Sijun Forums :: View topic

Snakebyte · Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2002 9:13 am

What are your thoughts on the upcoming AMD Hammer and the potential benefits to Large PSD files in Photoshop?

How about the upcoming HyperThreaded Pentium 4�s (One CPU acting as a dual CPU) with Dual Channel DDR?

Setting biased opinions aside which do you feel would be more beneficial to 1Gig or larger file sizes in Photoshop. (or any file size)

I personally like the hammer for its bus speed and future support for 64bit apps.

If this has been disused before than pardon me, I got no results from a search�

Frost · Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2002 10:15 am

Awetopsy · Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2002 10:44 am

Im an AMD user nowadays... Intel lost its appeal to me when it brought out faulty PIII's.

It seems nowadays that Intel is making more stable tech but its still very pricey... so Im sticking with AMD for the time being, although I wish AMD would label their processors properly. If its a 1.4, call it a 1.4 dont call it a 1600xp.

I really havent been following the latest CPU tech because Im pretty happy with my rig now.. so Ill wait again till I absolutely have to upgrade.

I will admit tho that from whatI have seen of the AMD Hammer.. Im impressed.

Giant Hamster · member Member # Joined: 22 Oct 1999 Posts: 1782

"(One CPU acting as a dual CPU) with Dual Channel DDR?"

*mind wanders...* DANCE DANCE REVOLUTION, EVERYBODY!!!!!!

[Shizo] · member Member # Joined: 22 Oct 1999 Posts: 3938

quote:
Originally posted by Awetopsy:
I wish AMD would label their processors properly. If its a 1.4, call it a 1.4 dont call it a 1600xp.

Hey busta, the reason for such naming practises is performance and marketing. Common people (the majority who dont know much about computers) look at two computers and go "hmm.. one is 1.4GHz and another is 1.6GHz, the latter must be better cause it's more"
But since T-bird 1.4 is comparable to Intel 1.6 in speed (and actually topping intel in most tests) then the naming part is correct. It's all relative..

And Double DDR is like ..quadrupal?
Same thing as "Windows NT" and "ATM machine"
haha

Awetopsy · Posted: Fri Sep 06, 2002 3:01 pm

Or I guess Intel needs to get it right too.. Intel shouldnt be calling theirs 1.6 if it doesnt go as fast as a 1.4 actually does go... :P

It makes sense in my head... I guess..

gigatron · Posted: Sat Sep 07, 2002 9:45 am

I currently have a 1.8GHz P4-b (the newer one but not the 533 bus one, i forget the code name), i clocked it to a 2069MHz beast (eh ya 69

) and i wish i went with a 1800XP but hey... im cheering for the hammer, i read a huge ass preview/review article of it (like 10+ pages of just text with links to new window with images, erm as in LONG TEXT) ya.. looks promising, also the hammers should be like 3.0GHz+ if im not mistaken, ah well time will tell, cant wait

Sukhoi · Posted: Sun Sep 08, 2002 1:27 am

Pricing definately tips my scale towards AMD (I have an 1.533, which I'm very happy with).

But if I could afford one, I'd go with Intel because they can be clocked so much higher. Regarding the new technology I can't really say because specs on paper is one thing, real life performance is another. So I'm just waiting for the hardware sites to tell me in black and white which cpu is the better. Ofcourse they always outrun eachother in certain areas, so....back to 'whatever you're gonna use it for'.

Sukhoi