think 64 bit will be way to go-use current apps & encourage 64 apps.there are approved opteron workstation mb now on AMD's site, and even finished ws through partners. my interest is video- editing etc. Question:why not build a 240 now instead of waiting for anthlon 64 ??? am i missing something??
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by blessme on 07/15/03 02:31 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
You wouldn't be missing anything at all. There is nothing on A64 that is not on Opteron already. The only thing is that Opteron is considerably more expensive.
One more thing: while I understand and appreciate encouraging 64-bit apps, I think video editing is not necessarily one of Opteron's strengths. Opteron is a powerful server processor, but a rather weak/medium workstation processor. For your purposes, a dual Xeon 3.06Ghz might get the work done quicker - and it might also be cheaper. It's your call, of course - this is just my opinion. If you want a link to some <A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20030422/opteron-24.html" target="_new">benchmarks</A> for checking, there you go. A dual Xeon 2.8 or 3.06Ghz can outperform a dual 244 in the tasks you will be performing. And keep in mind that now you have the extra option of going Xeon 1MB cache, for the same price as a 244, and that should be even faster than dual 244s for video editing. Most video editing has been optimized for Intel's architecture anyway.
Plus, a dual 240 is not a very powerful system as you might think. The 240s are clocked about 25% slower than the 244s, and that difference is nothing to sneeze at. Interesting bit: don't be fooled by review sites who only checked out the 244, and then get a 240 because it's 244s smaller brother. It's a much smaller brother!
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram