computer components & hardware - Which is better: AMD Athlon XP 1800+ or Intel Pentium 2 GHz?

HardwareBanter (http://www.hardwarebanter.com/index.php)

- Homebuilt PC's (http://www.hardwarebanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=36)

- - Which is better: AMD Athlon XP 1800+ or Intel Pentium 2 GHz? (http://www.hardwarebanter.com/showthread.php?t=16195)

Which is better: AMD Athlon XP 1800+ or Intel Pentium 2 GHz?

I'm creating a new PC - I'd like to find out which
CPU will give better performance in a PC used for
digital video editing:

An AMD Athlon XP 1800+ or an Intel Pentium 2GHz?

Thanks in advance.

When I build a new computer I don't think about what CPU to use as much as I
think about what motherboard to choose because, for many reasons, I choose
Intel Pentium.

If I were you, I would get ASUS P4C800-E Deluxe motherboard. It is a very fast,
extremely reliable. It is still very stable even when overclocked. Intel
designs and manufactures motherboard chipsets for its own CPUs for better,
faster, and more reliable system performance, and this motherboard has the
latest Intel 875P chipset with PAT(Intel Performance Acceleration Technology).

Intel Pentium4 performs better than Athlon when it comes to video editing, but
the difference in performance is not so great to choose one CPU over another. I
would choose Pentium because they manufacture their own motherboard chipset,
and every software company uses Pentium CPUs as a norm for their applications.

When it comes to video editing, it is not just about CPU performance. It is
also about how much of the burden is taken over by the well performance of a
video card. Here, the performance of the video card is very crucial. If your
budget allows, get ATI Radeon 9800 Pro. It is the best video card. Recently ATI
released Radeon 9800XT which it has faster GPU and memory speed. It performs
**not** a lot, but a little better than Radeon 9800 Pro simply because a new
driver that is specific for the Radeon 9800XT is still ongoing. After the new
driver is released, difference in performance will be more noticeable.

Pccomputerdr wrote:

When it comes to video editing, it is not just about CPU performance. It
is also about how much of the burden is taken over by the well performance
of a video card. Here, the performance of the video card is very crucial.
If your budget allows, get ATI Radeon 9800 Pro. It is the best video card.

Here's some REAL BS!! The video card has ZERO to do with video editing
performance other than if it has a fast enough ramdac to paint the 2D
images. Anything better than say an S3 2 meg should be able to EASILY deal
with this.

--

Stacey

Here's some REAL BS!! The video card has ZERO to do with video editing
performance

Then remove video card from computer! Let's see if you can do any editing. ;-)

Pccomputerdr wrote:

Here's some REAL BS!! The video card has ZERO to do with video editing
performance

Then remove video card from computer! Let's see if you can do any editing.
;-)

Miss the word "performance"?? You were claiming a better video card will
improve video editing performance, which is total BS. As long as the card
can paint the screen (the part of my post you snipped out!) it's plenty
good enough.

So are you saying you stand by the BS post you made earlier?

"Here, the performance of the video card is very crucial. If your
budget allows, get ATI Radeon 9800 Pro."

If you believe this you obviosuly have NEVER tested this nor ever done any
video editing.. Crap like this just steers people in the WRONG direction.
--

Stacey

If you believe this you obviosuly have NEVER tested this nor ever done any
video editing.. Crap like this just steers people in the WRONG direction.

Idiot, good video card will give you overall and above-all improvement.

Idiots like you try to build a good system using a good motherboard and CPU and
then throw in a ****ty video card. Have you heard anything called system
performance, moron? I guess not...

Pccomputerdr wrote:

If you believe this you obviosuly have NEVER tested this nor ever done any
video editing.. Crap like this just steers people in the WRONG direction.

Idiot, good video card will give you overall and above-all improvement.

??? How does an expencive video card focused on hardware 3D rendering for
gamers going to affect video editing performance AT ALL? Video editing is a
2D application just like a word processor. Are you going to now say office
work stations and file servers should all be using ATI9800 cards as well?
The only place a card like the ATI9800 will improve performance is in 3D
software (which video editing isn't) that can adress the hardware rendering
these have.

Idiots like you try to build a good system using a good motherboard and
CPU and
then throw in a ****ty video card.

Who said ****ty? A matrox G550 (about $100) is by far the BEST video card
for someone doing strictly video editing. It's also hundreds of $$ cheaper
than that 3D game card you sugested which could be spent on a faster CPU
that would do something. Then again even a ragepro 8meg ATI card would
=PERFORM= just as well as far as editing performance. The video card has
NOTHING to do with the time it takes for the video to render.

Have you heard anything called system
performance, moron?

Yep and using a ATI9800 video card in a video editing system isn't going to
improve =performance= AT ALL over a much cheaper card that isn't focused on
3D game performance. A system should be designed for the intended use and
to put an ATI 9800 in a system for editing video is a waste of money and
won't perform as well in 2D (not as sharp) as a G550.
--

Stacey