5 Dec
2010
5 Dec
'10
8:31 p.m.
I am looking to make a new computer purchase, and have decided
I want a 64bit AMD quad core processor. Before one gets to the Opterons
which start at about $205, I am looking at these two:
(A)
AMD Athlon II X4 605e 2.30 GHz Processor - Quad-core, 4000 MHz HT - 2 MB L2 - Socket AM3
PGA-941 -
SKU: BA47028 Mfg. Part No: AD605EHDGIBOX Condition: New
Price: $124.99
(B)
AMD HDZ970FBGMBOX Phenom II X4 970 3.50 GHz Processor - Quad-core - 1 MB L2 - 6 MB L3 -
SKU: BA47186 Mfg. Part No: HDZ970FBGMBOX Condition: New
Price: $184.99
That is a $60 dollar difference (prices are from mwave). For
audio, should I really spend the extra 60 bucks?
Thanks; IK
5 Dec
5 Dec
8:34 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 2:31 PM, Ivan K <ivan_521521(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I am looking to make a new computer purchase, and have
decided
I want a 64bit AMD quad core processor. Before one gets to the Opterons
which start at about $205, I am looking at these two:
(A)
AMD Athlon II X4 605e 2.30 GHz Processor - Quad-core, 4000 MHz HT - 2 MB L2 - Socket AM3
PGA-941 -
SKU: BA47028 Mfg. Part No: AD605EHDGIBOX Condition: New
Price: $124.99
(B)
AMD HDZ970FBGMBOX Phenom II X4 970 3.50 GHz Processor - Quad-core - 1 MB L2 - 6 MB L3 -
SKU: BA47186 Mfg. Part No: HDZ970FBGMBOX Condition: New
Price: $184.99
That is a $60 dollar difference (prices are from mwave). For
audio, should I really spend the extra 60 bucks?
i thought i got better value from a 6 core for $280 at newegg,
specifically a Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2GHz which I use with this mobo:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131644&Tpk=cro…
but your mileage may vary.
8:47 p.m.
This one?:
AMD HDT75TFBGRBOX Phenom II X6 1075T 3 GHz Processor - Hexa-core - 3 MB L2 - 6 MB L3 -
Socket AM3 PGA-941 - Box
SKU: AB01346 Mfg. Part No: HDT75TFBGRBOX Condition: New
Price: $205.99
Yes, it is six core and look at the price at mwave!
Your recommended motherboard seems a bit pricey to me, though.
--- On Sun, 12/5/10, Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
i thought i got better value from a 6 core for $280 at
newegg,
specifically a Phenom II X6 1090T 3.2GHz which I use with
this mobo:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131644&Tpk=cro…
but your mileage may vary.
8:36 p.m.
On 12/05/2010 08:31 PM, Ivan K wrote:
I am looking to make a new computer purchase, and have
decided
I want a 64bit AMD quad core processor. Before one gets to the Opterons
which start at about $205, I am looking at these two:
(A)
AMD Athlon II X4 605e 2.30 GHz Processor - Quad-core, 4000 MHz HT - 2 MB L2 - Socket AM3
PGA-941 -
SKU: BA47028 Mfg. Part No: AD605EHDGIBOX Condition: New
Price: $124.99
(B)
AMD HDZ970FBGMBOX Phenom II X4 970 3.50 GHz Processor - Quad-core - 1 MB L2 - 6 MB L3 -
SKU: BA47186 Mfg. Part No: HDZ970FBGMBOX Condition: New
Price: $184.99
That is a $60 dollar difference (prices are from mwave). For
audio, should I really spend the extra 60 bucks?
Why AMD? Just interest...
\r
9:36 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Ivan K <ivan_521521(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
My thinking is that for multi-core 64bit, there are less expensive
than intel. Am I wrong about this? What multi-core intel 64bit processors
are people buying?
--- On Sun, 12/5/10, rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Why AMD? Just interest...
>
> \r
In the last year:
Two i5-661 - 2 cores, 4 threads (4GB DRAM)
One i7-820 - 4 cores, 8 threads (8GB DRAM + 2 disk RAID1)
One i7-980x - 6 cores, 12 threads (24GB DRAM + 3 disk RAID1 + 2 disk RAID0)
The Intel processors seem (to me) to be more power conscience lately.
Don't forget to add up the incremental cost of electricity over the
next few years running a processor without hyper-threading if you go
that way. You might be better off spending a little more up front to
save a lot in the long term.
- Mark
9:47 p.m.
On 12/05/2010 09:36 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Ivan
K<ivan_521521(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
AMD seems to be more opensource friendly?
\r
My thinking is that for multi-core 64bit, there
are less expensive
than intel. Am I wrong about this? What multi-core intel 64bit processors
are people buying?
--- On Sun, 12/5/10, rosea.grammostola<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Why AMD? Just interest...
>
> \r
>
In the last year:
Two i5-661 - 2 cores, 4 threads (4GB DRAM)
One i7-820 - 4 cores, 8 threads (8GB DRAM + 2 disk RAID1)
One i7-980x - 6 cores, 12 threads (24GB DRAM + 3 disk RAID1 + 2 disk RAID0)
The Intel processors seem (to me) to be more power conscience lately.
Don't forget to add up the incremental cost of electricity over the
next few years running a processor without hyper-threading if you go
that way. You might be better off spending a little more up front to
save a lot in the long term.
9:54 p.m.
On Sun, 05 Dec 2010 21:47:41 +0100
"rosea.grammostola" <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/05/2010 09:36 PM, Mark Knecht wrote:
That's the impression I get too. I also don't like the way Intel was trying to
squeeze them out either :(
--
Will J Godfrey
http://www.musically.me.uk
Say you have a poem and I have a tune.
Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song.
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Ivan
K<ivan_521521(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
AMD seems to be more opensource friendly?
\r My thinking is that for multi-core 64bit, there
are less expensive
than intel. Am I wrong about this? What multi-core intel 64bit processors
are people buying?
--- On Sun, 12/5/10, rosea.grammostola<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Why AMD? Just interest...
>
> \r
>
In the last year:
Two i5-661 - 2 cores, 4 threads (4GB DRAM)
One i7-820 - 4 cores, 8 threads (8GB DRAM + 2 disk RAID1)
One i7-980x - 6 cores, 12 threads (24GB DRAM + 3 disk RAID1 + 2 disk RAID0)
The Intel processors seem (to me) to be more power conscience lately.
Don't forget to add up the incremental cost of electricity over the
next few years running a processor without hyper-threading if you go
that way. You might be better off spending a little more up front to
save a lot in the long term.
10:08 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 12:47 PM, rosea.grammostola
<rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
<SNIP>
AMD seems to be more opensource friendly?
\r
I used to think that was true, mainly due to the pre-AMD ATI history,
but reading LKML and the Intel-Gfx lists over the last 2-3 years I've
changed my mind. Intel makes contributions to kernel development and
supplies lots of Open Source hardware drivers, far more I think than
AMD. The Intel Graphics driver development is manned by Intel people
with Intel mailing addresses. They have good Linux platform bring-up
support included with retail motherboards and on their web site
including methods for updating BIOS that don't require Windows or DOS.
Don't get me wrong. I love AMD. I worked for them twice for about 8
years total and they are a great company with great products. I just
think Intels back in the lead for the last year or so. I expect AMD
will stay in the game, but get ahead I'm not sure.
Just my view,
Mark
10:10 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Don't get me wrong. I love AMD. I worked for them
twice for about 8
years total and they are a great company with great products. I just
think Intels back in the lead for the last year or so. I expect AMD
will stay in the game, but get ahead I'm not sure.
when i was researching my recent CPU & mobo upgrade, my impression was
that right now:
* Intel still produces the absolute fastest systems
* AMD offers better cost/computational-power ratio just below the fastest
* Intel offers better value down in the midrange
* AMD does better in the low end
10:23 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 1:10 PM, Paul Davis <paul(a)linuxaudiosystems.com> wrote:
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Mark Knecht
<markknecht(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I have no significant disagreements with that analysis.
Don't get me wrong. I love AMD. I worked for
them twice for about 8
years total and they are a great company with great products. I just
think Intels back in the lead for the last year or so. I expect AMD
will stay in the game, but get ahead I'm not sure.
when i was researching my recent CPU & mobo upgrade, my impression was
that right now:
* Intel still produces the absolute fastest systems
* AMD offers better cost/computational-power ratio just below the fastest
* Intel offers better value down in the midrange
* AMD does better in the low end
6 Dec
6 Dec
4:32 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 09:47:41PM +0100, rosea.grammostola wrote:
AMD seems to be more opensource friendly?
In what way?
Both companies seem to be pretty open source friendly, and both have
failings (ATI in seeming to prefer their closed source fglrx drivers,
and Intel in using PowerVR graphics cores in their GMA500 and GMA600
chipsets).
4:53 p.m.
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 09:47:41PM +0100,
rosea.grammostola wrote:
> AMD seems to be more opensource friendly?
I disagree. While AMD has a good track record with free
software... so does Intel:
1. Nearly all of their wireless drivers are free,
and have been for a long time. (..with small
arguments about the firmware...) They are also
developed in a fairly open manner.
2. Their graphics drivers are free, especially
the newer ones... and they're developed in
a fairly open manner.
3. Nearly all of their compilers and developer
tools run on Linux.
4. They (along with Nokia) are bank-rolling the
MeeGo project. It is also being developed in
an open manner with an emphasis on getting
free code into upstream.
-gabriel
midnight
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 12:36:39PM -0800, Mark Knecht wrote:
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Ivan K
<ivan_521521(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm more pro-Intel since a close encounter with an i5.
I now have a Thinkpad 410 with i5-M560 that is (mostly)
Linux-friendly, runs cool and is power thrifty.
* The Intel supplied driver sources work for the integrated GPU
under a recent kernel. (I'm using 2.6.36.)
* Important Fn-key combinations work.
* Beeps are still audible with the alsamixer beep control muted. :-(
* I'll be replacing the Realtek rtl8192se wireless card.
This is after fruitless hours compiling/fiddling stale
drivers and equally stale ndiswrapper.
* I haven't tested the firewire. It is Ricoh e832 chipset,
and appears to work, with some problems reported when
the BIOS is set to allow virtual machines. The jack
is the mini size.
My previous notebook, Toshiba Satellite L305D had an AMD
Turion x2 QL-64 processor, and run an H2O BIOS. It tended to
overheat, always needed to be set up on books for better
airflow, and was on only (barely) acceptable with clock
fixed to 1GHz.
I suppose I could have bought an external cooler.
But then the LCD developed problems...
Cheers,
Joel
My thinking is that for multi-core 64bit, there are less expensive
than intel. Am I wrong about this? What multi-core intel 64bit processors
are people buying?
--- On Sun, 12/5/10, rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Why AMD? Just interest...
>
> \r
In the last year:
Two i5-661 - 2 cores, 4 threads (4GB DRAM)
One i7-820 - 4 cores, 8 threads (8GB DRAM + 2 disk RAID1)
One i7-980x - 6 cores, 12 threads (24GB DRAM + 3 disk RAID1 + 2 disk RAID0)
The Intel processors seem (to me) to be more power conscience lately.
Don't forget to add up the incremental cost of electricity over the
next few years running a processor without hyper-threading if you go
that way. You might be better off spending a little more up front to
save a lot in the long term. - Mark
--
Joel Roth
12:10 a.m.
On 12/06/2010 12:00 AM, Joel Roth wrote:
On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 12:36:39PM -0800, Mark Knecht
wrote:
maybe you already knew but here's a "workaround" for X:
xset b off
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Ivan K
<ivan_521521(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
I'm more pro-Intel since a close encounter with an i5.
I now have a Thinkpad 410 with i5-M560 that is (mostly)
Linux-friendly, runs cool and is power thrifty.
* The Intel supplied driver sources work for the integrated GPU
under a recent kernel. (I'm using 2.6.36.)
* Important Fn-key combinations work.
* Beeps are still audible with the alsamixer beep control muted. :-(
My thinking is that for multi-core 64bit, there are less expensive
than intel. Am I wrong about this? What multi-core intel 64bit processors
are people buying?
--- On Sun, 12/5/10, rosea.grammostola <rosea.grammostola(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Why AMD? Just interest...
>
> \r
In the last year:
Two i5-661 - 2 cores, 4 threads (4GB DRAM)
One i7-820 - 4 cores, 8 threads (8GB DRAM + 2 disk RAID1)
One i7-980x - 6 cores, 12 threads (24GB DRAM + 3 disk RAID1 + 2 disk RAID0)
The Intel processors seem (to me) to be more power conscience lately.
Don't forget to add up the incremental cost of electricity over the
next few years running a processor without hyper-threading if you go
that way. You might be better off spending a little more up front to
save a lot in the long term. * I'll be replacing the Realtek rtl8192se wireless
card.
