In contemplating a new (home) digital video editing
system, I'm trying to decide between purchasing a dual
AMD Opteron processor system or an AMD Athlon 64 FX-53
system.

Can anyone comment on what might be the better option?

While both options fully support 32-bit apps, and that
I'd mostly be using non-pro video editing apps, what
setup is likely to offer the best throughput?

The classic argument is get the biggest SINGLE processor system capabable of running your work

Dual processors are a solution used where the power of one just isn't enough. There will always be a performance loss as a result of management overhead of scheduling more than one CPU, however look to the price / performance curve and relate that to your budgetary constraints: no constraints - no worries

Now if you want to know which is better for your requirement, one would suggest that Opteron may be better suited. Read more at

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/...6_8832,00.html

The 64-bit AMD chip will need a 64-bit operating system and 64-bit apps
to achieve it's potential. I believe MicroSoft is working on (or maybe,
just completed an AMD version of 64-bit XP), but even with a 64-bit
operating system, you still would need 64-bit apps. As it stands now, and
this is just what I've seen, the only usable 64-bit system is still the
Itanium line (as far as a working operating system, and apps (very
limited/specialized)). To make a short story long, at this point, it's
(IMO) better to go with dual 32-bit chips.

(-: FireFox :-)


"Tim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3a2f01c429a3$b9e72d80$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In contemplating a new (home) digital video editing
> system, I'm trying to decide between purchasing a dual
> AMD Opteron processor system or an AMD Athlon 64 FX-53
> system.

*SNIP*

Very few Apps will utilize both processors, so you are best off with one. Adobe Premiere will use two, or a single hyperthreaded P4
The AMD will run WinXP 32 bit as well as 64 bit. I understand the 64 bit version is very pricey, untill MS releases it's home version. If
you build or buy a system now in anticipation of the 64 bit version, and 64 bit apps, your hardware will be somewhat dated once all that gets market
I'm doing home video work on a single 3.0 GHz Intel w/1 GHz PC4000 Ram and am quite happy with it. I turn on hyperthreading when I plan to use adobe
and turn it off the rest of the time.The real trick is to learn to set up a render process and walk away from the computer and do something else.
No matter how much money you throw at a system, that stuff takes a while
As far as which is better, AMD or Intel, that debate still rages on
Coach E

----- FireFox wrote: ----

The 64-bit AMD chip will need a 64-bit operating system and 64-bit apps
to achieve it's potential. I believe MicroSoft is working on (or maybe,
just completed an AMD version of 64-bit XP), but even with a 64-bit
operating system, you still would need 64-bit apps. As it stands now, and
this is just what I've seen, the only usable 64-bit system is still the
Itanium line (as far as a working operating system, and apps (very
limited/specialized)). To make a short story long, at this point, it's
(IMO) better to go with dual 32-bit chips

(-: FireFox :-


"Tim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:3a2f01c429a3$b9e72d80$(E-Mail Removed)..
> In contemplating a new (home) digital video editin
> system, I'm trying to decide between purchasing a dua
> AMD Opteron processor system or an AMD Athlon 64 FX-5
> system

*SNIP*

Many thanks for the guidance.

I'm seeing a consistent suggestion that buying one really
decent processor will (overall) provide the better
solution for now. And, putting money into lots of RAM and
fast hard disks will "compensate" for the single-
processor approach to digital video rendering.

Thanks,
Tim



>-----Original Message-----
>Very few Apps will utilize both processors, so you are
best off with one. Adobe Premiere will use two, or a
single hyperthreaded P4.
>The AMD will run WinXP 32 bit as well as 64 bit. I
understand the 64 bit version is very pricey, untill MS
releases it's home version. If
>you build or buy a system now in anticipation of the 64
bit version, and 64 bit apps, your hardware will be
somewhat dated once all that gets market,
>I'm doing home video work on a single 3.0 GHz Intel w/1
GHz PC4000 Ram and am quite happy with it. I turn on
hyperthreading when I plan to use adobe,
>and turn it off the rest of the time.The real trick is
to learn to set up a render process and walk away from
the computer and do something else.
>No matter how much money you throw at a system, that
stuff takes a while.
>As far as which is better, AMD or Intel, that debate
still rages on.
>Coach Ed
>
> ----- FireFox wrote: -----
>
> The 64-bit AMD chip will need a 64-bit
operating system and 64-bit apps
> to achieve it's potential. I believe MicroSoft is
working on (or maybe,
> just completed an AMD version of 64-bit XP), but
even with a 64-bit
> operating system, you still would need 64-bit
apps. As it stands now, and
> this is just what I've seen, the only usable 64-bit
system is still the
> Itanium line (as far as a working operating system,
and apps (very
> limited/specialized)). To make a short story long,
at this point, it's
> (IMO) better to go with dual 32-bit chips.
>
> (-: FireFox :-)
>
>
> "Tim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote
in message
> news:3a2f01c429a3$b9e72d80$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > In contemplating a new (home) digital video
editing
> > system, I'm trying to decide between purchasing a
dual
> > AMD Opteron processor system or an AMD Athlon 64
FX-53
> > system.
>
> *SNIP*
>
>
>
>.
>