I have an Athlon XP 3200+. It has a clock speed of 2.2Ghz. I wanted to upgrade to a Dual Core processor since everyone say that is the way to go for speed and Multitasking. But I just looked at what APPEARED to be a SIGNIFICANTLY more powerful chip, the Athlon 64 X2 4400+. This is a 64 Bit, Dual Core Processor, with AMD's nonsensicaly misleading 4400 in the name. But this chip is rated at.. GUESS.. 2.2Ghz. WTF??!! Am I really going to get better performance out of this upgrade getting a chip with Identical clock speed? Will this make Video Editing Faster?
Really depends if the app is multithreaded (if it isn't then you are only running 1 core), if it is 64bit (the XP is 32bit only), makes use of SSE2 (XP didn't have SSE2, although mmx or 3dnow is often faster for AMD chips anyway), etc. If it is 32bit, single threaded with no SSE2 then I wouldn't expect a large difference between the two.
I would be running Avid Liquid 7.0 and Photoshop CS 2. I run several programs at once and would like to be able multitask while running edits. (i.e. - Surf the web an the like)
I was told that a AMD 64 3200 = 3.2 gigahertz even though it list as 2.2.So if that is true then a AMD 64 4400 should be 4.4 gigahertz.Even though they list lower they are faster than a p4 and have their own memory contoller on a dual core which is beter the core duo because it doesn't rely on the front side bus like core duo.
No, AMD even lists on the product specs that the 64 bit chips use the same weird naming system. The Athlon 64 X2 4800+ runs at 2.4Ghz. That is why I am struggling to find out if this upgrade is worth the money. It is weird though, because so many people who use these boards talk about how powerful their computers are, and yet, no one is willing to answer with some info about whether this is a worthwhile upgrade.
I'm not too sure but from what I've read you would be much better off with the dual core processor. As I understand it, The dual core processor wont really speed up your computer, so if you're using ONE program that takes up alot of power, you'll still have the same problem... BUT, if you're using more then one program (like you're suggesting, with the video editing software, webbrowsing etc) then dual core is definitely the way to go because it will use each processor to run each program. in effect the dual core runs both programs simultaneously at the same speed as the XP processor would run just one. (hope that made sense haha)
