AMD x4 OR C2Q?

[n0an]

Hello,

I am planning to buy a server to encode on as my PC is not equipped enough. I am confused between AMD Phenom x4 and Core 2 Quad. Here are the specs:

* Phenom Quad 940 3.0Ghz
* 2048 MB DDR2 RAM
* 250 GB 7.200 RPM



* Intel C2Q Q8200 2.33Ghz
* 2048 MB DDR2 RAM
* 250 GB 7.200 RPM


Which one would be better in terms of x264 and XviD?

[prOnorama]

According to this test here that Phenom model is a bit faster than the C2Q for x264 encoding:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/17402/8

If you can afford a Core i7 that's the fastest option right now for encoding x264/Xvid.

[n0an]

Hmm... interesting. My next options are these:

* Intel Core i7 920 2.66Ghz
* 4096 MB DDR3 RAM
* 250 GB 7.200 RPM
* 2000 GB Traffic p/m


* Intel Xeon Quad 5405
* 4096 MB FB DDR2 RAM
* 250 GB 7.200 RPM
* 2000 GB Traffic p/m


Is Xeon > i7?

[DJ Bobo]

Definitely the Phenom II X4 940. It's not only faster than the C2Q8200, you can also easily overclock it to 3.6GHz (since it's a black edition) at which level it is even comparable in speed to the Core i7, without paying the heavy bill of the Core i7 ;)
Xeons are even more expensive than the Core i7 CPUs, without any performance increase!

[Blue_MiSfit]

The new Xeons == Core i7. Same thing.

The only reason to buy a Xeon over an i7 would be if you have a dual socket server.

If you want a badass server at a reasonable price for x264 encoding, take a look at the PowerEdge R410. I'd suggest two Xeon 5520 CPUs, as these are entry level Core i7 CPUs. Toss in 8GB of RAM or so, and add a copy of Windows 7, and you'll have a mean 8 core (with HT so, 16 logical cores) server for under $2000 ;)

BTW, it's a 1U rack - but dell makes other form factors of course!

~MiSfit

[n0an]

Well, I am thinking of getting this:

# Intel Core i7 920 2.66Ghz
# 8192 MB DDR3 RAM

Here's the website:

http://worldstream.nl/

If you think a custom one could help, please give me a config so that I can contact the host. My budget is 130 euros incl. Win 2003 lincense and per month payment plan.

P.S. Any other good hosting will help too.

[DJ Bobo]

You do realise you're willing to pay almost 50€ more every month, just to get a few fps more right? This is about 600€ a year, which means the cost of a brand new powerful system every year!
It's as your life is hanging on this :confused:
Your choice man! ... luxury when you hunt us!

[nurbs]

The Phenom II 940 uses more power than the Core i7 920 both in idle and under load. At the same time the 920 is about 50% faster (at stock speed) than the athlon when encoding x264, so even if it was using more power the higher encoding speed would offset that. There's also the core i7 860 which offers the same encoding speed as the 920 for about the same price with less power draw.

Sources:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3492&p=7
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3641&p=8

That being said I wouldn't rent it at such a premium (35€/month), but rather buy it since the price difference is not that much. Are you sure that they rent the whole system to you and not just a virtual server on that system shared with others?

[DJ Bobo]

Well, obviously, anandtech have something wrong in their system.
The Phenom II X4 940 system draws 105W idle and 212W under load, the i7 920 system 126W idle and 231W under load (graphics card used in both cases: GeForce 9800 GTX+). See here (http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/prozessoren/2009/test_amd_phenom_ii_x4_920_940_black_edition/30/#abschnitt_leistungsaufnahme).
And the Phenom II regularly overclocks to 3.4~3.5GHz without pushing the voltage, which means without pushing the TDP, so the Core i7 is always at loss when considering costs.

[n0an]

It will take a year to save and buy a new high-end PC. I want to do that, but I need a solution for now as well. It will be hard to quit encoding and then start over again on getting a new PC. I can kinda afford a server as I earn bi-weekly, but upon graduation and getting a job, I will definitely buy a good PC.

Anyway, I cannot overclock the server, so I will have to use whatever it's there on the list. All EU companies including OVH (friggin' VAT) are expensive as of now (but their services is satisfactory). I want to invest in something which gives optimum performance. The reason behind getting a powerful machine with 8 gig ram is I will be sharing the server with a friend (encoder), so we need sufficient performance in case we both encode at the same time. I am skeptic about AMD as Intel has been the popular choice. I will be glad to invest in a C2Q if it will perform better than a Core i7.

I am seeking your advice 'cause I currently encode on a 4 yr old laptop which is my only lifeline :P. I will be trying out the server over Christmas break and then decide whether it is worth or not.

