Looking to buying a new PC - Questions

[Drayco84]

CPU is rather unimportant.  Something with two cores and the fastest memory interconnect.  Because your CPU is more worthless then Intel and AMD would have you believe.

It isn't because he needs to work with graphics as well. GPU acceleration on 2d graphic editing is something slim today, and 3d programs usually make little to no use for it during renderings.
But what it depends on may not be on overall performance, he might need to check if the program he uses supports multithreading, if they doesn't, it would be ideal the processors with the best per-core performance, which may not be the best processor overall.

Not really, no.  No matter what you do in photoshop even the bottom line CPUs you can get today will churn through the data faster then the memory bus can possibly provide.

Photoshop, yes. Games, not as much... Mostly because most of them still don't utilize multi-threading. Then again, I just recently got back into PC gaming, then lost it due to crappy motherboard choice. I personally recommend Asus, but only because the Netbook I have has had not one, but two bios flashes, and took both of them well. My ECS mobo that was crashing due to a glitch with using two RAM chips. (Yeah, "glitch" is an understatement here...)

[ShadesFox]

 With video games it is all about how quickly you can shovel data from the hard disk to the graphics card.  Nothing else really matters, the CPU only in regards to how well it can set up DMA transfers and memory management in general.  Buying more then the minimum dual core CPU right now is a waste of money in any regard that isn't a synthetic benchmark.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

ATI does better at making drivers available for linux, more frequently updated, and are more responsive to the linux community than NVidia, at least in part due to the way they keep different drivers for different cards, thereby making the testing of drivers easier and less time consuming, I am given to understand.

As of a couple years ago, it was completely the opposite.  I'm honestly not sure what's better these days for Linux video.  Kernel support for ATI may not be to the point where it is for NVIDIA, given their enormous head start.  Phoronix seems to think that NVIDIA still wins, though probably not for much longer.

Oh, neat. A comparison of the open source mostly-2D drivers for ATI against the closed-source 3D NVidia drivers. That makes sense. And, surprise surprise, the ATI loses. What, exactly, was the point of that? That the very latest Ubuntu, with the very latest X, doesn't yet have drivers available?

I do like that Phoronix use their own, apparently unrelated numbering schema for X. Ubuntu 10.04 uses 7.5 of X. Not 1.7, unless you're talking package versions, which are a different thing entirely.

[Tapewolf]

I do like that Phoronix use their own, apparently unrelated numbering schema for X. Ubuntu 10.04 uses 7.5 of X. Not 1.7, unless you're talking package versions, which are a different thing entirely.

That's the version of the actual server, I think.  E.g. from /var/log/Xorg.0.log on my workstation:

X.Org X Server 1.6.0
Release Date: 2009-2-25    (I should probably upgrade that)

...not that this is really helping Shadrok choose a system builder 

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

Even so, that's 1.6.0, not 1.6; a 2.6 kernel is not a 2.6 kernel, but a 2.6 _series_ kernel, and that covers everything from 2.6.0 through 2.6.32, a span of at least a year, if not two or three, of development. There are some major differences between 1.4.2 and 1.6.0 of the X.Org server, for example.


And yes, as you say, it's not helping Shadrok. It _is_ interesting information, though... ;-]

[Tapewolf]

Even so, that's 1.6.0, not 1.6; a 2.6 kernel is not a 2.6 kernel, but a 2.6 _series_ kernel, and that covers everything from 2.6.0 through 2.6.32, a span of at least a year, if not two or three, of development. There are some major differences between 1.4.2 and 1.6.0 of the X.Org server, for example.

Depends how development is managed - the linux kernel isn't a great example IMHO because it's stuck at 2.6, which is fairly unusual for this kind of project.

As I remember it from before, 2.2 had major changes since 2.0, 2.4 had major changes since 2.2 and so on, but - pulling numbers out of a hat - 2.2.1 and 2.2.40 would be broadly the same with incremental improvements, so you'd refer to them as 2.2 or 2.4 and be reasonably confident that they would behave the same.  That's definitely not the case with 2.6.x though.

I don't follow X development closely so I don't know what they do, but for the most part I would expect big internal differences from 1.4.0 and 1.6.0.  Broadly speaking, if 1.4.0 and 1.4.2 are like chalk and cheese, it means that something has gone a bit wrong with the project management  

EDIT:
And this is even less useful for Shadrok 

[Turnsky]

http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCategory.aspx?SubCategory=368&name=Operating-Systems

here folks, Operating systems, both OEM and Retail.. this has been your local search ninja, have a nice day.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

Depends how development is managed - the linux kernel isn't a great example IMHO because it's stuck at 2.6, which is fairly unusual for this kind of project.

As I remember it from before, 2.2 had major changes since 2.0, 2.4 had major changes since 2.2 and so on, but - pulling numbers out of a hat - 2.2.1 and 2.2.40 would be broadly the same with incremental improvements, so you'd refer to them as 2.2 or 2.4 and be reasonably confident that they would behave the same.  That's definitely not the case with 2.6.x though.

I'm disappointed you didn't pick 2.4.0 and 2.4.40, there. 2.4.11 had a major VM change, which meant they weren't at all similar. Also, there were a bunch of changes at one point to match with a new glibc. Not to mention the subpoints, like the various shuffling of dev devices for the HP Array Controllers, which changed three times in the 2.4 series - somewhere between 2.4.0, 2.4.4, 2.4.11, and 2.4.30 or so, as I recall.

Theoretically, however, your point stands. And yes, the project management for the Linux kernel is a bit variable, unfortunately.

And this is even less useful for Shadrok 

True. I'm gonna leave it at that, even though I've enjoyed this much. ;-]

[Shadrok]

Photoshop, yes. Games, not as much... Mostly because most of them still don't utilize multi-threading.

Well Photoshop and the other graphic programs (as well as the 3D) are my main concern in the build. Gaming more or less is to help me keep my sanity... or is it to release my insanity... Anyway graphics and 3D are my primary, gaming is secondary.





I just remembered that my job gives me a discount on some things, computers being one of them.

So after some time on HP's website I put together this (there were limits on what I could use as a starting computer)

HPE-170t series
OS___________ Windows 7 Pro 64-bit
Processor______Intel i7-860 quad-core processor [2.8GHz, 1MB L2 + 8MB shared L3 cache]
Memory_______ 16GB DDR3-1333MHz SDRAM [4 DIMMs]
Hard drive_____ 750GB 7200 rpm SATA 3Gb/s
Graphics card___ 1GB ATI Radeon HD 4850 [2 DVI, HDMI and VGA adapters]
Sound Card_____Integrated 7.1 channel sound with front audio ports
or Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio for $40 more

starting price $1,949.99
$1,543.99 after rebate

This is also without a monitor, but I can use my current one till I get another one or two.

So what do you think? Good? Bad? or just Ugly?

[superluser]

So what do you think? Good? Bad? or just Ugly?

Overpriced.

I'll get you a second opinion shortly.

EDIT: Nevermind.  That's a decent price for an Intel chip.  What if you tried an AMD like this?

https://secure.newegg.com/WishList/MySavedWishDetail.aspx?ID=18715248

[ShadesFox]

For most audio applications you won't noticed the difference a sound card makes.  Unless you try recording audio, then it starts making a huge difference.

That set up would do well.  I'm still not sold about how much multicore does for photoshop.  Maybe see if you can't drop down to core count for a higher CPU frequency and faster memory?

[Drayco84]

Yeah, I'd prolly recommend cutting back on the processor too. Unless you plan on running a lot of applications at once, most are NOT multithreaded, and thus they can't take advantage of multiple cores. (Yes, two helps as the OS can run on one while your game/app can run on the other.) And intel does have some CPUs that use software to act like they have two cores. (Like the ATOM series, but it's less common in desktop CPUs.)

