What Determines Speed?

[GamingMouse]

I'm getting a new computer with essentially the single goal of fast computing power. One thing I'll be doing with it is performing complex queries on large local databases. I've been getting conflicting advice on what my priorities should be, and I'd like to clear things up.

Theoretically, which will be faster:

2G of RAM and a 2GHz CPU

OR

1G of RAM and a 3.2 GHz CPU

I'd also appreciate an explanation of any other factors that come into play, and the reasons behind your answer. Nothing too fancy, but just the broadstrokes on how the parts of a computer interact to determine speed.

I was also told that FSB speed and L2 cache are important. What are these?

Thanks for any info,
gm

 

[Blain]

Forget 2GB of memory and go with 1 and the much faster CPU.

 

[Lovehandles]

Originally posted by: GamingMouse
Theoretically, which will be faster:

2G of RAM and a 2GHz CPU
OR
1G of RAM and a 3.2 GHz CPU

Depends on mostly on what you're doing. For graphics intensive appc like Photochop, the more memory the better. If you're a heavy gamer the first option would be better. For you, you said you want more computing power, so go w/ the first option.

Originally posted by: GamingMouse
I was also told that FSB speed and L2 cache are important. What are these?

FSB = Front Side Bus. Speed at which your MB and CPU communicate.

L2 cache - type of memory that a CPU uses. Typically on-die, meaning on the chip. It is must faster and more expensive (compared to L1 cache). The larger L2 cache memory, the more computing power (and faster your system will perform overall).

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Now now. A 2 GHz Athlon 64 (3200+) kicks a P4 3.2 around. So let's hope you're dealing with the same CPU type here and the 3.2 should win.

 

[SlitheryDee]

A pentium D would probably suit your needs. I agree w/ Blain about the memory. Are you thinking of 2 specific processors in your examples? I ask because I know that the intel dual cores currently top out at 3.2 ghz and dual core seems to fit your needs.

 

[GamingMouse]

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Now now. A 2 GHz Athlon 64 (3200+) kicks a P4 3.2 around. So let's hope you're dealing with the same CPU type here and the 3.2 should win.

I have also been told that P4s are more reliable than Athlons, and that I should stay away from Athlons.

Is this true?

Btw, I will not be doing any gaming on this PC.

Thanks again,
gm

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: GamingMouse
I'm getting a new computer with essentially the single goal of fast computing power. One thing I'll be doing with it is performing complex queries on large local databases. I've been getting conflicting advice on what my priorities should be, and I'd like to clear things up.

Theoretically, which will be faster:

2G of RAM and a 2GHz CPU

OR

1G of RAM and a 3.2 GHz CPU

I'd also appreciate an explanation of any other factors that come into play, and the reasons behind your answer. Nothing too fancy, but just the broadstrokes on how the parts of a computer interact to determine speed.

I was also told that FSB speed and L2 cache are important. What are these?

Thanks for any info,
gm

 

[Lovehandles]

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Now now. A 2 GHz Athlon 64 (3200+) kicks a P4 3.2 around.

Well that's an obvious no brainer mate! I think the OP was suggesting the same family/type of CPU.

 

[DaveSimmons]

GHz by itself means nothing. Neither does any other number in isolation.

The speed of a CPU is a combination of GHz, cache, memory bandwidth and how efficiently it uses all of them. Different CPU families from intel and AMD also perform better or worse at specific tasks such as gaming or video encoding.

For example, in gaming an A64 3500+ has a GHz speed much lower than a P4 3.6 GHz but performs tremendously better.

Also, aside from the CPU you need to balance the amount of RAM and the disk type (IDE/SATA or SCSI, single or RAID0) and drives to get the most power from a given budget.

The storage tab at the top of the page can help on disks (see also StorageReview.com) and the CPU tab should include some business and disk-oriented benchmarks that might help.

A couple of questions that might get you less vague responses:

What kind of budget do you have, and what size of database will you be working with?

Will you be generating new data, and if so do you need real-time protection against data loss (RAID1 or RAID5) or is end-of-day backup acceptable?

 

[Lovehandles]

Originally posted by: GamingMouse
I have also been told that P4s are more reliable than Athlons, and that I should stay away from Athlons.

Is this true?

Pure garbage. That must be why the company (AMD) has been around for 35+ years.

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: GamingMouse

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Now now. A 2 GHz Athlon 64 (3200+) kicks a P4 3.2 around. So let's hope you're dealing with the same CPU type here and the 3.2 should win.

I have also been told that P4s are more reliable than Athlons, and that I should stay away from Athlons.

Is this true?

Btw, I will not be doing any gaming on this PC.

Thanks again,
gm

Intel will never let you down... unless you bump the voltage over 1.7v

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: Lovehandles

Originally posted by: GamingMouse
I have also been told that P4s are more reliable than Athlons, and that I should stay away from Athlons.

Is this true?

Pure rubbish!

:thumbsup:

 

[Lovehandles]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
GHz by itself means nothing. Neither does any other number in isolation.

The speed of a CPU is a combination of GHz, cache, memory bandwidth and how efficiently it uses all of them. Different CPU families from intel and AMD also perform better or worse at specific tasks such as gaming or video encoding.

Amen.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: GamingMouse
I have also been told that P4s are more reliable than Athlons, and that I should stay away from Athlons. Is this true?

No.
Athlons now run cooler than P4, run faster than P4 in many applications, and are just as stable when left at stock speed (not overclocked).

People saying that are thinking of Athlons from several years ago running on bad VIA chipsets and often run overclocked / out of spec.

 

[SlitheryDee]

If you can wait get an AMD dual core. They are designed for dual core operation, while the intel solution is 2 prescotts sort of stuck together.

 

[GamingMouse]

A couple of questions that might get you less vague responses:

What kind of budget do you have, and what size of database will you be working with?

Will you be generating new data, and if so do you need real-time protection against data loss (RAID1 or RAID5) or is end-of-day backup acceptable?

I have about $1200 to spend. The DBs will me up to 500MB. End of Day backups are acceptable.

One seemingly knowledgable source I spoke with recommended the following, and EMPHASIZED that I should not waste money on 2G of RAM -- 1G was enough. I really would like feedback on that one point. Also any of the other suggestions. Here are his suggestions below (comments his, not mine):

1--ASUS P5 AD2 premium MB tha supports up to 1066mhz bus speed for next generation CPU's from INTEL.. and suports DDR 533 ram
http://usa.asus.com/products/mb/socket775/p5ad2-e-p/overview.HTM


2--INTEL P4 3.6 GHz P4 LGA775 3.4HZ 800FSB 2MEG model 650

intels new CPU that has dual CPUs inside,, like having 2, and 2 megs cache.. kicks the crap outta the AMD and will last for years... and be fast.. and designed for professioanl applications NOT GAMES.. and will do multiple things at once..

3 --1 GIG set RAM KINGSTON MATCHED DDR 512 MEG DDRX2 MEMORY MODULE 4300
comes in factory tested pairs.. especially for INTELS new chipset..
designed for concurrent DDR2 banks

thats one gig ram all you ever need anymore is only a 5% speed gain and double the money and is STUPID unless you are building rockets for NASA.. I have 1 gig and have not limited it yet..

4- NVIDIA GEFORCE 6600 or 6800 EXTREME PCI bus which is much faster than regular bus.. VIDEO CARD

5 1-2 MAXTOR 120 GIG SERIAL ATA HD with 16 megs cache -2 is faster and better

6combo CD-DVD burner... from SAMSUNG perhaps with 8 megs cache

7 ANTEC CASE

 

[aatf510]

Originally posted by: GamingMouse
I have also been told that P4s are more reliable than Athlons, and that I should stay away from Athlons.

Is this true?

Btw, I will not be doing any gaming on this PC.

Thanks again,
gm

I never understand where people get the ideas of a CPU not being reliable.
CPU cannot be unreliable because they can hardly die unless you put some crazy voltage through it. A properly operated CPU can easily survive 20+ years.

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: GamingMouse

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Now now. A 2 GHz Athlon 64 (3200+) kicks a P4 3.2 around. So let's hope you're dealing with the same CPU type here and the 3.2 should win.

I have also been told that P4s are more reliable than Athlons, and that I should stay away from Athlons.

Is this true?

Btw, I will not be doing any gaming on this PC.

Thanks again,
gm

100% pure steaming bullsh!t

 

[shoRunner]

that kinda graphics card is pure waste, get the cheapest card you can get. last i checked database queries use no gpu power so no reason to get a gaming card.

 

[GamingMouse]

Originally posted by: shoRunner
that kinda graphics card is pure waste, get the cheapest card you can get. last i checked database queries use no gpu power so no reason to get a gaming card.

Can you recommend a specific brand for me?

 

[shoRunner]

cheapest pci-e on newegg

http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814150088

 

[GamingMouse]

Originally posted by: shoRunner
cheapest pci-e on newegg

http://www2.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814150088

Thanks. So this will work fine for displaying all normal graphical apps, pics, mpegs, etc?

 

[dodgybob]

A few things are wrong with your seemingly knowledgable source's info:

1 - The ASUS P5 AD2 premium whilst being the top end of intel motherboards for now is not really an upgrade path for future cpus from intel. The 1066mhz bus on it can only really be used for single core P4EE cpus which are ridiculously expensive. It will NOT support dual core processors which is where the intel desktop product line is heading. For those you will have to wait for chipsets like the 955. In essence it is one of the best boards for a current intel cpu if you choose that path but will need to be replaced if you go dual core in future.

2 - The model 650 does NOT have dual cpus (AKA dual core) inside. The differences between it and earlier prescott P4 cores are a doubling in the L2 cache , better throttling support (to reduce speed and hence temp as it's a very hot cpu when it's not under load) and 64bit extensions to use 64bit operating systems. If you are going to use this cpu under load a lot then make sure you get a very well ventilated case and a quality psu to supply enough power to the system. If I remember correctly the doubling of cache had little performance benefit to the P4 Prescott core.

3 - 1gig of ram will probably be fine. A matched pair of ddr2 from a good source like kingston would be the best pairing for that motherboard if you choose to go the intel route.

4 - Those graphics cards are massive overkill if you are not going to game. You will not be using much of their capabilities and will have spent a lot of money for the priviledge. If you are not going to be using 3D apps a 6200 Turbocache card might well serve all your graphics needs and be a lot cheaper.

5 - Maxtor do make hard drive with 16mb cache in their diamondmax plus 10 and maxline III ranges. However it is only the 250gb+ drives that have 16mb cache and the smaller ones have 8mb cache. I think the 120gb are even from the previous generation of their drives. Two drives would only be faster in a RAID 0 striping array but if you are only using sata drive i doubt you will get that much of a performance increase and put your data at greater risk. A better alternative if you choose 2 drives would be to use RAID 1 to mirror your data as a backup. In that array you would use one of the drives and the other would be a copy of that drive so that if it failed you would have your data intact.

6 - Get a DVD burner like the NEC3520, it burns cds too.

7 - Antec make good cases and they come with their own PSUs which are very good. But have a look around as there are a lot of good case and PSU makers out there. Might want to get a separate PSU and case. Get at least a 450w PSU as that cpu needs a lot of power and be certain to only go for a quality manufacturer's model.

By the way currently Intel do not kick the crap out of AMD, more the other way round. The AMD cpus run cooler (and hence more reliably and cheaply as they use less power) and generally out perform equivalent Intel cpus. Another factor is that they tend to be a bit cheaper.

Another reason why you might want to go down the AMD route is upgradeability. If you get say an nforce4 socket 939 motherboard and an A64 cpu you should be able to upgrade to dual core later on with just a BIOS update and you wont have to replace your motherboard. It would be a cheap way to increase performance down the line if your applications are significantly multi-threaded.

 

[shoRunner]

whats your budget?

 

[GamingMouse]

Originally posted by: shoRunner
whats your budget?

$1200 total (excluding monitor)