Read this thread late!
I'd run Intel, it has a better memory bandwidth than the older Athlons. It also clocks very well and doesn't run too hot. Many people report its more stable with the music software too. Personally I HATE computers with music, they're so unreliable. I use hardware in my studio and only sequence in the computer + a little audio.
You will need at least DDR400 with the Intel.
Most PC's are very powerful and if you're not running racks of virtual synths and effects you don't need huge power.
Athlon 64 is not worth the money, it's limited to around 2.4ghz without sub zero cooling. All the architectures are due for a big change at the moment.
Is Mac the way to go? Well if you can afford it and put up with the fact it's slower, it's supposed to be more reliable and therefore is worth it.
If you bought Asus or Abit and some better ram you could have clocked to around 3.2ghz on air. Pity you only bought 3200!
Thanks, Tim
I'd run Intel, it has a better memory bandwidth than the older Athlons. It also clocks very well and doesn't run too hot. Many people report its more stable with the music software too. Personally I HATE computers with music, they're so unreliable. I use hardware in my studio and only sequence in the computer + a little audio.
You will need at least DDR400 with the Intel.
Most PC's are very powerful and if you're not running racks of virtual synths and effects you don't need huge power.
Athlon 64 is not worth the money, it's limited to around 2.4ghz without sub zero cooling. All the architectures are due for a big change at the moment.
Is Mac the way to go? Well if you can afford it and put up with the fact it's slower, it's supposed to be more reliable and therefore is worth it.
If you bought Asus or Abit and some better ram you could have clocked to around 3.2ghz on air. Pity you only bought 3200!
Thanks, Tim