Old PC vs. New

Additional operating system/hardware discussion (Windows, Linux, *BSD and others)
Forum rules
Any posts concerning pirated software or offering to buy/sell/trade commercial software are subject to removal.
User avatar
edikat
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:21 pm
Location: UK

Old PC vs. New

Unread postby edikat » Sat Jan 28, 2012 9:50 am

Hi there Guys

I have a choice of PC's, both cheap, but as I am on a budget (£100/$160 is the price my friend is offering me for either PC) I need to know which would be more powerful, both computationally and I/O. I'm not too familiar with PC technology to this degree so any help much appreciated. I'll be running CentOS 5.7 64-bit with a LISP environment (a lot of heavy functional programming). Video is unimportant.

PC#1
Dell Precision Workstation 470 (2005 manufactured) with 2nd Generation 'Solid Caps' Motherboard
Dual 3.6GHZ XEON Nocona 64-bit CPU's, (1MB L2 I think)
4GB DDR2 ECC
80GB+500GB SATA
DVD
Fire GL 3100 Card 128MB PCI-X

PC#2
Generic Built Machine (a few years old)
AMD Athlon X2 6000+ Dual-Core Processor - 3.00 GHz, 2MB L2
4GB
500GB SATA
DVD
Some ATI 512MB Video Card (unknown model)

Would their be big differences between the two?
I'll be doing symbolic manipulation with LISP (programming development).

Thanks for any advice!
"Scud" East
Sun Blade 2500 'Silver' Workstation - Dual 1.6 USIIIi, 4GB, 146GB SCSI, Solaris 10U9
Sun V210, 2x1.33 USIIIi, 8GB, 73GB 15K, Solaris 10U9
Sun V100, USIIi 550, 1.5GB, 40GB, Debian Lenny 5.X

User avatar
Adrenaline
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 12:37 pm
Location: Laurel, MD USA
Contact:

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby Adrenaline » Sat Jan 28, 2012 10:58 am

Both are DDR2 systems, which is unfortunate because DDR3 is crazy cheap right now.

The AMD PC probably has more than the 2 SATA connections that the Dell offers and being a generic build replacing parts would be easier.

As far as performance, the Xeon's would probably win when hyper-threading is taken into consideration.
:Indigo: 33mhz R3k/48mb/XS24 :Indy: 150mhz R4400/256mb/XL24 :Fuel: 600mhz R14kA/2gb/V10 Image 8x1.4ghz Itanium 2/8GB :O3x08R: 32x600mhz R14kA/24GB :Tezro: 4x700mhz R16k/8GB/V12/DCD/SAS/FC/DM5 (2x) :O3x0: 4x700mhz R16k/4GB :PrismDT: 2x1.6ghz 8mb/12gb/SAS/2xFGL

robespierre
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:28 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby robespierre » Sat Jan 28, 2012 1:41 pm

You may want to check the multiprocessing details of the software environments you will be using... most Lisp implementations still have some form of "global interpreter lock" or single-threaded memory allocator, which would reduce any benefits of multiple cores or HT.
:PI: :O2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indigo2IMP:

User avatar
[[C|-|E]]
Posts: 413
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 1:37 am
Location: London - UK

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby [[C|-|E]] » Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:28 pm

The PC with the two Xeons should be faster. You have two processors and two buses, after all. The mobo is going to be also better (talking about construction quality). However, I do not know what to say about conectivity. I would choose the Dell if the computer was for me :).
Image _Betty Blue_
R12000A 400 Mhz; 1 Gb RAM; 72 Gb 15K HDD; IRIX 6.5.29
CrystalEyes; Dial Box; O2Cam "ZEYE"; external Toshiba SD-M1711 DVD-ROM; Octane speakers;
Lock bar; SGI microphone.
Mods: PSU Noctua fan; internal Toshiba SD-M1401 DVD-ROM; Adaptec AIC-7880P SCSI card.

_REKIEM_I7_
Seasonic X 1250W PSU / Intel I7 2600k 4 x 5,00 Ghz / 2 x Gainward 2Gb GTX 560Ti Phantom 2 / 32 Gb DDR3 / Intel x25-M 160 Gb SSD and 10 extra Tb
_REKIEM_T5400_
875W PSU / 2 x Intel Xeon Harpertown 4 x 3,33 Ghz / 1 x Geforce 4Gb GTX 970 / 1 x Geforce 1Gb GTX 750 / 32 Gb DDR2 667 ECC / Samsung 840 Series Pro 128GB SSD and 3 extra Tb
_Raspberry Pi_
:|

SAQ
Posts: 5758
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 8:37 am
Location: Renton, WA

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby SAQ » Sat Jan 28, 2012 8:42 pm

I can't speak to FireGL, but I'm typing this at a computer running ATi graphics on Linux and I'm wishing that I left the nVidia Quadro FX 1400 from my old dual Opeteron in this one. The ATi/AMD Linux drivers are... very poor, and I've had many more problems with crashing X server and artifacts than I had on the nVidia.
Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

There are those who say I'm a bit of a curmudgeon. To them I reply: "GET OFF MY LAWN!"

:Indigo: :Octane: :Indigo2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indy: :PI: :O3x0: :ChallengeL: :O2000R: (single-CM)

hamei
Posts: 10005
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby hamei » Sat Jan 28, 2012 10:35 pm

SAQ wrote:I can't speak to FireGL, but I'm typing this at a computer running ATi graphics on Linux ...

Don't I see an Octane in your sig ? :P

User avatar
vishnu
Posts: 2215
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 3:25 pm
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby vishnu » Sun Jan 29, 2012 12:40 am

hamei wrote:Don't I see an Octane in your sig ? :P
That's why I don't have a sig; since I do virtually all my computering on Sun Sparc/Intel Linux I'd feel like I'm sandbagging... :cry:
Project:
Temporarily lost at sea...
Plan:
World domination! Or something...

User avatar
edikat
Posts: 85
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2011 4:21 pm
Location: UK

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby edikat » Sun Jan 29, 2012 8:43 am

Thanks guys for the replies.

I had an opportunity to view both systems, and the Dell seemed totally solid in its build, and looked really well made, and in the end I decided on that.
Actually the guy threw in an old (2003) Dell 2001FP 20" 1600x1200 DVI Monitor and all the original media and books.

Dell Precisions seem like nice machines.
"Scud" East
Sun Blade 2500 'Silver' Workstation - Dual 1.6 USIIIi, 4GB, 146GB SCSI, Solaris 10U9
Sun V210, 2x1.33 USIIIi, 8GB, 73GB 15K, Solaris 10U9
Sun V100, USIIi 550, 1.5GB, 40GB, Debian Lenny 5.X

SAQ
Posts: 5758
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 8:37 am
Location: Renton, WA

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby SAQ » Sun Jan 29, 2012 2:38 pm

hamei wrote:
SAQ wrote:I can't speak to FireGL, but I'm typing this at a computer running ATi graphics on Linux ...

Don't I see an Octane in your sig ? :P


Yep, a 2x250 with 700-something MB of RAM and a 18GB disk drive. Fun to play with, but a bit of a pain for serious work. I have the Origins as well, but I have had very little luck getting them to reliably work as clients with X.org servers.

SGI was/is nice in terms of build quality and general well-thought-out design, but in terms of price per SPECmark/MB of RAM/GB of filesystem space (for the set of all of the above in capacities required for modern work), and all of the above per KWh they don't look so good compared to an x86/x64, especially when you consider I got mine for free. Let's look at the specs:

Intel box:
Crossbar-switched I/O: Check
SMP: Check
Interleaved memory: Check
Decent disk interface: Almost
NUMA: Not on this one, but my previous one had it (Opeteron)
Accelerated graphics with 3D and OpenGL support, including hardware geometry and texture: Check in theory, though the drivers suck. Again previous machine had it.
L33t flashing lights and windows all over the place: No, by the grace of God.
System controller: No
True, 100% remote console that works all the time: No
Expandable system using additional bricks: No, but then again neither is the Octane (or Fuel).
Can use the latest junky apps (and sometimes not-so-junky apps) without lots of porting issues: Yes

