Which is faster: My Opteron 165@ 2.65Ghz or Core2 Duo E6300

[Clunk]

No guarantees, but its not often you hear of a c2d that cant hit 3ghz, and a 3ghz c2d will destroy anything that AMD has to offer, both in benchmarks and cpu heavy apps, and I also noticed a good speed increase in general, and I moved from a similar system to yours

[koocha]

No guarantees, but its not often you hear of a c2d that cant hit 3ghz, and a 3ghz c2d will destroy anything that AMD has to offer, both in benchmarks and cpu heavy apps, and I also noticed a good speed increase in general, and I moved from a similar system to yours

That sounds promising. I'll need to price it up now.

I'd need a c2d, sli mobothat's a good overclocker and ram.

Any suggestions?

[Clunk]

Im not aware of any SLI boards that are good overclockers and work properly, but maybe someone else can shed light on that, I would like one myself

[koocha]

I don't have 2 graphics cards but would like the option to expand

[Clunk]

On paper, the SLI boards look good, but they are riddled with problems and just arent worth the bother....unless you like bother

[chuckskull]

Thats an E4300 at stock and RAM running at 800mhz 5-5-5-15 thanks to a dodgy BIOS, if it;s of any interest to you.

As for good clocking SLi boards http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Produ...oductID=529752 is getting good reviews.

[koocha]

On paper, the SLI boards look good, but they are riddled with problems and just arent worth the bother....unless you like bother

Not particually, but the Asus I have now has been good to me

Thats an E4300 at stock and RAM running at 800mhz 5-5-5-15 thanks to a dodgy BIOS, if it;s of any interest to you.

As for good clocking SLi boards http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Produ...oductID=529752 is getting good reviews.

That would be nice but...I've got a USB2 card, Sound Card and TV Tuner that are all PCI. Need them all

[Clunk]

Im on about c2d SLI boards.

[this_is_gav]

It's not worth it at all to be honest. I went from a single-core Opty @ 2.7GHz to an E6600 currently at 3.3GHz. There's very little that benefits from the speed increase at all. I do a fair bit of video encoding, but other than that, without the 'benefit' of benchmarks, I wouldn't notice any difference other than having 2 cores, which you already have.

I really struggle to recommend an upgrade at all unless you're doing a load of media or other CPU-heavy work.

[excalibur2]

It's not worth it at all to be honest. I went from a single-core Opty @ 2.7GHz to an E6600 currently at 3.3GHz. There's very little that benefits from the speed increase at all. I do a fair bit of video encoding, but other than that, without the 'benefit' of benchmarks, I wouldn't notice any difference other than having 2 cores, which you already have.

I really struggle to recommend an upgrade at all unless you're doing a load of media or other CPU-heavy work.

Unfortunately what you say falls on deaf ears here most of the time.
My system is crippled and am waiting to upgrade, yet it's amazing what a xp2000 plus very old matrox mystique with 4 megs of memory can do........yeah I know I can't play games and videos are a bit jerky but the quality of the picture is superb at 1028X768 32bits, but my system is OK for general use even in Vista.

[jonathan_phang]

I think that I will be coming across the same dilema soon as well, but as per Gavs post, after just looking at prices, it may all be too much too soon. I think, if anything, I will want to upgrade my x1800XT to something a bit beefier (ie. DX10) but to be honest, I cant say that there is anything that I have tried to play - games wise - that has seriously taxed my system.

Before, I always used to be able to tell that I wasnt happy when i couldnt run at top resolution with full details - That isnt the case just yet, so maybe until all the glut of next-gen type games come out - I'll hold out with my opty at 2.5 (and thats just being lazy ocing it..)

There always seems to be these hardware upgrades that REALLY need to be done, like going to C2D. I really feel I have to - but just ask if your current system is bottlenecking anything you do seriously.

If no, then save the money a bit more and then play the waiting game. I know I will - I think my money will be better spent on a better GPU and maybe a 22" WS monitor to replace my 19" one.

But on the flipside - if you can afford it - and actually have the time to research and price up and build the system, then go ahead.

2p's worth

JP

[Smokey21]

What resolution do you play at?

A Core2 would no doubt be faster, but you wouldn't notice much of difference in games, except Supreme Commander.

I thought of going Core 2, but im gonna wait and see what K10, and Intel's next Quad core has to offer.

[koocha]

What resolution do you play at?

A Core2 would no doubt be faster, but you wouldn't notice much of difference in games, except Supreme Commander.

I thought of going Core 2, but im gonna wait and see what K10, and Intel's next Quad core has to offer.

I play at 1400x1050 32bit on my 20" TFT with my 8800GTS

[DecomposingStar]

Thats an E4300 at stock and RAM running at 800mhz 5-5-5-15 thanks to a dodgy BIOS, if it;s of any interest to you.

As for good clocking SLi boards http://www.scan.co.uk/Products/Produ...oductID=529752 is getting good reviews.

I know alot of people have a 1 for graphics because of dodgy nVidia drivers for the 8800 (debateably one of the best cards on the market... although i don't think so), so it's not soly based on the performance test it seems... This is why i don't think that the Windows Experience Monitor should be used as a benchmarker.

(note; the quote from chuckskull was a reference, and not a reply)

[chuckskull]

Bad drivers can mess with any benchmark. I only posted it as the OP had posted his and it made for a good comparison, but there's nothing particularly wrong with it as a benchmark apart from being overly simplistic.

[DecomposingStar]

Bad drivers can mess with any benchmark. I only posted it as the OP had posted his and it made for a good comparison, but there's nothing particularly wrong with it as a benchmark apart from being overly simplistic.

An 8800GTS getting a 1 is more than bad drivers, The card would run BF2 quite well on full settings, so that's at least a 5.
There must be something to do with the way that Windows Vista recognises hardware that bases the score, so I don't think its very reliable