Workstation Processor(s) -> They are trying to sell me?
Moderator: General Moderators
- seodevhead
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 8:18 pm
- Location: Windermere, FL
Workstation Processor(s) -> They are trying to sell me?
Hey guys, I am in the market for a new PC workstation for my photoshop, development and 3D stuff. I don't play any games, so gaming isn't a part of this... but I wanted to ask you guys for your opinion on this processor setup.
I have two choices that are for the most part, about the same amount of money.
I can get a workstation with:
A) WS DUAL XEON E5345 2.33GHz, 8MB cache, 1.333 MHz FSB
or
B) Intel Core 2 Quadro QX6700 2.66GHz (quad-core)
..as my CPU.
I have never dealt with a dual processor configuration... nor have I ever dealt with the XEON's.
This computer will also be a "general-use" pc for internet, photoshop, etc. Which CPU setup do you think is superior (considering one of my options is the latest quad-core extreme chip). Thanks for any advice and recommendations.
I have two choices that are for the most part, about the same amount of money.
I can get a workstation with:
A) WS DUAL XEON E5345 2.33GHz, 8MB cache, 1.333 MHz FSB
or
B) Intel Core 2 Quadro QX6700 2.66GHz (quad-core)
..as my CPU.
I have never dealt with a dual processor configuration... nor have I ever dealt with the XEON's.
This computer will also be a "general-use" pc for internet, photoshop, etc. Which CPU setup do you think is superior (considering one of my options is the latest quad-core extreme chip). Thanks for any advice and recommendations.
- seodevhead
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 8:18 pm
- Location: Windermere, FL
- feyd
- Neighborhood Spidermoddy
- Posts: 31559
- Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:24 pm
- Location: Bothell, Washington, USA
32 bit will have a tough time running at 4GB of RAM on many systems. You should probably switch to the 64 bit version.. maybe even spring for 2003 .. or possibly wait for Vista (although I don't know it's compatibility list off hand.)
Well from looking at several technical briefs, you should probably run the dual processor Xeons. Unless the applications you're running are specifically engineered to understand dual core threading and the requirements thereof, it will likely run slower than you'd expect in many cases. Plus, I can't find any details on whether Windows XP is even compatible (or rather will work) with quad-core. Not to mention that the Xeons have 8MB caches whereas the Quad has 8MB total.
I'd also recommend the Quadro over the Geforce.
Well from looking at several technical briefs, you should probably run the dual processor Xeons. Unless the applications you're running are specifically engineered to understand dual core threading and the requirements thereof, it will likely run slower than you'd expect in many cases. Plus, I can't find any details on whether Windows XP is even compatible (or rather will work) with quad-core. Not to mention that the Xeons have 8MB caches whereas the Quad has 8MB total.
I'd also recommend the Quadro over the Geforce.
- seodevhead
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 8:18 pm
- Location: Windermere, FL
Thanks feyd... so you think I should go ahead and get the XP Pro x64 edition? It seems like everyone is trying to steer me away from the x64 bit version of XP Pro because of the "horrible" driver support. However, it seems like just about all major peripherals these days has a released patch/driver for 64-bit. What do you think? Worth the risk?
- seodevhead
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 8:18 pm
- Location: Windermere, FL
Man.. that would be great if I could use x64 XP Pro...
Some of the stuff I am using is a 3yr old HP deskjet printer... a WACOM graphics tablet, Wireless Microsoft keyboard and mouse, firewire MAXTOR external hard drive, iPod, and a Comcast NetGear Wireless Adapter. Of course my speakers are quite old (not sure if that matters). So it sounds like I would have to literally find and download all the x64 versions for all my components (won't be plug n play?)?? Thanks so much for your advice feyd.
Everyone has been trying to talk me out of getting the x64 version so much... I am a bit scared to pull the trigger.
Some of the stuff I am using is a 3yr old HP deskjet printer... a WACOM graphics tablet, Wireless Microsoft keyboard and mouse, firewire MAXTOR external hard drive, iPod, and a Comcast NetGear Wireless Adapter. Of course my speakers are quite old (not sure if that matters). So it sounds like I would have to literally find and download all the x64 versions for all my components (won't be plug n play?)?? Thanks so much for your advice feyd.
Everyone has been trying to talk me out of getting the x64 version so much... I am a bit scared to pull the trigger.
- seodevhead
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 705
- Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 8:18 pm
- Location: Windermere, FL
So if you were me... building a kick-butt machine for development and 3D.... would you go the XP Pro x64 route? And mind you, this would be your all-general-purpose PC as well.feyd wrote:A lot of components should be plug'n'play, but some will need drivers. The Wacom likely will, Microsoft's hardware likely doesn't... etc etc.
- feyd
- Neighborhood Spidermoddy
- Posts: 31559
- Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 3:24 pm
- Location: Bothell, Washington, USA
Given your list of hardware thus far, I would certainly look into it.. if I was excluding other platforms. Build a list of hardware you intend to install immediately and in the near future. If most have 64-bit drivers available, it's probably quite possible for you to use it. For the ones that don't readily have 64 bit drivers, ask them. It can't hurt to see if they're making them or if they will tell you how soon they may be available. You could even see if you could get on the beta for them if it's that urgent.