I'm fairly sure CPU make more difference than people make out. My mate has an e6300 alienware with a 7900gt and he gets twice the fps that I get (I was led to believe a x1950 can beat a 7900). That might just be because I have a crap motherboard though.
With love and many thanks,
Melons
Another factor is the motherboard.
I thought you needed to get an i915 chipset to get the best out of a C2S CPU if you plan to overclock. IIRC, the nvidia chipset isn't as good as the intel one for the C2D, and last time I checked, a decent intel mobo cost £20-30 more than say an NForce mobo for A64.
So the difference could be £80 and not £60 for equivalent features on the chipset / equiv overclocking ability
AFAIK, i915 doesnt support C2D..Originally Posted by tfboy
Me want Ultrabook
Yeah, sorry, I meant the 965 chipset. Asus P5Bs and all that
Like I mentioned before, you yourself will have to justify it. If your wallet permits, sure then go for the C2D. But if your wallet is not so permissive, and you have other priorities in your computing needs that MAY outweigh the plus of a C2D, then consider my advice and others to list out your needs then justify which product makes better sense..
All I can say is that desktop feels just the same, everything is equally responsive and such, even on Vista. The thought of future proofing may come in, but you'll have to ask yourself whether its worth future proofing something you'd most likely wont use, or spend it on something that will bring better benefit. Only you can answer that..
About the frames/sec churned out by C2D, well.. lets just say that most ppl will not notice 150fps to 130fps. And when things get down to 60-50fps, its most likely the VGA card thats limiting, not really the CPU.
Me want Ultrabook
Every single Athlon CPU I've had seemed to want to run at 45oC or higher even idled. I've always used good coolers by Nexus, Gigabyte, Zalman and Thermaltake. The Athlon XP2200 I had in my "main" PC - used mostly for the net, a bit of photo editing and office work - was constantly running at about 63oC with a hefty Gigabyte cooler attached to it. Reliably, mind, but still damned hot.
I've changed over to an E4300. Day-to-day work feels smoother, I never get audio glitches on DVDs I watch and MP3s I'm playing, even if I have Photoshop or UT2004 grinding away at the same time. And whilst writing a DVD. With a Zalman CNPS9700 cooler, it runs at about 36oC.
Core 2 Duos seem to run cooler, much much cooler, than their Athlon counterparts. Hell, this E4300 runs a hell of a lot colder than an Athlon that performs about half as well.I have no idea if AMD's dual-core CPUs perform as well as this, but based on the reviews I've read, they don't. I've had some first hand experience with an X2 4600 for a little while, and it was certainly good, but it runs a lot hotter than my E6600.
Sorry, this is a bit of a rant, not sure how useful this post is going to be to anyone, but for what it's worth I'm concerned about noise and heat when building my PCs. Thanks to these Core 2 Duo CPUs, I don't have to be concerned any more.
Im thinking about going for an E6400 2.2Ghz for now so that i can OC once i feel confident enough, or if i can save or wait till price drop go for the E6600
Good rant, but how hot a CPU runs isn't that straightforward any more. My CPU runs at whatever temp I tell my motherboard to target. If the CPU is too cool, then that means the fans are spinning too fast and making more noise than necessary. The fan speed will slow down and the CPU temp will go up until the expected temp is reached and the thing hits equilibrium.
Also the Athlon XP is an utterly different beast from the Athlon 64 in terms of power. The XP power saving was pants, it never really worked. There is a utility you can download that turns on the FSB disconnect during halt available in most chipsets for the XP, and that does make it run a lot cooler. Mine used to crash about once every couple of days running that though, which is why it was never enabled on most systems.
Could you provide me with a link with some info on this tool, please? If it can be made to work reliably, I'd like to know, because I have a ton of old Athlon XPs I'd like to sell off into some inexpensive boxen, and if this tool makes them run cooler (hell if I can just get it under the 55oC mark that'll be nice), I'd like to at least test it.
My AthlonXP in my shuttle box (below) peaks at 39C and averages at 34C..
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
Another good reason is, Upgradability
Core2Duo - Quad Core Motherboards
What Socket compatibility do AMD offer?
939 - AM2 ?
Am2 - what?
I think in the long run Intel are the best bet if your looking to buy a CPU at this present time especially if its a £60 increase
or E6300
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/2007/0...-2-extreme-uk/
can't get better than that really if your worrying that AMD are cheaper
__________________
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
Error exists between Keyboard & Chair replace User and press Any Key!
.... Where's the Any Key???
Compatible with 1066fsb quad cores maybe, but any idea if the change to 1333 is likely to require a new chipset? While the socket has stayed the same with Intel for a while, they keep changing other things that still require a new motherboard
AM2 is a good socket - the next generation of chips from AMD are apparently backwards compatible with this, so the upgrade would go:
AM2 - Barcelona
(not to say I don't agree with the core 2 duo choice - I think with the recent AMD cuts as well you basically can't go wrong- either are good
AM3 processors supposed to work in AM2 motherboards are they not?
Anyway, nothing is future proof.
Buying for a surfing/work processing box? AMD can be cheaper, makes a lot of sense (esp. after recent pricing cuts filter through).
Buying for high end gaming/hardcore use - core 2 is a better bet.
That said, I will say that for 1600x1200 gaming a new processor will make bog all difference to my gaming experience versus a new graphic card. I'm probably going to shove the new ATI card in my current rig and stick with 939/X2 for a while. Unless I get 'itchy-clicky-websitey-finger' or just bored enough to build a new system (which tbh I enjoy more than using them).
Crosshair VIII Hero (WIFI), 3900x, 32GB DDR4, Many SSDs, EVGA FTW3 3090, Ethoo 719
i dont use anywere near the power my e6400 uses i dont even bother overclocking it anymore
but as i sold my amd fx57 single core for £250 and managed to pay for a 6400 and a motherboard out of it as well as paying £160 for geil ddr2 and selling my old ddr ocz for £150 it was something i just had to
incidentally do people that use ebay not realise that things are cheaper in shops my ocz was bid to £150 with £5 post and was for sale new at aria for £134 the same day
I was an AMD guy but just don't like the way they are going about things, I know nothing is future proof I should know that better than most but what I was saying is at this moment in time £60 cheaper would not sway me to buy the AMD option in regards to a lot of attributes. I was saying that the best bet would be to go for Intel at this time of market and if his pockets allowed him to. I then also gave an alternative (E6300) in which I also posted a review to show you what performance you can get from a £115 CPU.
I agree with your itchy clicky finger but lets hope you buy an Nvidia with good driver support
__________________
Make it idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot.
Error exists between Keyboard & Chair replace User and press Any Key!
.... Where's the Any Key???
after am2 i guess socket F, but i agree, they are switching sockets like mad, and its really gay because then you have to end up upgrading all components to get the latest ones.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