This is after fruitless hours compiling/fiddling stale
drivers and equally stale ndiswrapper.
* I haven't tested the firewire. It is Ricoh e832 chipset,
and appears to work, with some problems reported when
the BIOS is set to allow virtual machines. The jack
is the mini size.
My previous notebook, Toshiba Satellite L305D had an AMD
Turion x2 QL-64 processor, and run an H2O BIOS. It tended to
overheat, always needed to be set up on books for better
airflow, and was on only (barely) acceptable with clock
fixed to 1GHz.
I suppose I could have bought an external cooler.
But then the LCD developed problems...
Cheers,
Joel
> - Mark
8:32 p.m.
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 12:10:19AM +0100, Robin Gareus wrote:
The workaround doesn't appear to work.
In firefox, typing a non-existing text into the page search
field gives a beep.
I think I'll take this up with Lenovo.
--
Joel Roth
On 12/06/2010 12:00 AM, Joel Roth wrote:
> I now have a Thinkpad 410 with i5-M560 that is (mostly)
> Linux-friendly, runs cool and is power thrifty.
(...)
* Beeps are
still audible with the alsamixer beep control muted. :-(
maybe you already knew but here's a "workaround" for X:
xset b off
8:37 p.m.
On 12/06/2010 08:32 PM, Joel Roth wrote:
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 12:10:19AM +0100, Robin Gareus
wrote:
The workaround doesn't appear to work.
In firefox, typing a non-existing text into the page search
field gives a beep.
Well it works, here but it's an older model (X60s) running
Debian/testing+sid with xorg.
On 12/06/2010 12:00 AM, Joel Roth wrote:
> I now have a Thinkpad 410 with i5-M560 that is (mostly)
> Linux-friendly, runs cool and is power thrifty.
(...)
* Beeps
are still audible with the alsamixer beep control muted. :-(
maybe you already knew but here's a "workaround" for X:
xset b off I think I'll take this up with Lenovo.
better search google first:
http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/How_to_disable_the_pc_speaker_%28beep!%29
best,
robin
9:04 p.m.
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 08:37:33PM +0100, Robin Gareus wrote:
On 12/06/2010 08:32 PM, Joel Roth wrote:
Thanks, it works. I thought I'd been all over that site!
Joel
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 12:10:19AM +0100, Robin
Gareus wrote:
The workaround doesn't appear to work.
In firefox, typing a non-existing text into the page search
field gives a beep.
Well it works, here but it's an older model (X60s) running
Debian/testing+sid with xorg.
On 12/06/2010 12:00 AM, Joel Roth wrote:
> I now have a Thinkpad 410 with i5-M560 that is (mostly)
> Linux-friendly, runs cool and is power thrifty.
(...)
* Beeps
are still audible with the alsamixer beep control muted. :-(
maybe you already knew but here's a "workaround" for X:
xset b off I think I'll take this up with Lenovo.
better search google first:
http://www.thinkwiki.org/wiki/How_to_disable_the_pc_speaker_%28beep!%29 best,
robin
--
Joel Roth
7 Dec
7 Dec
1:15 a.m.
Joel Roth writes:
--
Janina Sajka, Phone: +1.443.300.2200
sip:janina@asterisk.rednote.net
Chair, Open Accessibility janina(a)a11y.org
Linux Foundation http://a11y.org
Chair, Protocols & Formats
Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/wai/pf
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 12:10:19AM +0100, Robin Gareus
wrote:
One person's poision may be another's food.
I wish I could get beeps working on my X61S. Alas, no joy.
Janina
On 12/06/2010 12:00 AM, Joel Roth wrote:
> I now have a Thinkpad 410 with i5-M560 that is (mostly)
> Linux-friendly, runs cool and is power thrifty.
(...)
> > * Beeps are still audible with the alsamixer beep control muted. :-(
> maybe you
already knew but here's a "workaround" for X:
xset b off
The workaround doesn't appear to work.
In firefox, typing a non-existing text into the page search
field gives a beep.
I think I'll take this up with Lenovo.
--
Joel Roth
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user(a)lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
5153
days inactive
5155
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
18 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
Folderol -
Gabriel M. Beddingfield -
Ivan K -
Janina Sajka -
Joel Roth -
Joshua Boyd -
Mark Knecht -
Paul Davis -
Robin Gareus -
rosea.grammostola