| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
M00dy
Killed In Action
The Crimson Federation
   |
Posted - 2008.01.07 18:06:00 -
[1]
I'm buying a new computer in a month and I'm trying to decide which processor to buy.
AMD AthlonÖ64 X2 5200 or Intel Core 2 Duo Processor E6550
I'm very frugal. I don't want the best. I just want the best cheap stuff.
I know most will say to get the E6750 but I don't want to. I just want to play premium EvE and some other older games.
The E6550 is will cost me around $65 more. Is it really worth that? I don't think so, but I wanted to be sure. I hear that AMD isn't worse, but why is that?
RATatatatatat - Moody
Killed In Action
The Crimson Federation |
M00dy
Killed In Action
The Crimson Federation
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 18:06:00 -
[2]
I'm buying a new computer in a month and I'm trying to decide which processor to buy.
AMD AthlonÖ64 X2 5200 or Intel Core 2 Duo Processor E6550
I'm very frugal. I don't want the best. I just want the best cheap stuff.
I know most will say to get the E6750 but I don't want to. I just want to play premium EvE and some other older games.
The E6550 is will cost me around $65 more. Is it really worth that? I don't think so, but I wanted to be sure. I hear that AMD isn't worse, but why is that?
RATatatatatat - Moody
Killed In Action
The Crimson Federation |
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 18:31:00 -
[3]
The Core 2 is worth it. It is much, much faster.
|
Asestorian
Domination.
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 18:38:00 -
[4]
Core 2 Duo is better, there's not much reason not to get it.
---
MOZO
|
Paulo Damarr
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 19:14:00 -
[5]
The Core 2 Duo undoubtedly scores better in most benchmarks but unless your planning to overclock the bejesus out of it you wont notice much real world performance gain (seriously we are talking 5 fps in shooters or a few seconds on encoding times).
AMDs aggressive pricing policy means you can save a lot of money on the processor and the motherboard so you can get a much better mainboard for your cash, you can then put your savings towards other components which in the wider picture your machine will actually outperform a Core 2 duo machine built within a similar price range.
-----------------------------------------------
My new years resolution is to give up nonconstructive posting |
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 19:22:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Paulo Damarr
The Core 2 Duo undoubtedly scores better in most benchmarks but unless your planning to overclock the bejesus out of it you wont notice much real world performance gain (seriously we are talking 5 fps in shooters or a few seconds on encoding times).
The Core 2 Duo rips the Athlon 64 a new one with or without overclocking 
|
Paulo Damarr
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 19:25:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Paulo Damarr on 07/01/2008 19:27:16
ú for ú the performance increase is not that great. Good quality RAM and mobo will soon make that up.
-----------------------------------------------
My new years resolution is to give up nonconstructive posting |
Buxaroo
Reikoku
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 19:25:00 -
[8]
I am usually the guy who says go with AMD. But I am not a fanboy sense it's my money on the line and I want to go with the best I can get for the $$. So I am in Intel's corner this year.
I went from a 3400+ AMD64 (socket 754 grrr) and X800 GTO to the following:
Intel Duo Core2 6750 2.66ghz
4 gigs DDR2 800mhz
EVGA 8800GT 512meg
So far I am loving the hell out of it. The other night was my first fleet battle with this setup and it performed like a champ. We had around 800 in local. I was in my alt's carrier. I had full effects on AND sound. I saw and heard every whiz bang bam there was. Saw every laser rail autocannon there was going. And my fps never got below 30 with an average of 40.
Having said that, your main bottle neck is probably going to be the videocard. But go with the Intel duo cores. This time Intel didn't drop the ball.
ps, damn DS didn't know you joined MC....don't hate me if I end up on your killmail 
|
Battou
Caldari
Slacker Industries
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 22:06:00 -
[9]
Sweet another AMD bashing thread. Intel does have the better chip right now, but its common knowledge that clock for clock AMD is about 300 Mhz behind Intel's Core 2 Arch. Intel really pull out the win when you factor in over clocking, but personally I would buy an AMD chip and save the money to put towards a better graphics card(s).
Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed amount of win -Hango ([email protected]) |
Blind Man
Cosmic Fusion
When Fat Kids Attack
|
Posted - 2008.01.07 22:39:00 -
[10]
lulz amd sux
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 00:25:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 08/01/2008 00:26:10
Originally by: Battou
Sweet another AMD bashing thread. Intel does have the better chip right now, but its common knowledge that clock for clock AMD is about 300 Mhz behind Intel's Core 2 Arch. Intel really pull out the win when you factor in over clocking, but personally I would buy an AMD chip and save the money to put towards a better graphics card(s).
Except, no, you're wrong. As you can see, the Athlon 64 6400+ and Core 2 E6750, which are about 20 dollars apart pricewise, have a 20% performance difference.
Unfortunately, AMD is still behind, and will probably be for a while (until Intel starts slacking due to their large lead).
|
Nadarius Chrome
Celestial Horizon Corp.
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 00:59:00 -
[12]
WTF DS is in MC? |
Paulo Damarr
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 01:28:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Paulo Damarr on 08/01/2008 01:33:53
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Unfortunately, AMD is still behind, and will probably be for a while
Phenoms outperform Core 2 duos and while they dont look so hot placed against the Intel quad cores the Phenoms prices place them more in competition with the Core 2s as they are around the ú140-ú160 area rather than the ú600-800 Intel quads.
So no they are not behind.
Edit: Just looked up some of the Intel Quads, Q6600s can be picked up for ú155
-----------------------------------------------
My new years resolution is to give up nonconstructive posting |
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 01:32:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Dark Shikari on 08/01/2008 01:32:43
Originally by: Paulo Damarr
Originally by: Dark Shikari
Unfortunately, AMD is still behind, and will probably be for a while
Phenoms outperform Core 2 duos and while they dont look so hot placed against the Intel quad cores the Phenoms prices place them more in competition with the Core 2s as they are around the ú140-ú160 area rather than the ú600-800 Intel quads.
So no they are not behind.
The Phenoms are only marginally faster than the old Athlon 64s and have a major bug that when fixed in the BIOS results in a 20% speed loss, putting them even slower than the old Athlon 64s.
|
Paulo Damarr
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 01:43:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The Phenoms are only marginally faster than the old Athlon 64s and have a major bug that when fixed in the BIOS results in a 20% speed loss, putting them even slower than the old Athlon 64s.
Ok you win, but the Phenoms will still be good when they finally sort them out plus the Backwards compatibility with existing AM2 cant be bad.
-----------------------------------------------
My new years resolution is to give up nonconstructive posting |
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 01:49:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Paulo Damarr
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The Phenoms are only marginally faster than the old Athlon 64s and have a major bug that when fixed in the BIOS results in a 20% speed loss, putting them even slower than the old Athlon 64s.
Ok you win, but the Phenoms will still be good when they finally sort them out plus the Backwards compatibility with existing AM2 cant be bad.
Well unfortunately its a hardware bug--fixing that doesn't help everyone who bought broken chips.
It is pretty unfortunate, I was hoping the Phenom would give Intel a run for their money.
|
Eval B'Stard
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 05:42:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Eval B''Stard on 08/01/2008 05:45:13
The AMD 64x2 is more comparable to the Core Duo (in which case it is better), not the Core 2 Duo until AMD catch up Intel are currently out in front.
Having said that I'd still go for the AMD but thats just personal preference based on experience.
-------------------------------------------
When we gonna see the 40km and 80km tractor beams ?
|
Reiisha
Splint Eye Probabilities Inc.
Dawn of Transcendence
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 07:53:00 -
[18]
Isn't the phenom also a quad core CPU? Isn't that a bit strange to compare to an Intel dual core?
EVE History Wiki
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 12:26:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Nadarius Chrome
WTF DS is in MC?
x2
Originally by: ISD Cortes
You're at liberty to use the rolling sig you had, as long as there's no chimeras covering the nether regions of voluptuous females. |
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 12:27:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Reiisha
Isn't the phenom also a quad core CPU? Isn't that a bit strange to compare to an Intel dual core?
Name 5 consumer-available software packages that can effectively use more than 2 processors.
Originally by: ISD Cortes
You're at liberty to use the rolling sig you had, as long as there's no chimeras covering the nether regions of voluptuous females. |
Dark Shikari
Caldari
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 14:33:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Sokratesz
Originally by: Reiisha
Isn't the phenom also a quad core CPU? Isn't that a bit strange to compare to an Intel dual core?
Name 5 consumer-available software packages that can effectively use more than 2 processors.
In 10 seconds off the top of my head: Supreme Commander, x264, Microsoft VC-1 encoder, Mencoder, CoreAVC.
|
Sokratesz
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 15:01:00 -
[22]
You dont fall in the category standard consumer ;)
Apparantly there is more than i thought, but even then, like with any sort of hardware speed scaling, the gains will not keep up with the speed, relatively.
Originally by: ISD Cortes
You're at liberty to use the rolling sig you had, as long as there's no chimeras covering the nether regions of voluptuous females. |
Terinnon
Amarr
German Trading Association
|
Posted - 2008.01.08 15:15:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Terinnon on 08/01/2008 15:20:21
Edited by: Terinnon on 08/01/2008 15:17:43
I say :
Buy a Phenom 9500... it costs in Germany about 160Ç so you get a Quadcore CPU with good OC potencial.
The socket AM2 boards are also cheaper then the 775 boards, Quadcore is the Future and the 9500 runs stable at 2,5ghz (90% of the cpu¦s) or even 3,0ghz (50%) on 3,0ghz the performance is near the Q6600 (about 100Ç more) so u geht for less money a good and fast CPU...
i have an Q6600 (3,0ghz)with 3gb DDR2 800 and a 8800GT 512MB this system with all components cost me about 650Ç and the power is impressive. Quadcore support is used by nearly every new game and in future there will be more Cores with less Ghz ... see the 82core 1ghz cpu from intel... so its not a good idea to buy an dualcore while an quadcore only costs a few $ more...
Edit :
a power improvement quadcore > dualcore is used on every multithreaded program... even old ones using the 4 cores but every core with 25% so you can do 4 threads at the same time this is faster then doing them one by one :)
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |