computer question

[baw]

I'm going to order a compter for home. We get a 12% discount through dell but its not on every model. I can get 12% off a precision 690 with two dual core intel 5160 3.0ghz with 4GB or ram.

or if I dont use the discount and go with two quad core 2.66ghz xeons with 4GB. Its about $1600 more. And after looking at the bench marks on this website it looks like I would only be gainning about 25-35 seconds? The 5160 was rendering the test at 2m 26 secs while the quad was just under 2min. I dont think the extra cash is worth it do you?

[percydaman]

call dell and tell them you want the discount on whatever model you want. They're in the business of making money, let em know how important it is, and you'll probably get what you want. Make sure you talk with a business class salesman.

[AJ Jefferies]

Re: computer question

And after looking at the bench marks on this website it looks like I would only be gainning about 25-35 seconds?

Assuming you're only ever going to render the benchmark, yes.

[baw]

funny....

serously though. In day to day work is that extra mony worth it?

[Geertvdp]

Baw,
The difference of the current test between a 5355 quad 2.66ghz xeon model and a 5160 dual core 3ghz model is about 50 sec.
That in it self doesn't say much, it is the % comparative that reveals the true power of a system: if the first system is equal to 100%, then your cheaper dual core 5160 will do it in roughly 160% of that time.

To put that in production perspective: if you render an animation in 100 hours, it will take you 60 more on the cheaper system....
The bottom line is that you'll have the job finished almost 3 days earlier with the faster system.
If (I know, it is conditional!!!) that could mean that you get 1 more job done per month, you'll understand that the 1600$ will be gained back pretty fast....

The investment in a fast and expensive system is very closely related to the volume of work you have. The more work you have, the more it makes sense to go for the fastest system you can get....
Personally, if I were on a budget, I'd have a look at the low end quadcore's (5310 &5320) or a quadcore QX6700 instead of buying 5160's.

[baw]

well. I already pulled the trigger and got tthe 2 dual core xeon 3GHZ. The quad was coming in too high on the price. The wife just woulnt allow it

[Geertvdp]

If it can be of any comfort.. I know the feeling...
I choose a QX6700 system and I'm pretty happy about it never the less.

[baw]

my current system runs that test at about 8min. So what I'm getting is a huge improvement. I just hope I dont regret not spending the extra $1500 or so for the quad

[baw]

ok after further review. A dual quad core 2.33 would be $200 more than the dual core 3.00

The quad would be alot faster would it not?

[Geertvdp]

yes....by far
even the quadcore 1.6ghz is marginally faster then the 3ghz dual core...

look at my list :
http://www.chaosgroup.com/forum/phpB...=asc&start=125

roughly put: 8x1.6 > 4x3 , on condition both cpu's use the same technology (which they do in this case, as the quad is nothing more then 2 core duo's stuck together)

[baw]

I canceled the order and made a new one. The first order they would not load 64 bit because I had to order through the employee discount area and not the small buisness section. Apparantly its not available through that. So I would have had to purchase 64 bit and load it.

so...Instead of a dual core 3.0 with 4gig and having to purchase 64 bit later I'm getting a dual quad core 2.2 with 4gig and windows xp64 bit (apparantly when ordering a quad they have no choice but to load 64, go figure) all for only $189 difference!

[Geertvdp]

You've gained ±26% of performance with only 189$ in surplus.
Good move.