Knowname wrote: aren't p4s just quicker at editing?? In normal tasks it's rather apparent that they aren't pound for pound as good but this guy is interested in editing. I would say, if you game more go A64, if not- go P4.
"Mistakes" is such a broad word, but what I was referring to are missed branches. You can't tell if those are occurring or not as such a high-level. I could tell you if I could get on a simulator and well "ran" Preimiere on it with standard ops that it would send. That isn't feasible though.
It is feasible to say that I imagine Adobe products have mispredicted branches and those will be insanely slow (in CPU terms) with all the squashing and redirecting.
Also the P4's WERE better for editing, but A) I thought we were recommending a Pentium-Mobile and B) THat was the past. Last articles I read (given this was a good two months ago), AMD had the undisputed crown in everything except....mp3 encoding? It was a big deal since we beat them in everything and for a cheaper processor.
Given I am talking about something like say the FX-55 which we are not discussing, but I'm *pretty sure* we have the performance crown *at the moment*. Honestly it changes a lot so I wouldn't be surprised if they retook.
Just wait till our dualcores?
Also a big reason for my argument (other than my obvious bias) is compatibility and looking forward. With Athlon-64's, you get 64-bits NOW and won't have to upgrade in a few years just to run your 64-bit applications. I'd rather have that even if the P4's were better by a small margin.
I mean it doesn't matter how fast you run things if you can't run it due to incompatibilities right?