myemail.an@googlemail.com wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am about to choose a new desktop computer (budget: £ 550 - £ 600
> max, excluding monitor) and would like some advice on the processor:
> 1) AMD or Intel? I struggle to understand to what extent there are
> different schools of thought, and to what extent there are constant
> and actual changes going on, so that one month AMD is better and the
> month after it no longer is
> 2) Dual core or quad core? I could get a dual core 3.4 Ghz AMD or a
> 2.4 quad core AMD for roughly the same price. I wonder if with 4
> processors you hit the point of diminishing returns. The most CPU-
> intensive tasks I'll ran are dvd ripping, video encoding and photo
> editing (at an amateur level, nothing professional). With a quad core
> system, can I encode 3 movies at a time, assigning each encoding job
> to one processor only, and leave the other processor free for other
> stuff (i.e. watch a movie, surf the web, etc)?
> 3) I will be using both Windows (probably XP 32bit) and Linux,
> probably Kubuntu 64bit. Is there any specific difference in the way
> the operating systems manage dual or quad cores?
>
> Thanks for your help!

example i built a amd x2 5600 64 bit pc £400
a friend built a intel 6400 duo2 64 bit pc £1000
yes his is faster in some areas but the question is do you need all that
speed then i would consider heat and make sure you have a good heat sink
fan and a decent case.

So the first question you should ask your self is what do you intend to use
the pc for and work from there if i went up to amd x2 6000 64 bit mine
would equal and out perform his in some areas and would be cheaper.

my pc does dvd ripping without slowing up and i can do video editing running
four instances of avidemux2 at the same time and still use other
applications.