia has had a black out recently. If energy efficient processors are used, the power strain is a lot less and the owner can use their solar cell generators to power the equipment during the black outs. Also energy efficient processors can be used in environments that have to be quiet (<30 dB) or in very cramp areas that removes very, very little heat. Energy efficient systems are better for the Earth and easier to pay electricity bills. Energy efficient is not about using low power power supplies. It is about squeezing as much work out of something. Energy efficient does not stop at processors. Power supplies should also be energy efficient. My power supply is near 90% efficiency.
 
Old 08-05-2006, 12:05 AM   #37
IsaacKuo
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA
Distribution: Debian 4.0 Etch
Posts: 1,349

Rep: Reputation: 49
It became important because Intel was reaching the limits of how fast they could go with making their processors any faster. Due to the sheer amount of heat generated by the Pentium 4 netburst architecture, Intel tried to redesign the entire layout of computers to compensate--that's what BTX was all about.

In the meantime, though, AMD was clobbering them on CPU performance, and not even BTX was going to do anything about it. Intel's gamble on betting everything on netburst and every higher clock speeds simply wasn't able to keep up with AMD's performance with architectures emphasizing computing efficiency over clock speed.

Intel realized that they were heading for a dead end, and desperately went back to the Pentium 3/Pentium M architecture to compete with AMD. It looks like they've succeeded magnificently with Core 2 Duo, being both faster and more energy efficient than AMD's best processors. However, the clock speed is lower than the previous Pentium D processors, so the marketing guys wisely realized they needed to market based on something other than clock speed.

That's why energy efficiency became so important suddenly. It had been a way for AMD to market their processor's performance edge over the faster clocked Intel chips, and now Intel has to use the same standard to market the superiority of Core 2 Duo over its own older chips.
 
Old 08-05-2006, 08:29 AM   #38
drkdick
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Distribution: Fedora, custom LFS, Ubuntu Studio (RT)
Posts: 37

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penguin of Wonder
Why has engery efficiency become so important suddenly?
It is funny, since until not so long ago the "usual" AMDs were considered energy efficient. It only seems natural to me that when the same computational power can be achieved with less energy for almost the same price-tag, I'll go for that option (deciding between 4600+ and 4600+ EE, conroes aside).

I know the difference is almost negligible, but hey, many a mickle makes a muckle as they ... hardly say anywhere.

The reviews don't promise much though.

Last edited by drkdick; 08-05-2006 at 08:32 AM.
 
Old 08-14-2006, 01:37 AM   #39
cubdukat
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Posts: 48

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustavo Narea
Hi, Jens, and thanks for your answer!



I'm just fine with my 32-bit processor and if you say that by upgrading it I won't find a big difference, I think the best I can do is just expand my RAM. What do you suggest me to do? Are 512MB enough or should I use 1GB?



Yes, I'm still using yast. I'm definitely going to give a try to smart.

Thanks, jens, once again!
I'm sorry if I'm coming in on this late, but according to the Linux Reality podcast, the Package Manager function in Suse 10.1 is borked, and even Novell recommends people use Smart Package manager.

From what I understand, towards the end of development, there were some changes made in the way it works that caused some issues that they didn't have time to work out. Supposedly it's supposed to be fixed in the next version, but as I said before, Smart Package Manager is the way to go for 10.1.

If I'm not mistaken, you don't even have to download it; it's included in the distro.

I'm currently running Ubuntu with 512MB on a P4 2.4GHz, and it's quite snappy. Linux tends to do things a little bit more efficiently than XP does, so 512MB is a decent place to start. I also ran Suse 10.0 and 10.1 on the same machine and they too were quite respectable speed-wise.

I too am looking to build a new 64-bit system for Vista, but it will also dual-boot Linux, just like the one I'm using now. I've decided to go with the new Core 2 Duo processor for two reasons:

1. I do a lot of video editing work in XP and since most editing apps out there are coded with the P4 in mind, I'd like to stay with that, and;

2. From everything I've read, the performance increase between Core 2 Duo and similar X2 chips is much greater than ever before, not to mention that I've read of some issues with the Socket AM2 nForce boards in Linux. Not to mention that there seems to be no real performance increase by AMD's switching over to DDR2, just like when Intel switched over to Socket 775.

If I weren't bound by the needs of XP and Vista, I'd gladly dump it for Linux, but for now, i can't.
 
Old 08-14-2006, 10:00 PM   #40
Gustavo Narea
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: Venezuela
Distribution: openSUSE 10.1
Posts: 7

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Hi, cubdukat, and thanks for your answer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cubdukat
If I'm not mistaken, you don't even have to download it; it's included in the distro.
You may download it from guru, but it's not included by default.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cubdukat
I'm currently running Ubuntu with 512MB on a P4 2.4GHz, and it's quite snappy.
That's absolutely right! My parents' box, which is quite similar to mine, (also) runs Kubuntu * and it runs fast (very fast, compared to when it ran SuSE 10.1).

* Yes, I'm linuxing my family.

Cheers.
 
Old 08-15-2006, 12:11 AM   #41
Electro
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by cubdukat
I'm sorry if I'm coming in on this late, but according to the Linux Reality podcast, the Package Manager function in Suse 10.1 is borked, and even Novell recommends people use Smart Package manager.

From what I understand, towards the end of development, there were some changes made in the way it works that caused some issues that they didn't have time to work out. Supposedly it's supposed to be fixed in the next version, but as I said before, Smart Package Manager is the way to go for 10.1.

If I'm not mistaken, you don't even have to download it; it's included in the distro.

I'm currently running Ubuntu with 512MB on a P4 2.4GHz, and it's quite snappy. Linux tends to do things a little bit more efficiently than XP does, so 512MB is a decent place to start. I also ran Suse 10.0 and 10.1 on the same machine and they too were quite respectable speed-wise.

I too am looking to build a new 64-bit system for Vista, but it will also dual-boot Linux, just like the one I'm using now. I've decided to go with the new Core 2 Duo processor for two reasons:

1. I do a lot of video editing work in XP and since most editing apps out there are coded with the P4 in mind, I'd like to stay with that, and;

2. From everything I've read, the performance increase between Core 2 Duo and similar X2 chips is much greater than ever before, not to mention that I've read of some issues with the Socket AM2 nForce boards in Linux. Not to mention that there seems to be no real performance increase by AMD's switching over to DDR2, just like when Intel switched over to Socket 775.

If I weren't bound by the needs of XP and Vista, I'd gladly dump it for Linux, but for now, i can't.
Have you try Cinelerra (CVS version). It is a high quality video editing software. It is better than Adope Premiere and it seems that it can compete with Avid.

AMD's AM2 socket processors comes with virtual hardware extensions. You can use Xen Source to run both Windows and Linux at the same time with a little performance penalty. I think Intel Core 2 Duo processors have too. Only time will tell which one does better.

IMHO, DDR2 is a joke. AMD should forget upgrading to DDR2 and go for GDDR3. It is a lot faster and better.
 
Old 08-15-2006, 11:44 AM   #42
cubdukat
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Posts: 48

Rep: Reputation: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electro
Have you try Cinelerra (CVS version). It is a high quality video editing software. It is better than Adope Premiere and it seems that it can compete with Avid.

AMD's AM2 socket processors comes with virtual hardware extensions. You can use Xen Source to run both Windows and Linux at the same time with a little performance penalty. I think Intel Core 2 Duo processors have too. Only time will tell which one does better.

IMHO, DDR2 is a joke. AMD should forget upgrading to DDR2 and go for GDDR3. It is a lot faster and better.
I hadn't even thought of Cinelerra. I'd heard some really good things about it, but I think I put it out of mind because of my current system. I'd heard that you all but need a 64-bit CPU to use it well. Fortunately that's what I'm upgrading to, so it's definitely on the short list.

Same thing with Xen. I'll have to read up on how to do it. It was in an issue of Linux Format that I bought earlier this year. They should really have a magazine like that for the US market. Linux Magazine and Linux Journal aren't exactly aimed at the beginner or mid-level user like the British mags seem to be.

Depending on whether Vista can run virtualized, I may decide to build a separate Linux box instead of a dual-boot system. That probably would be the best way to go, I guess. I'll have to take a look at that when Vista gets closer to release.
 
Old 08-16-2006, 01:48 AM   #43
Electro
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,042

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by cubdukat
I hadn't even thought of Cinelerra. I'd heard some really good things about it, but I think I put it out of mind because of my current system. I'd heard that you all but need a 64-bit CPU to use it well. Fortunately that's what I'm upgrading to, so it's definitely on the short list.

Same thing with Xen. I'll have to read up on how to do it. It was in an issue of Linux Format that I bought earlier this year. They should really have a magazine like that for the US market. Linux Magazine and Linux Journal aren't exactly aimed at the beginner or mid-level user like the British mags seem to be.

Depending on whether Vista can run virtualized, I may decide to build a separate Linux box instead of a dual-boot system. That probably would be the best way to go, I guess. I'll have to take a look at that when Vista gets closer to release.
Magazines are obsolete. I keep up with computer technology by reading articles at xbitlabs.com and anandtech.com. Google news is helpful too.

I have used Cinelerra (CVS version) with an Intel Pentium 4 (Northwood core) 2 GHz with 1 GB of RAMBUS ECC memory. The speed is good enough to edit videos. Though rendering takes a long, long time.
 
Old 08-16-2006, 03:35 AM   #44
eagles-lair
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2004
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Distribution: Lindows/Linspire, SuSE, PC-BSD, ubuntu, puppy
Posts: 239

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electro
Magazines are obsolete.
Maybe so lol

However some of us prefer to read print. That's not a criticism of your view, merely an observation

The monthly glossy for which I used to write reviews some years ago has ceased print publication because of the enormous cost of production per copy on short runs. But I tell ya it's nice to see your photo in a rack full of printed stuff heh

Enjoy your reading your computer screen mate.
 
Old 08-22-2006, 01:23 AM   #45
cubdukat
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2006
Posts: 48

Rep: Reputation: 15
Sadly getting a subscription to any one of the British mags is prohibitively expensive (at the current exchange rate, I'd end up paying almost $200 for a full year!). I'm just going to keep doing what I'm doing--buying the mags at my local Barnes & Noble.

I have definitely decided to go with the Core 2 Duo E6400 chip. It's still in the affordable range, and has respectable power. With my current Linux setup (I'm now running Suse 10.0) I'm not really doing anything that taxes the hardware, but I'm going to install the DVD version of Unreal Tournament 2004 tonight. It runs a little smoother than in XP.

I'm also doing some more research into what Cinelerra needs, but I think the new system should be able handle it swimmingly.
 
  


Reply

Tags
32bit, amd, pentium, processor, ram, smart, upgrade, yast


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentium vs. AMD newbiesforever General 13 07-22-2006 05:08 PM
Pentium M processor family on kernel config jrdioko Linux - Hardware 4 08-14-2005 11:14 PM
Processor Upgrade (Pentium M) VS. Price: Which has the best price/tech ratio? hanzj Linux - Laptop and Netbook 8 03-22-2005 07:18 PM
Processor Upgrade (Pentium M) VS. Price: Which has the best price/tech ratio? hanzj General 3 03-21-2005 02:10 AM
Redhat 8.0 Incredibly slow with Pentium III Processor andrewgates1979 Linux - Hardware 6 08-17-2004 01:45 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:45 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration