> > I have an Athalon 1.33 and a KT133A motherboard running W2K. Also
> > running a
> > load of USB & SCSI perhipherals, as well as firewire for a Nikon
scanner.
> > There is nothing inherently wrong with this combination. It works
> > as well as
> > I could want it to.
>
>
>
> Read the fifth paragraph (counting from below the byline) about DIMMs and
> W2K.
That would apply to the Abit board. I'm running an Asus board, and am always
switching configurations. Right now I have three 512 meg DIMMS, but I've run
the board with one and two DIMMS. Never any instability problems.
> > It really depends on the application. Some applications and graphic card
> > drivers are optimized for multi-processor systems and give a much higher
> > performance boost. Some applications don't show any change at all.
>
> We were talking Photoshop. Photoshop does genuinely get better with a
> dual-processor system.
So it seems. As soon as the Athalon dual systems are out in full force, I'll
probably go that route.
> Ah, I should have said I was comparing prices of Crucial (made by Micron)
> RAM. I would recommend peeps don't buy "unbranded" RAM. Crucial and
> Corsair are the most respected names. Prices of unbranded RAM are quite a
> lot cheaper. In high performance systems I reckon this is a risky route
to
> take.
I pretty much use Micron exclusively. It's about 25%more than generic ram,
but in my experience it's been 100% reliable. DDR ram is still overpriced
here in Canada.
> I saw benchmarks of a 1.3GHz Athlon outperforming a 1.7GHz P4 in
> Photoshop... Wish I knew where they were now.
I may have seen the same benchmarks. The P4 does better in some tests, the
Athalon better in others. Overall, the nod was given to the Athalon systems
However, if you're working with huge files (in the hundreds of megabytes),
the P4 with it's faster throughput might be a better choice.
