Thread: AMD or Intel
View Single Post
  #6  
Old 03-04-06, 19:14
Leif Leif is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Luton
Posts: 911
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen Fox
I understand modern computers are developed for gamers and game requirements. Photographers need another set of requirements of a PC, both AMD and Intel produce fine microprocessors but if purchasing from a clean slate and no brand allegiance which is best for the photographer interested in fast and efficient RAW conversion from the like of Nikon Capture.

Please note, thread not designed to be AMD v's Intel bashing!
I work in IT, and colleagues at my last client site reckoned that AMD Athlon gave better bang for the pound. However, I'm not sure there's much in it.

I think that your best bet is to look at magazines like PC World when they do tests of a selection of machines. What matters is how well the components - CPU, motherboard, RAM, HDD, graphics card - work together, rather than just the CPU. A good manufacturer will make sure that no component causes a bottleneck, and that no component is over specified relative to the others. Places like Evesham, and Mesh usually do well. Also I've found that the cheapest way to speed up a machine is by adding RAM. You really need at least 1GB RAM and more is better. Of course you need to avoid a gaming machine!

Colleagues also recommended XP Pro rather than the standard XP. If you have a hyper-threading capable Intel Pentium, you'll need XP Pro to take advantage of it. I think the latest Photoshop can use hyper-threading. (Hyper-threading allows the processor to emulate multiple CPUs so that programs that use multiple threads can run faster.)

Also Nikon are bringing out an update to NC which - fingers crossed - will be faster. Oh look, is that Father Christmas in a sled pulled by 6 flying pigs?

Leif
Reply With Quote