Single Vs. Multiple CPU's

[Muaddib65]

Ok here's the deal. I am building a new system to do that favorite of things, edit video. But I do want it to be able to do other things. So using those modern processors, and more importantly chipsets, I'm comparing single and smp systems. So realizing that I am going to be using Premire, a mutithreaded program that can use these two processors, is there a difference, and if so, how much of one? so...which is more powerfull...

2 amd mp processors

1 amd xp processor

1 intel processor

The amd would be one of the new 333mhz babies

The intel one of the 533mhz variety

Keep in mind what is coming in the future,that future being like the next 3 months. Also I am not only going to be editing video, that's the reason I'm building the box, but it's also to retire my P3 500 box thats more screwed up than the royal tenenbaums. There is a budget, but not a small one.

So let it begin, I want tons of messages here, technobable will not be frowned upon, hopefully neither are stupid questions. Lets put all that knowledge resting in those brillant heads of yours to the test, which would win. a Smp, a xp, or a p4.

 

[Lonyo]

If your budget is big enough, or you're willing to wait, then a hyper-threading P4 might do well for you. It can do multiple threads at once, so your program would be slightly faster. That being said, I'm not sure if a HT P4 would be more or less expensive than 2 slower AMD's.
You might want to investigate the HT P4's, and I think a HT P4 would win over single AMD, but I'm not sure about whether it would be better than 2 AMD MP's, probably not.

 

[KingofFah]

The last time I did research on MP systems, there was a problem with running two CPUs. The OS would only set 50% usage to each CPU. I doubt that is still an issue, at least not in smp os's like xp pro and applications that support smp. I have also read that there is a decent amount of improvement between a single and a multiple system. Understand that AMD MP's are only unlocked XP's; however, I am unsure of the situation with the tbred core. Just how much is the budget. For some people 1500$ is enough to build a killer system, and other would pay 3000$ for that same system. When I was about to buy my computer, I had a price of a little under 1200 for the single system and around 1900 for a dual setup with the tyan thunder (expensive board, but the best for dual).

 

[ChemEngr]

The 50% usage was out of the total of both cpus. So each one fully maxed out is 50% of the overall processing power, which is normal.

 

[KingofFah]

It is still only 50% each? Even in the XP?

 

[mechBgon]

On a multithreaded app where both CPUs are able to get work to do, you can expect to see 100% utilization on both at the same time. Caligari trueSpace 4, 5 and 6 are examples (in raycasting rendering, at least). The hyperthreaded P4 seems to be at its best when there are two dissimilar tasks going on, so you would want to ask around at a Premier forum to see what the real-world gains are.

Currently, the fastest dual-MP setup would weigh in with dual 2400+'s at 2.0GHz apiece. Looks like two of them would set you back about $520 at Newegg, including a pair of Taisol 760's for heatsink/fan units. If you assume that Premier can add 60% more performance from the second CPU, that's the equivalent of about 3.2GHz on a single CPU (in trueSpace the boost happens to be near 100%). By AMD's new PR scheme, that would come out to...

(3 x 3200MHz / 2) - 600 = PR4200+ assuming CPU #2 is providing an effective 60% performance improvement.

So that sounds good on paper, about 4000MHz worth of power on tap for a little lower price than a 3.06GHz P4. You may want to read this article carefully if you're contemplating ever maxing the board out with more than a couple R-ECC 1Gb modules... there's a reason some dual-AMD boards come with funky supersized power connectors! They need 'em to power all that RAM!

I believe there will be an updated MPX chipset, the 768MPX, which supports 333MHz-bus CPUs (Bartons with 512kb L2 would be naturals for servers), so you may want to keep that in the back of your mind too. On Intel's side, they're brewing up more dual-DDR boards with higher bus speeds.

 

[Muaddib65]

Well after all I've read I think I'm going dual. It's just better for what I want to do. All I have to do decide weither or not to go dual xeon's or mp's.

Thanks for all your help guys.

 

[PeeluckyDuckee]

I'm not sure what AMD has up its sleeve in the SMP arena in the next 3 months, but if you have the loonies, the Xeons look interesting. What's your budget? Give us something to work with here. For SMP on a budget, AMD seems to be the way to go. For what you do, a real SMP rig will benefit you more than any HT implementation. IMO, 2 physical processors is always better than 1 physical and 1 logical processor, especially when the CPU is going to be maxed out during operation for any length of time.

If you do go the Xeon route, you benefit from true SMP as well as any benefits derived from HT technology (if any). The new 7505 chipset supports AGP 8X, DCDDR, and can be paired up with a variety of gigabit lan, onboard lan/video, PCI-X, U320 if you need such things. Hopefully the new 3.06Ghz Xeons and 3Ghz Xeons coming out in 1Q will help drop the prices on current Xeon procs. The 2.8Ghz part is pretty expensive @ ~$520ish right now.

In the end, you get what you pay for. The route you choose may also depend on how often you wish to upgrade as well.