Pentium 4 vs. Xeon? Any experience/recommendations out there?

[Jay_Bursky@adobeforums.com]

I am in the midst of deciding about a new computer and reviewing available options. My present system needs to be retired to the Computer Old Aged Home before it has a stroke.

I reviewed the new flock of P4s that are hitting the market but speaking with Dell and HP, they are recommending a Xeon processor with RAID storage. Their contention is that the Xeon platform for a hard core graphic design shop is both more stable and flexible. Evidently, the Xeon is a 64 bit processor which the P4 is not and will be able to handle the alleged upgrade path to 64 bit Adobe applications. In addition, the Xeon platforms that have been suggested are two CPU configurations. I can start with one and add the second later. I realize I should be primarily concerned with my immediate needs, which I am, but I want to get as many years out of the new machine as possible, thus, the need to also be sensitive to a modest future horizon.

Any experience or recommendations with the Xeon?

[Michael_S._Flynn@adobeforums.com]

Gee, what a shock - salespeople trying to sell you something that you don't really need.

First of all, you don't need a lot of speed for doing DTP. Not that there's anything wrong with a lot of speed, but dual Xeon's and RAID storage is riculous for the what you'll end up paying. You could buy an entire computer just for the price of Xeons. And RAID is just hype for 9999.9999% of the population.

Second of all, build it yourself. Dell and HP make and sell absolute crap as do Gateway, IBM and Sony.

Third, Intel blows - go with an AMD. Clock speed means nothing compared to FPU performance. AMD Barton CPUs overall outperform their Intel counterparts even when the Intel's have a 1ghz clockspeed edge.

If you want to get suckered into a high-end system costing thousands of dollars, go for it. I could recommend the components for a DTP system that would probably be at least 1/3 of what they'll try to sell you and you wouldn't notice any speed difference without some benchmarking software.

[Bob_Levine]

While I agree you don't need the Xeons, I gotta tell you that I fully
intended to build my last system. But once I priced out the parts and
the cost of a full version WinXP Pro, it was cheaper to buy a barebones
machine from Dell. I threw in my existing video card and bought a gig of
RAM elsewhere.

The OEMs use essentially the same parts you can buy yourself, but the
software images leave a bit to be desired. I like Dell because they give
you a full WinXP installation CD instead of recovery CD.

Shop home and small business for Dell and also check out
[url]www.techbargains.com[/url] for coupons.

Bob

[Stu_Bloom@adobeforums.com]

Dell and HP make and sell absolute crap as do Gateway, IBM and Sony.




I've had bad luck with HP machines. But I have owned six Gateways, and the only time ANY of them needed service was when it (a notebook) was dropped six feet onto a concrete floor - and then it still worked, even though the case was split open!

[JohnO@adobeforums.com]

> Second of all, build it yourself. Dell and HP make and sell absolute crap
as do Gateway, IBM and Sony.

We've been buying Dell desktops for about six years now, and we're extremely
pleased with them. We could easily build our own, or give a spec to our
friendly system builder, but we don't. For us, having Optiplex workstations
saves us a bundle in time, trouble, and worry.

>
> Third, Intel blows - go with an AMD.

I wouldn't go that far, but I would say it doesn't matter which one you get.

>I could recommend the components for a DTP system that
>would probably be at least 1/3 of what they'll try to sell
>you and you wouldn't notice any speed difference without
>some benchmarking software.

Probably true. But...I don't have time to screw around searching for
drivers, troubleshooting my own handiwork, or dealing with four different
manufacturers. For my company, that's time better spent making books. :-)

---Mine is just a different perspective.

-John O

[Gabriel_Ayala@adobeforums.com]

Third, Intel blows - go with an AMD.





I wouldn't go that far, but I would say it doesn't matter which one you
get.




I would go that far, thank you. I have been using AMD processors since way back when... I still stick to AMD and will not switch to Pentium until Pentium learns how to make processors that actually are better than AMD's. They can say all they want about AMD but the fact of the matter is AMD has always been better and cheaper!

Most of my friends and family use Pentiums and those systems that are using Pentiums are too slow, frustrating (IMO) and absolute crap!

build it yourself. Dell and HP make and sell absolute crap as do Gateway,
IBM and Sony.





If you know what you are doing, the best bet is to build it yourself. If you must go with one of these companies go with Dell. I agree that they all suck but if I had to buy something pre-built it would be from Dell.

When I get a call for service it's ususally someone using a HP or a Gateway so I say stay away from those.

Pentium 4 vs. Xeon?
Try vs AMD 64!

Bottom line, for DTP, you could just get a cheap Processor/Motherboard combo for about $80 that comes with an AMD 2500 XP - that should be plenty of speed for DTP. There is really no need to get a Xeon or AMD64.

[Jonathan_Balza@adobeforums.com]

Gabriel... I just want to point out something - kind of a flaw in your logic. Dell does not sell AMD Processors of any type. <http://support.dell.com/support/topics/global.aspx/support/kb/en/document?dn=1055363&c=us&l=en&s=gen&cs=> Even though that document is old, it is still accurate, AFAIK.

So, my recommendation, based on Gabriel's post and my experience building my own PCs, would be to build your own using an AMD chip. The XP chips are probably the best value for the money.

[Gabriel_Ayala@adobeforums.com]

Johnathan,

I am aware that Dell does not sell AMD. This is why I recommend building your own. But... if you don't know how to build one then you'll have to settle for a Dell which in my opinion would be the second best choice.

Thank you,
Gabriel Ayala

[Stu_Bloom@adobeforums.com]

I wish I had nothing more important to worry about and argue about than which brand of 2GHz+ processor to buy.

Stu (who thought he'd died and gone to heaven when he got his 6 MHz IBM AT)

[Gabriel_Ayala@adobeforums.com]

Arguing???

Well yes, it's a discussion. That's why the hyperlink says "Reply To This Discussion".

[Ken_Grace@adobeforums.com]

Stu

Did you upgrade from an XT, or are you a newcomer to computing?

k

[Gabriel_Ayala@adobeforums.com]

6 MHz 8o LOL

[Stu_Bloom@adobeforums.com]

Ken--> I upgraded from a TRS-80 Model 2. For which I paid about $6,000., in 1979 or 1980 It was a real mean machine. Two single-sided disk drives, a whopping 48KB of RAM, and a diasywheel printer that blasted along at 10 cps.

Gabriel--> One would think there were more important things to "discuss."

those systems that are using Pentiums are too slow, frustrating (IMO)
and absolute crap!

[Gabriel_Ayala@adobeforums.com]

My present system needs to be retired to the Computer Old Aged Home before
it has a stroke.




If you want the latest and greatest for a good price, go with the AMD64.

[Bob_Flisser@adobeforums.com]

Jay,

FWIW, InDesign CS runs pretty well on my Dell 6500 workstation -- Xeon processor with 1 gb of memory, 120 gb drive and a Radeon 9000 AGP display with 128 mb (dual monitors).

My only performance complaint is that when I save my files (they're all about 50 mb), I can't tell when it's finished saving, since there's no progress bar. I click the screen, and if it goes white, I know it still has a few more seconds. That's when I check my e-mail.

I wouldn't mind having more display memory, but it's fast enough. On the same machine, the display performance beats the crap out of Quark Distress.