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

Personally, I'd be skipping the memory from HP and going to www.crucial.com to purchase memory, if only because they're usually significantly cheaper. Or at least checking if it is...

And the memory you get from HP is often Crucial memory with an HP sticker on it anyway.

And I've only once had any issue with RAM I bought from crucial, and that was an old Sun box with unusual RAM that they had to get from someone else. And even then, they had zero quibbles with taking it back "yeah, fine, ship it to us, we'll ship you a replacement now, it'll be there tomorrow" was the reaction, as I recall.

The other hundred odd wintel servers were fine...

[Turnsky]

For most audio applications you won't noticed the difference a sound card makes.  Unless you try recording audio, then it starts making a huge difference.

That set up would do well.  I'm still not sold about how much multicore does for photoshop.  Maybe see if you can't drop down to core count for a higher CPU frequency and faster memory?

dualcores is about all one needs for decent performance, anyways.

a mid-range dual core running 3-4 gig of ram with an entry level DX10 card will run CS4 quite happily.

[Tapewolf]

Oh, fun point about multicore processors, or multiprocessor setups - some games, especially Thief, Thief 2 and System Shock 2 will randomly deadlock if run on multicore processors.
There is a way to patch them to work around this (setting the process affinity so it can only use one CPU) but it's something to bear in mind when reinstalling your old software, since pretty much everything is multicore these days.

[RobbieThe1st]

That may be true, but I have not seen anything -but- such (really old) games deadlock on Multicore processors.

I have to say a couple of things:
For most -anything- you do, over 4GB ram is just overkill. I have 4GB, and I'm never running into the limit.
CPU wise, I disagree. I have a quad-core 3.2ghz processor, and I see the load-meters max out on all cores during some apps starting up, though only for a second - Apps do start up lightning fast.
Also, having a quad-core does a lot for multi-tasking; If you have a single-threaded task running in the background, you can let it crunch away while doing anything you want else. With only a dual-core, things get a lot slower if you do that(personal experience).

BTW, I think you'd be a -lot- better off -not- buying from HP; I've seen a lot of HP and Dell equipment have "issues", or even just be slower than it should. Also, support is often horrible.
If you build it yourself, you get to use first-quality harddisks and motherboards; you get a higher ram speed(which equates to more performance, as several have said), and choosing high-quality components that won't die, have glitches, or "sort of" work.

If its really that big of an issue, I'd be willing to help you with it, whatever you need.

-Robbie

[Tapewolf]

That may be true, but I have not seen anything -but- such (really old) games deadlock on Multicore processors.

Yes, but his computer [that is, his current computer] is from the same era as those games.  I don't know what software he has on it - nor am I for a moment suggesting that he get a single-core processor - but it's a potential gotcha.
Specifically, it happened to me when I upgraded my 2001 motherboard to a 2008 one...

[Shadrok]

Kind of need to type this up quick (have to head off to work in a few minuets)

The sound I would like to record decent quality as I plan to record audio for animation as well as re-record some lines for Tapewolf (that is if he still needs me to re-record Sid's lines.)

The RAM, I've learned from my current computer that for the long road it's a good thing to have as much as you can get.

The CPU I have a single core in my current desktop and a dual core in my laptop and it makes a difference in render time. So there's a good chance that a quad would be faster rendering then the dual.

When I get home I'll post what software I use and more on what I plan to use with the new PC.

[superluser]

The RAM, I've learned from my current computer that for the long road it's a good thing to have as much as you can get.

While this is true, you also have to consider that the price of RAM will decrease with time, so it may make morse sense to buy a little now and wait until you need it to buy more.

The sound I would like to record decent quality as I plan to record audio for animation as well as re-record some lines for Tapewolf (that is if he still needs me to re-record Sid's lines.)

In that case, get the best you can get. 

[Tapewolf]

In that case, get the best you can get.  

I think he'd need to add another zero onto the budget for that  

For an internal card, the Asus Xonar D2X is quite nice.  It's PCI-E so it should last for a while yet, and it also has a lot of RF shielding.  As I understand it, they also use reasonable quality components rather than populating the board with any old cheap tat.

The main alternative these days is a USB audio interface.  These are many, but finding good ones is difficult.  All of the ones I've used regularly - without exception - eventually broke down and started to add USB bus noise to the audio signal.  I am currently using one that I modified into a standalone converter and connect it to the computer via a fibreoptic link, but that's another story.

[Shadrok]

Ok back from work and here are the programs I'm currently using, I may upgrade some of these down the road (More then likely Flash/Photoshop and Maya).

Adobe : Photoshop CS2
        Illustrator CS2   
        Premiere Pro 2.0
        Image Ready CS2
        After Effects 7.0
        Encore DVD 2.0
        Audition 2.0

Flash 8
Maya 6
VH Multi Cam Studio
Adacity

Out of these the main ones are Photoshop, Maya, Flash, After Effects, and Premiere. When recording audio I have used Adacity but I need to see how Audition is as I may go with it in future projects, I guess when I get some quiet time I'll do that. (That is when ever that mite be, as this house is always filled with noise.)

After Effects and Premiere I use when making 3D animations and Encore I use to put those animations to DVD so that they have a menu. As for Illustrator I've recently started using it to vector images inked in Photoshop, to put into flash. (I would draw directly in flash but I find the brush resizing when you zoom annoying.)

Over all the main goal of this new computer should be animation (rendering / drawing, putting it to video with audio, and publishing to DVD with a custom menu).

[RobbieThe1st]

Well, sound wise, this may be taking a step backwards, but I don't trust the newer cards - They don't look like they have enough caps to do the job, which is why I stuck with my Audigy 2 ZS(Turnsky[iirc] also has one). Yes, its aging, and yet its only PCI... but it isn't hard to get a MOBO with one or more PCI slots on it still. Also, the fact that its a quality card you can get for $25, and Still has current drivers means quite a bit.

However, I'm pretty sure that the quality of microphone has a lot more to do with the quality of sound you get than the sound-card; I'm pretty sure you can get "good" quality audio out of an Onboard setup. And, considering almost all mobos have onboard sound, its not exactly a big deal.

I'd look for the rest of the PC first, and then, once you have things running - Then pick out a sound card, if the onboard doesn't do a good enough job.

Now, after seeing what you want it for, definitely quad-core. And, go for the highest clock-speed you can, 3.2 GHZ or better.

[Tapewolf]

However, I'm pretty sure that the quality of microphone has a lot more to do with the quality of sound you get than the sound-card; I'm pretty sure you can get "good" quality audio out of an Onboard setup. And, considering almost all mobos have onboard sound, its not exactly a big deal.

Yes and no.  It's usually referred to as a chain, and there is always a weakest link.

With motherboard sound it's a crapshoot, but I'd put my money on the sound card.
Most onboard sound systems are wholly unshielded and stuck right next to the USB ports with no blocking caps on it whatsoever.  As a result you get the processor and USB bus splattered all over your recording, often louder than the signal itself.
You could stick a Neumann mic in it and get something that sounds nice, but is completely unusable.

There is an example here - actually of USB bus noise from a crappy external sound interface - but it's very similar to what the onboard audio sounds like on the last two motherboards I had:

http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2010/04/10/review_audio_interface_m_audio_pro_tools_recording_studio/page3.html

If you're reasonably serious about doing voice work, it might be worth setting some money aside for a condenser mic and a preamp, preferably with a limiter.  You can probably get something decent enough for under $200.
It's worth noting that there are USB sound interfaces which have the preamp and limiter built-in these days, however you have to be careful or you'll end up with one that leaks the USB bus into the recording too.

[RobbieThe1st]

Yes and no.  It's usually referred to as a chain, and there is always a weakest link.

With motherboard sound it's a crapshoot, but I'd put my money on the sound card.
Most onboard sound systems are wholly unshielded and stuck right next to the USB ports with no blocking caps on it whatsoever.  As a result you get the processor and USB bus splattered all over your recording, often louder than the signal itself.

Point.

You could stick a Neumann mic in it and get something that sounds nice, but is completely unusable.

Wait, what? How could something sound nice, but be unusable?

-----
Off topic - I was messing around, and recorded this sample: http://robbiethe1st.afraid.org/files/audigy2zs-sample.wav
I used my Audigy2ZS for the input, a scavenged button mic + 5k resistor for the actual microphone. Recorded in Audacity.

How does that sound to you? What do you see in that recording that would make it a bad setup, or a good one(e.g. pops, clicks, noise, etc.)?
I'm curious.

[Tapewolf]

Wait, what? How could something sound nice, but be unusable?

You can have a great performance, captured on a $3000 mic and put through a $30000 Fairchild compressor, but if it's entirely punctuated by a whining sound from the bus, it's not going to be suitable for putting in a recording.

I'm at work, I've searched around but I don't have any examples on me.  If you're interested I can put together a specimen.

That said, the onboard sound on this Dell is crystal clear, and without taking it apart, your recording is good too.  Maybe I've just ended up with crappy motherboards.

EDIT:
Actually - straying off-topic a bit more - if you want a generic example of how a performance can be ruined at the recording stage, albeit for different reasons:
http://tapewolf.wildernessguardians.com/dmfarp/abel71.wav.mp3

...I won't go as far as calling it a good performance, it's a couple of years old now - but I'm not sure I'd be able to do that panic attack again either way.

There are two problems - firstly Hennya, and secondly Abel was recorded at 44KHz on a then-new sound card (an old low-end Audigy, actually), and the sample-rate converter is totally borked.  If you listen to Abel, particularly around the 2:53 mark you can hear it ringing slightly.

[superluser]

Wait, what? How could something sound nice, but be unusable?

Well, you could have the sound of the local Catholic station in the background of your recording because they're only a couple hundred feet away and your old motherboard decided to pick it up on the mic in line (as is the case with many of my YouTube videos).

[Shadrok]

If you're reasonably serious about doing voice work, it might be worth setting some money aside for a condenser mic and a preamp, preferably with a limiter.  You can probably get something decent enough for under $200.
It's worth noting that there are USB sound interfaces which have the preamp and limiter built-in these days, however you have to be careful or you'll end up with one that leaks the USB bus into the recording too.

As far as voice work goes I've not given it much thought. For the most part it's been a quick solution to the problem of needing a voice for an animation.

I guess I should keep the option to upgrade the sound card if I do decide to get serious and get a decent mic too (instead of my karaoke mic)

On the other hand it mite be nice to have decent audio recording for my webcast.

[RobbieThe1st]

You can have a great performance, captured on a $3000 mic and put through a $30000 Fairchild compressor, but if it's entirely punctuated by a whining sound from the bus, it's not going to be suitable for putting in a recording.

Well, you could have the sound of the local Catholic station in the background of your recording because they're only a couple hundred feet away and your old motherboard decided to pick it up on the mic in line (as is the case with many of my YouTube videos).

Oh, I misunderstood what you meant. To me, that wouldn't sound "good", because of that noise.
---
I listened to the recording; I see what you mean.
---
Also, I'm curious; Those of you with mic problems, have you tried connecting the ground line of your mic directly to chassis ground/some good ground spot? Or, tried simply touching a good ground?
I know that with my last cheap mic, I was absorbing enough 60HZ radiation from the surrounding area that I'd get quite a bit of noise if I was too close to the(unshielded) cable; If I grounded myself out, much of that went away.
(My current mic has no such problem; I'm guessing it may have something to do with the cable I used).

[Jack McSlay]

For most -anything- you do, over 4GB ram is just overkill. I have 4GB, and I'm never running into the limit.

You have obviously never tried rendering 3d scenes with a high level of detail, nor tried editing a multi-layer A3-sized image at 300DPI/48BPP

ps.: if he's not doing recordings in a sound-tight room, I fail to see the point of worrying about bus noise

[Passive]

Code Select Expand