What's Better: Dual Xeon Processors or an AMD Athlon 64?

[Hugh DiMauro]

I was looking at Alienware computers and the choice between their two top models. Which is the better choice for video editing: Dual Xeon Processors or an AMD Athlon 64?

[Glenn Chan]

Dual Xeons most likely. However, you should pick your editing software first. Some software like Premiere Pro is highly specific. Premiere Pro may benefit more from a Matrox RTX100 on a single processor system than on dual Xeons. (I'd choose Final Cut over Premiere though.)

2- Alienware is very, very overpriced. If you have that kind of money, why not get a system from a turnkey vendor (which should provide better support)?

Or if you're willing to do some research, ask other people for working combinations of parts and get a custom computer built from a manufacturer such as monarchcomputers.com or a local computer shop.

Check out resellerratings.com too... alienware's rating is ok (8/10ish), monarch's is better, and dell/hp/sony's are all abysmal.

Anyways, figure out the editing platform you want first... then figure out the computer.

[Dave Perry]

I would suggest dual G4s or G5s and Final Cut Pro.

[Don Donatello]

the question should be dual xeon's or dual AMD's ..

i believe in many computer reviews you'll find the fastest computers using AMD 64bit CPU ...

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/artic...,119989,00.asp

[Glenn Chan]

At games, AMD is usually better. But at video, Intel usually is better. This might change when the new version of Windows comes out, as it is NUMA-aware and will gives Opterons a boost. There's already benchmarks showing the effects of NUMA.

As well, things may change as processors go dual core. see http://www.techreport.com/reviews/20...5/index.x?pg=1

If you want things to be simple, look at manufacturer's recommended specs. Those are generally a good guide.

2- There's also systems available that support four or more processors. That would make an interesting rig...

[Hugh DiMauro]

Thank you all for your input. If this helps:

I am a Vegas man, through and through.

[Ron Evans]

To be fair you should have asked Dual Xeons or Dual Opterons, that is more like for like. The answer in this case is probably Dual Opterons. For Intel versus AMD for single processors the P4 is better for encoding, AMD 64 better for games and just about everything else. For dual processors the Opterons are faster than the Xeons like for like and with the dual core parts available there is no contest, Opterons will be a lot faster, run cooler and use less power.

Ron Evans

[Spike Spiegel]

someone mentioned macs? lol, those puppies can't compare with the opteron breed, dual or not..

[Pete Wilie]

Do you guys have links to articles comparing Xeons and Opterons from a end-user perspective? In other words, if I want to build a AVID xPressProHD editing machine what are the cost/benefit trades between Xeons and Opterons?

While I am interested in the technical side of Opterons, right now I'm more interested in what their benefit is, and how much it will cost. I did a google search but only came up with a lot of very technical articles.

Thanks.

[Ron Evans]

Go search on www.AMDzone.com, www.anandtech.com or www.Tomshardware.com they will usually point you to some other sources too.

Ron Evans

[George Ellis]

Here is the only post I know of that compares and they may not be equal comparisons on the dual cores. Too new.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=2397&p=17

[Glenn Chan]

Hugh:
The best benchmarks to look for are the rendertest.veg results and Main Concept MPEG2 encoder (for DVD architect). Rendertest.veg results are best found by searching the official Sony forum at
LINK: http://mediasoftware.sonypictures.co....asp?ForumID=4

I don't think there's been any threads relating to Vegas 6 and dual processors, so it may be a good idea to start a thread there. My gripe about rendertest.veg is that it doesn't mimic real world projects (doesn't use real media using DV codec, uses best rendering mode instead of good, unrealistic filter usage). On the other hand, there are many results for it.

As far as the Main Concept MPEG2 encoder goes, there are benchmarks for that on many computer hardware sites. The ones I like are:
anandtech.com
techreport.com
xbitlabs.com

Sometimes the computer hardware sites run sketchy non-real world benchmarks, like synthetic benchmarks (i.e. sandra) and look at benchmark results that don't make a difference (i.e. games... frame rates above 90fps don't matter, because you can't see the difference). If you look at benchmark results, they vary a lot depending on the benchmark. Look for benchmarks that are RELEVANT to what you do- video editing. The two benchmarks I metioned above are perhaps the most relevant. A little better would be to benchmark one of the projects you have worked on, but without access to various computers that would be hard.

2- Tom's Hardware tends to have sketchier testing methodology than the other computer sites mentioned above in my opinion.

[Devlyn Hukowich]

Just remember that most software does not take advantage of dual processors, even if the OS will. Some stuff is better off with rendering on another fast single processor system.

[Pete Wilie]

As every day passes more and more SW does support and make good use dual processors. It's always best to check the specs of the SW you will be running, but Avid XpressPro HD, Apple FCP, and Pinnacle Liquid Edition 6 are just 3 professional NLEs that DO make use of dual processors. If there wasn't any SW that uses dual processors, then few would be buying the P4 hyperthreading processors (looks like dual processors to applications).

[Hugh DiMauro]

My HT Gateway uses Vegas 6 just fine for now. I won't be switching computers any time soon.