Nu Builder ?s

[Gortnicktu]

A couple of humble questions from a newbie, who has already gone through the guides, etc.

I plan to build my own soon (first). I work mostly with 2D imaging, and with larger dimensions/file sizes (150-1500mb). I do some 3D rendering as well, so I want to add some processor power with 3D in mind. My meager understanding of new and emerging technologies leads to ask some questions, even after reading up a bit.

The first one is simple. I understand that the pricey graphics cards are mostly for gaming. My needs are simpler, as in dual monitor support, high refresh rates and 32 bit depth at large screen dimensions, at least on the bigger CRT monitor. So, my thinking is lesser card with lots of memory. Any insights/recommendations near the $100 price point?

Speaking of memory, processors and mb, I'm a bit confused about dual channel memory vs DDR2, at least as it applies to AMD Athlon64's and 754/939 motherboards. DDR2 sounds quite appealing for the type of work I do. It doesnt' seem realized yet on the Intel side, however, and I'm mostly persuaded to go AMD anyway. How does the dual channel memory support I read about for AMD differ from DDR2? Is DDR2 a feature that's coming soon for AMD boards?

Similarly, what I have read on dual channel support for AMD, and presumably this applies to motherboards, left me with the impression that it's limited to the 939 pin versions of the 64 processors? Can anyone offer a brief clarification as I was looking at purchasing the 754 pin Athlon 3000? Is this a much better reason to go with the 2X $ 3500 939 pin processor, aside from processor speed and upgrade ability?

Finally, is it correct to say that PCIx is only available for the high end AMD configurations? Any change expected soon?

Hope these questions aren't too simple. Any help is appreciated.

BP

 

[Valaire]

Socket 754 does not support dual channel memory, so if you want 1 gig of memory and you buy it in a 512 MB dual pack, you can still use it, it just won't operate in 'dual mode', which usually only amounts to a few percentage points difference. Socket 939, does, however support dual channel mode, so you can use that same memory in 939 and it will be a bit more efficient. I personally don't think dual channel is worth upgrading to socket 939 and spending a couple hunded more dollars on a 939 motherboard and processor unless money is absolutely not a factor.

 

[Gortnicktu]

Thanks, money is _always_ a factor.

 

[kaizersose]

Originally posted by: Gortnicktu
I plan to build my own soon (first). I work mostly with 2D imaging, and with larger dimensions/file sizes (150-1500mb). I do some 3D rendering as well, so I want to add some processor power with 3D in mind. My meager understanding of new and emerging technologies leads to ask some questions, even after reading up a bit.

The first one is simple. I understand that the pricey graphics cards are mostly for gaming. My needs are simpler, as in dual monitor support, high refresh rates and 32 bit depth at large screen dimensions, at least on the bigger CRT monitor. So, my thinking is lesser card with lots of memory. Any insights/recommendations near the $100 price point?

2D imaging stresses the processor far more than the graphics card so i would divert more funds to that area. if you plan on working with file sizes up to 1500mb (seriously large file) you will want at least a gig of ram, probably 2.

many cards can run two monitors. if you want to spend the money, you can get a a quaddro or firegl (workstation-class 2D cards) but you can probably get by with many more budget-friendly card.

 

[Gortnicktu]

Originally posted by: kaizersose

2D imaging stresses the processor far more than the graphics card so i would divert more funds to that area. if you plan on working with file sizes up to 1500mb (seriously large file) you will want at least a gig of ram, probably 2.

many cards can run two monitors. if you want to spend the money, you can get a a quaddro or firegl (workstation-class 2D cards) but you can probably get by with many more budget-friendly card.

My understanding, and I may well be mistaken, is that the faster the system bus and memory (data transfer rates in general) the better because the file sizes are so big that bottlenecks pose the bigger problem. That's one reason I was interested in the new intel chipsets, and the AMD 64s too. Asssuming MS releases it's 64 OS sometime soon, being able to run more RAM would be helpful.

I agree about RAM, which will be the greatest overall cost. That said, I'd hate to invest heavily in last generation DDR RAM not that DDR2 is a topic.

The video card is mostly to support high bit depth at 2000 x 1500 screen resolution, and or refresh rates (I don't know if refresh rates are factors of the processor card or exclusively the monitor. Nevertheless, I have the impression that bit depth and screen resolution are mostly factors of video memory. Clarification is always appreciated, however.

Didn't know the quaddro or firegl were 2D oriented cards, but I'm not up on video cards at all. I was thinking older 3D card (discounted), but with 8X AGP and 128 to 256 mb, or maybe even PCIx if it's on its way for AMD.

Thanks for the advice. I'm learning something