Let's face it: you have to be really committed to use a SGI all of the time or even most of the time. There are some things that they do well, but I've got Sun machines, DEC machines, SGI machines, an Apollo machine, etc. - and what I use most of the time is the junky old "common" PC. I've gotten over my "Big-endian load/store machines are The One True Way" complex, and while I still appreciate the design of a good computer I also acknowledge that the box on my desk, while designed to the minimums, does most of what I need quietly, quickly, and energy efficiently. Yeah, I'd love to play around with a newish Alpha or POWER box, but those cost big money (compared to my budget) and are big/noisy/hungry.

Yeah, Linux sucks. I've had it on boxes since the late-mid '90s, and it's been going downhill. On the plus side Windows is now just about useable - I no longer need to take the precaution of always removing those of delicate sensibilities from earshot when I start troubleshooting a Winbox. xBSD has fewer apps and less hardware support, but it's still pretty rock solid. Yea, MacOS is very good, but the only Mac offered that's good for someone who can't leave well enough alone^h^h^h^h^h^h^h a "tweaker" is the Mac Pro, which is quite expensive, and none of the PCs I've been given have been "Hackintosh-friendly", so I use my G4 occasionally and find other ways to do everything else.

I guess the short answer to this all is "time moves on", and though modern x64 desktops don't match everything that SGI/Sun/IBM had/has, they do enough cheap enough to be the general go-to solution for most day-to-day business.
Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!

There are those who say I'm a bit of a curmudgeon. To them I reply: "GET OFF MY LAWN!"

:Indigo: :Octane: :Indigo2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indy: :PI: :O3x0: :ChallengeL: :O2000R: (single-CM)

User avatar
guardian452
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby guardian452 » Sun Jan 29, 2012 2:58 pm

so a dell designed by dell engineers to function reasonably well as a computer in a professional environment, or a compilation of spare parts masquerading as a computer? You made the right choice... those noconas are dogs (P4 architecture) but the machine as a whole should be much better.
You eat Cadillacs; Lincolns too... Mercurys and Subarus.

hamei
Posts: 10005
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby hamei » Sun Jan 29, 2012 6:18 pm

SAQ wrote:SGI was/is nice in terms of build quality and general well-thought-out design, but in terms of price per SPECmark/MB of RAM/GB of filesystem space (for the set of all of the above in capacities required for modern work), and all of the above per KWh they don't look so good compared to an x86/x64, especially when you consider I got mine for free.

I was mostly pulling your leg :P

On the other hand, for "typing on a Linux box with ATi graphics", I'd say a dual 250 Octane would be better. At least on the Octane you would be in comfortable surroundings. All the talk about groovy new hardware misses one vital point - it's the software that really matters. And Irix vs Linux / Windows / Plan 9 ... well ....

btw, I've seen dualler 360 pimms for less than $80. That's a really worthwhile upgrade.

Not that I'm pushing you to do something you don't want ... if you'd rather run Loonix or whatever, that's cool. I just like Irix. It's nice.

Just to kick you one more time, "typing" is not exactly cpu-cycles intensive, unless you're a hell of a lot faster than me :P

Yeah, Linux sucks. I've had it on boxes since the late-mid '90s, and it's been going downhill. On the plus side Windows is now just about useable - I no longer need to take the precaution of always removing those of delicate sensibilities from earshot when I start troubleshooting a Winbox. xBSD has fewer apps and less hardware support, but it's still pretty rock solid. Yea, MacOS is very good, but the only Mac offered that's good for someone who can't leave well enough alone^h^h^h^h^h^h^h a "tweaker" is the Mac Pro, which is quite expensive, and none of the PCs I've been given have been "Hackintosh-friendly", so I use my G4 occasionally and find other ways to do everything else.

If all else fails, you could always try Irix ....

I guess the short answer to this all is "time moves on" ...

Does it ? Pussy's been the same for the past few thousand years. I don't imagine there's been much change in the important things ...

Scott Newhall used to go to rallies in his 1917 Packard. He drove, everyone else towed. All his friends kept saying, "Bad idea, Scott. What if that old car breaks down ?" So he finally gave in. Next rally, he showed up towing - he put a hitch on the '14 Packard and pulled the '17 behind it.

You don't have to 'change with the times" if you don't want to. I'm not saying you shouldn't if you do want to but there's no reason to let conventional wisdom make your choices for you. Use what you like, and to hell with the critics. If you like Irix, it's not impractical to use it on a daily basis, no matter what the children say. Especially for typing :P


guardian452 wrote:so a dell designed by dell engineers to function reasonably well as a computer in a professional environment ...

Are we talking about the same Dell here ? Or are you posting from a parallel universe ?

User avatar
guardian452
Posts: 2963
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 10:12 pm
Contact:

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby guardian452 » Sun Jan 29, 2012 9:58 pm

Are we talking about the same Dell here ? Or are you posting from a parallel universe ?
I'd take a dell workstation over some hodgepodge of whitebox parts any day of the week. unless there was thick smoke coming out of the dell...

I used to run something similar. Only complaint I had with my HP "PC workstation" was windows...
You eat Cadillacs; Lincolns too... Mercurys and Subarus.

hamei
Posts: 10005
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:10 pm
Location: over the rainbow

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby hamei » Sun Jan 29, 2012 10:42 pm

guardian452 wrote:I'd take a dell workstation over some hodgepodge of whitebox parts any day of the week...

Umm, that's pretty much the definition of a Dell ... a bunch of whatever whitebox parts they could get cheapest that week, all stuffed into their own case. They make money by "managing the supply chain", not "building good computers." Dell was pretty much a leader in the charge to the bottom ....

User avatar
Adrenaline
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 12:37 pm
Location: Laurel, MD USA
Contact:

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby Adrenaline » Mon Jan 30, 2012 4:07 am

hamei wrote:
guardian452 wrote:I'd take a dell workstation over some hodgepodge of whitebox parts any day of the week...

Umm, that's pretty much the definition of a Dell ... a bunch of whatever whitebox parts they could get cheapest that week, all stuffed into their own case. They make money by "managing the supply chain", not "building good computers." Dell was pretty much a leader in the charge to the bottom ....


Agreed, I'd take a well built whitebox anyday (thus I never buy prebuilt except my MIPS SGI machines). Get a decent CPU (Intel/AMD), high quality memory (G Skill/Corsair/etc), Seasonic based power supply (Antec/etc), Lian Li/Antec/etc case, Asus or like motherboard with a midrange or better chipset (8xx/9xx for AMD, not sure the Intel equivalent), 6000 series Radeon or the equivalent GeForce and a Western Digital Black drive. With all of that you've got plenty of upgrade room and maybe even saved some money over a Dell/HP/etc. Been white boxing it since 1997 and never looked back.
:Indigo: 33mhz R3k/48mb/XS24 :Indy: 150mhz R4400/256mb/XL24 :Fuel: 600mhz R14kA/2gb/V10 Image 8x1.4ghz Itanium 2/8GB :O3x08R: 32x600mhz R14kA/24GB :Tezro: 4x700mhz R16k/8GB/V12/DCD/SAS/FC/DM5 (2x) :O3x0: 4x700mhz R16k/4GB :PrismDT: 2x1.6ghz 8mb/12gb/SAS/2xFGL

robespierre
Posts: 729
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 2:28 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Old PC vs. New

Unread postby robespierre » Mon Jan 30, 2012 5:21 am

the notion that Dell "designs" or "engineers" in quaint... these days it's ODMs that do that.
:PI: :O2: :Indigo2IMP: :Indigo2IMP:


Return to “Miscellaneous Operating Systems/Hardware”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest