Re: Opteron or Athlon 64 FX?
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 01:22:00AM -0500, Marc D.M. wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 19:57 -0400, dtutty@porchlight.ca wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 10:11:52PM -0500, Marc D.M. wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 20:44 -0400, dtutty@porchlight.ca wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 06:58:10PM -0500, Marc D.M. wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 2006-09-01 at 18:19 -0400, dtutty@porchlight.ca wrote:
> > > > > > scan, retouch, and store pictures from a digital camera
> > > > > > watch DVDs on my big drafting monitor
> > > > > > transfer my old VHS tapes to DVD and edit out commercials.
> > > > > > (dream-on) filter out the snow since some where recorded
> > > > > > off-air (antenna).
> > > > > >
> > > > Can you comment on anything you run on both the opterons and the AMD64,
> > > > how the performance differes in a real-world sense? If you were
> > > > building a combined server/workstation or straight workstaiton would you
> > > > choose the opteron or the AMD64?
> > justification for doing the video VHS->DVD transfer is if it cheaper to
> > get a more power computer to do it (compared to whatever it takes to run
> > Java and Flash in Mozilla) than to just by a DVD recorder to do the
> > transfer. Is this valid, or would the DVD recorder be cheaper?
> Any sempron you buy today will be plenty fast enough for editing photos
> and audio. And if you get a half-decent video card with its own memory,
> you'll be playing games and editing video.
>
> Get the best Amd64 you can afford and no less tha 1GB ram. You'll be
> happy.
What about the merits of ECC memory? My previous computers have always
had it and the hardware-HOWTO says to always use it. Now, it seems,
that if one wants ECC they have to go Opteron. What has changed? Is
generic memory so reliable that ECC is no longer necessary? How do the
errors that ECC would normaly fix show themselves?
Doug.
Reply to: