Advice - Dual or Single Core?

[dannyaa]

Hi, I'm putting together a system for a friend. He updates very rarely and he's not into building computers and upgrading all the time. He just wants a system for around $1400 (including a monitor, 2.1 speakers, keyboard/mouse as his previous ones are old & crappy) that will last him a long time. He may consider a CPU upgrade 1.5yrs down the line if its cheap and only the CPU needed to be swapped, who knows - he hasnt upgraded his current comp for 5 years.

He will be using it for 3D rendering (Maya), Macromedia Flash/Dreamweaver, programming, video editing (Premiere Pro, maybe Avid someday). He will play some games but thats not his MAIN priority.

For his uses, should I get him a dual core now, or a single core? AMD's dual cores are really spendy, so I was thinking of an Intel P4D 830 (3.0ghz dual core) with 1gb RAM and a Geforce 6600 GT. Or is the performance increase not worth it? The other option would be to maybe get a AMD64 3500+ and he could swap in an X2 next fall or something.

So what do u guys think... dual or single and why?

Thanks,
Dan


P4c 3.2Ghz NWood / ABIT AI7 / 1GB XMS-Pro DDR 3200 / BFG GF-6800GT 256mb / Antec 380W

A64 3000 Venice / Epox 9npa-U / 1GB HyperX DDR 3200 / XFX GF-6600GT 128mb / Antec 330W

 

[HansGruber]

$1400 for complete system with AMD dual core is not enough im afraid.
Then there is always Intel D820, it's good at encoding rendering etc.
But it really is crappy at games, but i guess it doesn't matter.
But if you can spend 500 on a CPU then go with the AMD X2..

Conclusion: Go for dual, it gives much better performance in those apps, even that 820 beats fastest single core.
(what is going on, i just recommended Intel system. ? i guess i need a doctor..)

ps. how about bigger budget so i can suggest AMD dual core system ?


<font color=red>"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
- Albert Einstein</font color=red>

 

[HansGruber]

Or maybe <A HREF="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24029" target="_new">http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=24029</A> ?

<font color=red>"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."
- Albert Einstein</font color=red>

 

[endyen]

Getting an X2 in a year and a half, will give him a much better system then, while getting the 3500 will save some money now, without taking too large a performance hit.

 

[P4Man]

If you factor in the higher cost of the motherboard and RAM (as well as the need for a beefier PSU, better cooling,..), I doubt the 830 would be that much cheaper than an X2 4200+. If it won't fit in the budget, then don't do it, but the small premium would be worth it IMHO. I'd have a hard time recommending a ~150W CPU that requires immature motherboards, even though price/performance for his work won't be bad.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =