I'm making my first zm system out of parts I have to order. My readings here tell me AMD is not recomended for stability, stick to intels chips and boards, and I'll be using the live cd alot.
The following systems are all around my target pricepoiont, and all other things are similar, which would be the preferred of the three:
poll: deciding between celeron d, p4 and amd athalon
poll: deciding between celeron d, p4 and amd athalon
From 7000 feet in Colorado
Before we start an AMD vs Intel war here on the forums...
1. There is nothing wrong with the AMD cpu. Eons ago, the were constered "hotter" and "less stable". Now, that's rubbish. Both platforms are quite mature and stable. And AMD tends to have a better price/performance ratio.
2. The Pentium 4 is an older architecture, and the Celeron D is a good proccessor (Much better than the pre-D Celerons), as it's inexpensive (Don't know what your costs are for these systems) and it's not an E-Machine (although I don't rate Compaq much higher these days, as they are HP's lowest end cheap-as-can-be brand). Maybe some people have had good luck with EMachines... but I have not.
3. Why are you going to be using the live CD? Do you not plan on recording any events? Installing ZM seems logical to me.
My vote went to the Compaq Celeron 3.2.
--Pathway
1. There is nothing wrong with the AMD cpu. Eons ago, the were constered "hotter" and "less stable". Now, that's rubbish. Both platforms are quite mature and stable. And AMD tends to have a better price/performance ratio.
2. The Pentium 4 is an older architecture, and the Celeron D is a good proccessor (Much better than the pre-D Celerons), as it's inexpensive (Don't know what your costs are for these systems) and it's not an E-Machine (although I don't rate Compaq much higher these days, as they are HP's lowest end cheap-as-can-be brand). Maybe some people have had good luck with EMachines... but I have not.
3. Why are you going to be using the live CD? Do you not plan on recording any events? Installing ZM seems logical to me.
My vote went to the Compaq Celeron 3.2.
--Pathway
machine spec
I'm starting new, and when viewing the forums from my perspective, there's all sorts of caution over the amd's compatibility with linux, and having enough cpu speed. the live cd mention was a mistake. the athalon emachine, along with the others, have a HD with a 2 meg buffer, which is outdated, but maybe not a problem(?). This is the system i was thinking about.
http://www.emachines.com/products/produ ... prod=C6423
or
http://www.emachines.com/products/produ ... prod=C6535
thanks again for helping me sort this out.
http://www.emachines.com/products/produ ... prod=C6423
or
http://www.emachines.com/products/produ ... prod=C6535
thanks again for helping me sort this out.
From 7000 feet in Colorado
Let's get some more info about what your going to be dealing with...
How many cameras are we talking about? What kind of cameras? (IP or Analog with a capture card?) What kind of framerates are you expecting?
With any of these machines, You could expect to get 6+ cameras working, with no problem with a modest framerate. If you plan on recording, harddrive size will decide how long you can record for.
HD Buffer sizes can effect burst write/read speeds, but don't effect sustained transfers. If you're going to be recording a large number of cameras, HD speed might effect you. But it is unlikely you'll need to worry about it.
--Pathway
How many cameras are we talking about? What kind of cameras? (IP or Analog with a capture card?) What kind of framerates are you expecting?
With any of these machines, You could expect to get 6+ cameras working, with no problem with a modest framerate. If you plan on recording, harddrive size will decide how long you can record for.
HD Buffer sizes can effect burst write/read speeds, but don't effect sustained transfers. If you're going to be recording a large number of cameras, HD speed might effect you. But it is unlikely you'll need to worry about it.
--Pathway