New Computer for 2012

[dlndesign]

We are deciding on a new computer for the new year, and having some issues with what to get. I just need some helpful advice. We would be running CS5.5 Professional, Versa Works, Email, Internet.. So we are looking to get a machine that will be a beast and run for at least 4 years without having to upgrade the hardware. Thanks.

 

[rushworks graphics]

ask SignBurst for advise, they build computers and are mm on here. they can even build you a custom computer for your needs.

 

[Mike F]

ask SignBurst for advise, they build computers and are mm on here. they can even build you a custom computer for your needs.

+1

 

[john1]

I have a custom built PC with a i7 3.6ghz quad core processor and 16 gigs of ram...couldn't be happier. Only cost around $1500 from the ground up.

 

[MatthewTimothy]

I have a custom built PC with a i7 3.6ghz quad core processor and 16 gigs of ram...couldn't be happier. Only cost around $1500 from the ground up.

AMD is cheaper which is why im down this route. What are your goals on space, speed, price budget, and are you building this?? I can show you where to go, but if you cant build it i would be cautious.

I currently run 16gb of RAM, 6 core processor dual workstation cards and an SSD drive. It pretty nice and hell of production on quad screens.

 

[royster13]

I am just starting to build a system based on an AMD Athlon II X4...I have about 550.00 in parts....Just checked every sale email form New Egg for a couple months until I had all the parts I needed...

 

[SignBurst PCs]

Thanks for the recommends! I would be happy to help in any way that I can.

 

[Techman]

AMD is cheaper which is why im down this route.

AMD may be a little cheaper but the savings is not worth it any more. The Intel I7 2700 very fast and is overclock ready. Why is it crushing AMD? Because the Intel chip is balanced for the entire system instead of just pure horsepower.

I just built an I7 2600 and it is as fast as the mouse click. How fast? It opens Corel at the instant the mouse clicks. My configuration is just a plain jane system with no tweaks. I see no need to tweak it in anyway. A tweaker could easily make this even faster. But how much faster than a mouse click can one get?

Intel just released the I7 2700k (unlocked) and it is slightly faster than the 2600k and overclock ready if that is something some might like.

There is nothing within the AMD stable including the fx 8150 that will beat the I7 2700 CPU. Intel crushes the AMD current offerings. You get what you pay for. Intel is way ahead now.

Why? Forget all the bench marks. Intel wins it all in the benchmarks. Lets look at the internal operations..
Most software is written in 32 bit. Running 32 bit to 64 ,,
Using a Float 32 to Float 64 bit operation, (floating point operations) Core i7-2600K realizes a 14% gain. at the same time a FX-8150 suffers a 77% loss in speed.
The problem is.. When idle the AMD ups the speed of one core to a very high rate. It looks very fast because it is. But, when the cpu assigns work to the other cores the overall processing speed slows,

Using a good motherboard the Intel I7 2600k will do an automatic turbo speed to a higher output on demand.

So choosing an AMD because it is lower priced may not bring the results we want. Choosing a lesser Intel I5 chip may be a better selection if price is a major concern..

It is not obvious that the AMD is not up to the challenge?

 

[MatthewTimothy]

AMD may be a little cheaper but the savings is not worth it any more. The Intel I7 2700 very fast and is overclock ready. Why is it crushing AMD? Because the Intel chip is balanced for the entire system instead of just pure horsepower.

I just built an I7 2600 and it is as fast as the mouse click. How fast? It opens Corel at the instant the mouse clicks. My configuration is just a plain jane system with no tweaks. I see no need to tweak it in anyway. A tweaker could easily make this even faster. But how much faster than a mouse click can one get?

Intel just released the I7 2700k (unlocked) and it is slightly faster than the 2600k and overclock ready if that is something some might like.

There is nothing within the AMD stable including the fx 8150 that will beat the I7 2700 CPU. Intel crushes the AMD current offerings. You get what you pay for. Intel is way ahead now.