[nurbs]

If I take your numbers the Core i7 uses 9% more power under load, but it still has 28% higher encoding speed than the Phenom overclocked to 3.5 GHz.
The power consumption numbers on both anandtech and computerbase are the consumption of the system that was tested, not just the processor, so how can you say there was obviously something wrong with the anandtech test? Also it's a fact that the Core i7 860 uses less power than the 920 and so it would probably be tied with the Phenom or use less while still having a significant advantage in speed.
I do admit that the Intel system has higher cost, but personally I'd be willing to spend 100 to 200€ (10% - 20% of total system cost) more for a 30% reduction in encoding time.

[DJ Bobo]

There is absolutely no reason to be skeptic about AMD.
If there is something to be skeptic about, then it is Intel. Its "popularity" came from its antitrust practices. Not long ago, the new york district attorney general filed a complaint against Intel for its intimidation and bribe practices, which adds to the complaints filed in europe and Japan and others regions in the world. The EU sanctionned Intel not long ago with 1,06 billion euro for these practices. And Intel just payed another 1,25 billion dollars to AMD to clear its record with it ;)
Add to this that x86-64bit technology that everybody is so proud about is actually AMD technology, which Intel uses under license.

May be it's time for you to see things from another angle :)

Anyway, I truly suggest you get the X4 system. The C2Q8200 is no match to it anyway.
Even if you don't overclock it, you get pretty solid performance: you can convert a 2h movie with it in less than 3,5 hours. That makes easily 2 movies a night! That's more than you can afford to watch anyway :D
And the money you're willing to spend extra, you save it and it will get you the latest in PC technology in one year ;)

[nurbs]

That doesn't change the fact that when it comes to video encoding they offer significantly faster processors that aren't that much more expensive. If you are on a budget Phenom II isn't bad either, but the speed gain the Core i7 is well worth the money. If you are building a whole new system anyway, you are not being ripped off.

I normally don't rant, but DJ Bobo you are a fanboy. You misrepresent the benefits your companies product has to offer and play down it's drawbacks (up to 50% faster is "comparable speed" according to you). When somebody brings in solid numbers they have to be cooked. Then you link a german site to prove that "obviously" something is wrong with anandtechs numbers, but at the same site there is a big red disclaimer that says the numbers there are only for orientation and the ranking may be different with different components used. When even your own numbers don't support you you go on a tangent how Intel is an evil company, which has nothing to do with the suitability of their processors for the task at hand at all, and how AMD are the true innovators with x64 for which Intel is dependent on them. Of course you neglect to mention that Intel and AMD have a crosslicensing deal that at the same time gives AMD the right to use x86, SSE and other Intel technologies.

By the way, my current processor is an Athlon64 X2 and I'm very happy with it. Four of five systems I owned were AMD.

[prOnorama]

@ nurbs: i7 is a lot more expensive than Phenom II.

At a big online European retailer (Alternate) the Phenom II X4 955 BE is € 129,90 , The Intel Core i7 860 is € 239,90, that's like >90% more expensive.

The Core i5 750 is € 167,90 or about 30% more expensive and offers quite similar performance (a little bit faster for encoding purposes).

Still if encoding is all you do and you have the money that Core i7 860 seems the best choice to me. THe AMD wins best bang for buck.

[nurbs]

I know that, but you are probably not buying a processor alone. You need a mainboard, ram, graphics card, PSU, ect. When you buy all that 100€ isn't that much. Everyone is on a budget, but when you put it in context it's not as bad as DJ Bobo made it out to be.

[DJ Bobo]

@ nurbs
Don't make me say something I didn't say.
I said, when the Phenom II gets overclocked, it can be compared with the Core i7. And "compared" doesn't mean "equal", it's about leagues. If I tell you a BMW M3 is comparable to a Porsche Carrera, you can't tell me: oh, wait, the Porsche is 30km/h faster, that doesn't make them comparable! ;)
And overclocking on the Phenom II Black Edition is absolutely easy.
And it's only fair to tell him the whole story about "popular" Intel (well, it wasn't the whole story, I could have said a few other things :D), because he was "skeptical" about AMD. What was I supposed to do? Tell him, oh, you really don't have to know, if you're skeptical, please stay that way, go with "the popular choice"?
I didn't brought that from nowhere!

Anyway, everybody knows that getting the very high end in the PC World is a waste of money. What is the best today, is normal next year and costs half as much. It always have been like that, and it will always stay that way.
So buying a Core i7 to gain half an hour of encoding time per movie, or even an hour, and pay 600€ more per year doesn't sound profitable at all.
It's not like he's running a business and encoding 24/7, he's a student who transcodes a movie from time to time, it just shouldn't take an eternity. Paying 600€ more a year for amateur work is pure luxury, and the way he sounds, his budget is tight.
And when the budget is tight, every euro counts (you seem to forget that motherboards for i7's are more expensive than AMD motherboards too, and they don't have an IGP, so you need an extra graphics card, even if you're not intending to play on the thing, makes at least another 110-120€ extra ;))

I tell you something: don't argue with me when it comes to money, I've not been studying business administration for nothing :p
For me, it's all about the money :devil: ... well, ethics play a role too :D

[n0an]

@ nurbs
Don't make me say something I didn't say.
I said, when the Phenom II gets overclocked, it can be compared with the Core i7. And "compared" doesn't mean "equal", it's about leagues. If I tell you a BMW M3 is comparable to a Porsche Carrera, you can't tell me: oh, wait, the Porsche is 30km/h faster, that doesn't make them comparable! ;)
And overclocking on the Phenom II Black Edition is absolutely easy.
And it's only fair to tell him the whole story about "popular" Intel (well, it wasn't the whole story, I could have said a few other things :D), because he was "skeptical" about AMD. What was I supposed to do? Tell him, oh, you really don't have to know, if you're skeptical, please stay that way, go with "the popular choice"?
I didn't brought that from nowhere!

Anyway, everybody knows that getting the very high end in the PC World is a waste of money. What is the best today, is normal next year and costs half as much. It always have been like that, and it will always stay that way.
So buying a Core i7 to gain half an hour of encoding time per movie, or even an hour, and pay 600€ more per year doesn't sound profitable at all.
It's not like he's running a business and encoding 24/7, he's a student who transcodes a movie from time to time, it just shouldn't take an eternity. Paying 600€ more a year for amateur work is pure luxury, and the way he sounds, his budget is tight.
And when the budget is tight, every euro counts (you seem to forget that motherboards for i7's are more expensive than AMD motherboards too, and they don't have an IGP, so you need an extra graphics card, even if you're not intending to play on the thing, makes at least another 110-120€ extra ;))

I tell you something: don't argue with me when it comes to money, I've not been studying business administration for nothing :p
For me, it's all about the money :devil: ... well, ethics play a role too :D

You actualy grab my point by the n*ts :p. My budget is tight and I need a decent processor. What will you get from that site if you were me?

If AMD can take 30 more mins, but still be an all rounder then I will go for Phenom X4. Also, will it be able to easily handle two encodes at a time? For ex: A CCE + a normal encode.

[DJ Bobo]

You can run 2 encoding sessions at a time as long as you lower their priorities, so that they don't kill the responsiveness of the CPU.

That said, CCE isn't really a burden anymore on modern CPUs, since it is genuinely fast, and then it uses 2 cores only, leaving the other 2 free for whatever you wanna do.
On modern CPUs, you could actually finish a CCE run the time you take your breakfast :D

[n0an]

Hmm... so since there is not a drastic difference in the performance of the Phenom X4 955 and Core i7 920, I have decided to go the cheaper way with the Phenom X4 with 8Gig RAM. If this is not sufficient I can always upgrade to the i7 and actually understand the difference in terms of FPS and HT.

Thanks guys :).

[DJ Bobo]

You're welcome!

[nurbs]

If I tell you a BMW M3 is comparable to a Porsche Carrera, you can't tell me: oh, wait, the Porsche is 30km/h faster, that doesn't make them comparable! ;)
Depends, does a BMW M3 have a top speed of 100 km/h after you tuned the engine? Then we would have the comparable situations as with the overclocked Phenom and the i7.

And "compared" doesn't mean "equal", it's about leagues.
I assume you mean orders of magnitude. In that case my X2 is comparable with the fastest Phenom or i7 out there.

you seem to forget that motherboards for i7's are more expensive than AMD motherboards too, and they don't have an IGP, so you need an extra graphics card, even if you're not intending to play on the thing, makes at least another 110-120€ extra

I tell you something: don't argue with me when it comes to money, I've not been studying business administration for nothing
The cheapest phenom II board I found was 40€ including an IGP. The cheapest i7 board I found was 80€, the cheapest PCIe card 20€. That's a difference of 60€.
edit: Strike that found a cheaper Phenom board, difference up to 67€.


@n0an:
I'm not trying to change your decision, I just don't like the way DJ Bobo presents his arguments.

[Blue_MiSfit]

BTW - why use server 2k3? It's hideously expensive, and XP Pro (or windows 7) is a much better fit for a workstation.

[n0an]

BTW - why use server 2k3? It's hideously expensive, and XP Pro (or windows 7) is a much better fit for a workstation.

I only have the following options:

Windows 2003 Standard SPLA
€ 11.76 /m

Windows 2003 Enterprisse SPLA
€ 15.76 /m

Windows 2008 Standard SPLA
€ 13.76 /m

Windows 2008 Enterprise SPLA

Will ask the support if they can get XP for me.

[foxyshadis]

And it's only fair to tell him the whole story about "popular" Intel (well, it wasn't the whole story, I could have said a few other things :D), because he was "skeptical" about AMD. What was I supposed to do? Tell him, oh, you really don't have to know, if you're skeptical, please stay that way, go with "the popular choice"?
I didn't brought that from nowhere!

I'd rather not. Don't bring up politics or antitrust or lawsuits outside of the general forum, especially not in every related thread; I won't stand for the forum to turn into a typical hardware site flamefest. Keep it in threads made for that; in the rest of the forum, keep it to raw performance and real worries, like the long-term support of new or aging platforms.