Why? Forget all the bench marks. Intel wins it all in the benchmarks. Lets look at the internal operations..
Most software is written in 32 bit. Running 32 bit to 64 ,,
Using a Float 32 to Float 64 bit operation, (floating point operations) Core i7-2600K realizes a 14% gain. at the same time a FX-8150 suffers a 77% loss in speed.
The problem is.. When idle the AMD ups the speed of one core to a very high rate. It looks very fast because it is. But, when the cpu assigns work to the other cores the overall processing speed slows,

Using a good motherboard the Intel I7 2600k will do an automatic turbo speed to a higher output on demand.

So choosing an AMD because it is lower priced may not bring the results we want. Choosing a lesser Intel I5 chip may be a better selection if price is a major concern..

It is not obvious that the AMD is not up to the challenge?

you are talking as if this is an overclocking forum and NO ONE here will really know exactly what you are talking about nor know how to overclock. You and I both know the severe damages that can happen with overclocking and how you can fry your entire computer. For the price and performance WITHOUT over clocking AMD is the way to go in those terms for a plug and play solution. YES, you can overclock and YES Intel can be faster but if you are wanting bang for your buck with no tweeks AMD is the way to go. These guys cant afford to spend an hour trying to figure out why the tweek is causing BSODs or issues or that the Volts may be a little too high and crash the entire PC right in the middle of a design or RIP.

Hell while we are at it lets introduce watercooling over air cooling, lol.

 

[SightLine]

Ok well lets look at pretty much every business class professional workstations from all the main manufacturers like HP, IBM, Dell, Lenovo.... and yes Signburst. Also even all the better business desktops from the same....

All have Intel processors for a reason. None of these are targeted towards the "overclocker" crowd. This goes back for years as well. They all have Intel processors because of long term reliability and performance.

I also know this from 12 years as a senior net admin in my past career. At a major hospital I worked at we have a little over 3000 desktops. At one point upper management thought it would be a good idea to save money on close to 900 desktops by going with a lower end business line model from Compaq at the time that had an AMD processor. Same as always, boasting similar speeds, performance, etc. When they ran they did run fine. Within 8 months we pulled every single one back out of production due to numerous ongoing reliability problems ranging from buggy chipsets causing random crashes, overheating, getting very slow when a lot is running, and more.

Dont get me wrong - I'm rooting for AMD in the long run. Intel needs competition. But as it stands and has stood for many years AMD based systems just really are not the best choice where absolute rock solid stability is key and important.

Back on topic - I have no intent of getting into an ongoing Intel versus AMD flamefest....

Casey from Signbust makes excellent machines. From the main big companies - the PROFESSIONAL workstations are also generally excellent. We have used Dell Precision systems for years with literally zero issues.

I'd personally suggest a secondary dedicated machine for your RIP. Just needs to be mildly speedy with a nice amount of RAM. It does not need some ultra high end video card - unless you are doing 3D work or gaming your main design systems do not really benefit from super high end video cards either.

 

[Bobby H]

Most new computers can run Adobe Photoshop Extended without much of a problem as long as the user isn't going crazy designing massive images weighing multiple gigabytes.

The customer does have to spend a bit above "mid range" if he wants a desktop or notebook that will still run new applications well 4 years later.

I would at least get a machine with a Quad Core CPU, such as a Core i7 processor. You need more than one physical hard disc too. The upside is newer versions of Photoshop will allow external hard discs to be used for scratch disc work, like using USB 3.0 or eSATA ports on a notebook.

There's no such thing as too much RAM. Max it out if you can.

The latest versions of Photoshop require some decent OpenGL performance from the video card. The video card doesn't have to be top of the line, but I would definitely stay away from any integrated graphics chip on the motherboard nonsense.

 

[Techman]

you are talking as if this is an overclocking forum and NO ONE here will really know exactly what you are talking about nor know how to overclock. You and I both know the severe damages that can happen with overclocking and how you can fry your entire computer.

You obviously do not know what you are talking about.. And you are obviously allowing your personal opinion about AMD get in the way of the facts.

The AMD vs Intel flame war is long over. The facts speak for themselves.

First of all. The Intel I7 K is MADE for certain amount of overclocking. IT is unlocked for a reason at the factory. If what you seem to say was true then Intel would not unlock the chip. That chip is SOLD as a turbo solution for those who want it. Ther eis no need for anyone to tweak anything. The system does it all itself. I know this for a fact because I just built a system using the I7 2600K with ASUS P8P67 M Pro board and it is just about the best system I have ever owned.

Second. The motherboards matching the I7 are designed to allow for certain TURBO (overclocking) automatically or in manual mode. The board and chip combined go into turbo mode on their own when needed. If this was such a bad idea the engineers would not design such a benefit into the system.

Third. The fact is,,,, Intel is CRUSHING anything AMD has to offer., Including the latest AMD chip. Bang for the Buck? HAH. The I5 chips (cheap) are beating the Fx AMD chips as we type. Talk about bang for the buck?

Fourth. Plenty of people here know exactly what I am talking about. There are true computer technical masters wandering this board. In fact I recently chatted to members here about the latest Intel chips and they know more about overclocking those CPU's than you think.

Fifth. No one should take anyone's word for these facts. Simply google Intel I7 compared to the AMD chips. The results speaks loudly about the facts. If some would google the facts they would not make such a post about the AMD chips.

The only area that the AMD FX-8150 wins is video playback and transcoding media files. Every thing else is a distant second. That includes CAD and RIP.. I can personally vouch for CAD because my I7 station renders 3D cnc files as fast as I can click the mouse.

Lets google AMD success.. Hmmmmmmm if the AMD solution was so obvious why is it this came up?
However, the chip maker has been hit with mixed reviews about the performance of the Bulldozer chips, which has added to a difficult autumn for AMD. Last month, the company announced that it was cutting its third-quarter financial forecasts..

Hmm, if the chip was so good then why is it NOT selling?
I rest my case.

 

[john1]

Yep, the i7 is made to be overclocked...it says it on the packaging. Intel wins, AMD loses. That is all.

 

[Finishline Signs]

I highly reccomend Signburst. I bought my design computer from them about a 1 1/2 years ago and still love it. It has never given us a bit of trouble. I was hesitent to spend that much money exspecially since I had always built my own computers but I don't regret it one bit. They are well worth the money and Casey is great to work with.

 

[MatthewTimothy]

You obviously do not know what you are talking about.. And you are obviously allowing your personal opinion about AMD get in the way of the facts.

The AMD vs Intel flame war is long over. The facts speak for themselves.

First of all. The Intel I7 K is MADE for certain amount of overclocking. IT is unlocked for a reason at the factory. If what you seem to say was true then Intel would not unlock the chip. That chip is SOLD as a turbo solution for those who want it. Ther eis no need for anyone to tweak anything. The system does it all itself. I know this for a fact because I just built a system using the I7 2600K with ASUS P8P67 M Pro board and it is just about the best system I have ever owned.

Second. The motherboards matching the I7 are designed to allow for certain TURBO (overclocking) automatically or in manual mode. The board and chip combined go into turbo mode on their own when needed. If this was such a bad idea the engineers would not design such a benefit into the system.

Third. The fact is,,,, Intel is CRUSHING anything AMD has to offer., Including the latest AMD chip. Bang for the Buck? HAH. The I5 chips (cheap) are beating the Fx AMD chips as we type. Talk about bang for the buck?

Fourth. Plenty of people here know exactly what I am talking about. There are true computer technical masters wandering this board. In fact I recently chatted to members here about the latest Intel chips and they know more about overclocking those CPU's than you think.

Fifth. No one should take anyone's word for these facts. Simply google Intel I7 compared to the AMD chips. The results speaks loudly about the facts. If some would google the facts they would not make such a post about the AMD chips.

The only area that the AMD FX-8150 wins is video playback and transcoding media files. Every thing else is a distant second. That includes CAD and RIP.. I can personally vouch for CAD because my I7 station renders 3D cnc files as fast as I can click the mouse.

Lets google AMD success.. Hmmmmmmm if the AMD solution was so obvious why is it this came up?
However, the chip maker has been hit with mixed reviews about the performance of the Bulldozer chips, which has added to a difficult autumn for AMD. Last month, the company announced that it was cutting its third-quarter financial forecasts..

Hmm, if the chip was so good then why is it NOT selling?
I rest my case.

you may be right in some sense but you dont know what you are talking about when I refer to you when you keep mentioning overclocking. YES i agree on some levels Intel is better but my take is coming from over several years of having better luck with AMD over Intel WELL BEFORE the I7 market came out. That is where I am coming from, and yes i do know what I'm talking about. If your argument is that Intel is only better for now because of I7 is far from between the facts. Plus this forum does have some computer savy people and thats great, but most people here have no clue on how to unleash their computer and are looking for a solution, as in the OP's thread.

Now i would probably recommend going with SignBurst if he cant build one on his own. BUT well before I7 i have 5 workstations/design stations all running AMD, one server, and one RIP station built way before I7, so that is where im coming from. I cant upgrade, or look into I7, the wife would kill me, lol.

As what others have stated yes, many manufactures run with Intel and yes you are paying more, but if you know what you are doing there is NO sense in over paying for what you can get with AMD. Same rule applies to GPUs. Yes my opinion might be based on the PAST BEFORE I7.

That is all... :signs101:

 

[dj_elite]

I got my Dell XPS for $1300 (just the tower). It is an i7 with a 1gb video card and 8gb of ram. I run two monitors, two emails, flexi 8.6, production manager, Photoshop CS4, Microsoft Word, Firefox, and internet radio all at the same time. Sometimes I even have frontpage or illustrator CS4 open too. The i7's are very powerful and I am glad I went with one. I have not even overclocked it, this is just straight out of the box. I will be upgrading to 16gb of ram in the near future.

 

[MatthewTimothy]

FACTS:

AMD FX-8150 Zambezi 3.6GHz Socket AM3+ 125W Eight-Core Desktop Processor FD8150FRGUBOX going for 269.99.
here


Intel Core i7-3930K Sandy Bridge-E 3.2GHz (3.8GHz Turbo) LGA 2011 130W Six-Core Desktop Processor BX80619i73930K going for 599.99.
here



now without the "turbo mode" the I7 still is at 3.2ghz compared to AMD's 3.6ghz out of the box. Furthermore AMD is throwing out eight-cores compared to Intel's six cores. Now if you want to throw the argument over cores into play, here is AMD's Quad Core CPU running 3.6ghz and that wonderful "turbo mode", yah it does turbo mode into 3.8ghz. here


Now we can go on and on all day, but my point is, for the price, you can get a QUALITY rig built with AMD. And again im referencing PRICE. No shop owner in their right mind would want to invest a grand for a something they can hardly tell.

 

[SignBurst PCs]

Just looking at the frequencies isn't really a fair comparison (3.2 vs 3.6). Neither is the number of cores.

I am not an AMD hater, but the fact is that Intel has a considerable leg up right now. It has been a while since I would even consider building an AMD system.

The last few generations of Intel chips have been more than impressive, especially when built correctly (even without overclocking). We don't overclock anything, but our systems are capable of it. We can get more than enough speed without it and don't have to worry about voiding warranties.

Thanks again for all the recommends. A lot of work and care goes into building our computers and it is nice to see happy customers!

 

[MatthewTimothy]

Just looking at the frequencies isn't really a fair comparison (3.2 vs 3.6). Neither is the number of cores.

I am not an AMD hater, but the fact is that Intel has a considerable leg up right now. It has been a while since I would even consider building an AMD system.

The last few generations of Intel chips have been more than impressive, especially when built correctly (even without overclocking). We don't overclock anything, but our systems are capable of it. We can get more than enough speed without it and don't have to worry about voiding warranties.

Thanks again for all the recommends. A lot of work and care goes into building our computers and it is nice to see happy customers!

you are right, JUST buy it from him, I think my whole argument was missed but its cool

OP, sorry for thread jacking, and i wish you the best of luck with your purchase

 

[SignBurst PCs]

Matthew,

I do remember my days of building AMD. There was once only a small margin between the two companies and the price advantage of AMD was too much to overlook. But, it seems that since the first generation of "Core" branded Intel chips, I have been hooked on Intel.

I don't want you to think that I was being short and dismissing your opinion, it just differs from mine. I hope that AMD catches up again as it was nice to have options. It just seems that as a company, AMD/ATI needs to get their stuff together and if/when that happens, they have the potential of being a contender again.