Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Ack-Ack on January 28, 2008, 05:30:40 PM

Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Ack-Ack on January 28, 2008, 05:30:40 PM
I have the choice of an AMD Phenom™ X4 9600 Quad Core for $240 or an Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E6600 for $229.  Which one is the better deal?  

I've heard to stay away from the AMD quad cores, could someone explain why?  At this point, I really can't see why not spend the extra $11 and get a quad core unless the Intel Core 2 Duo is the better of the two chips.  

The things men will spend money on to play their toys, which in this case is Crysis.


ack-ack
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Fulmar on January 28, 2008, 08:39:31 PM
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=1075&model2=877&chart=444

This chart compares the two.  E6600 wins most tests.

But why not get the E8400 for $219.99?

E8400 is 3.0ghz, 6mb cache, and a faster 1333mhz FSB.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037&Tpk=E8400
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: humble on January 28, 2008, 10:00:03 PM
The real concept behind the phenom is really the integrated "spider". Toms benchmarks show the 9600 to be roughly 13% slower (and 13% less expensive) then the 6600 quad. I think the real issue is in the potential upgrade path for the AMD chip.phenom review from toms (http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/11/19/the_spider_weaves_its_web/index.html)
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Ack-Ack on January 29, 2008, 02:39:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Fulmar
http://But why not get the E8400 for $219.99?E8400 is 3.0ghz, 6mb cache, and a faster 1333mhz FSB.[url]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037&Tpk=E8400



You're right, why not?  Thanks for the advice, just ordered the E8400.


ack-ack
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Getback on January 29, 2008, 07:31:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Fulmar
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=1075&model2=877&chart=444

This chart compares the two.  E6600 wins most tests.

But why not get the E8400 for $219.99?

E8400 is 3.0ghz, 6mb cache, and a faster 1333mhz FSB.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037&Tpk=E8400


Or at Mwave for 209. If you get a combo deal it's 205 plus mainboard.

http://www.mwave.com/mwave/Skusearch.hmx?scriteria=BA24501
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Skuzzy on January 29, 2008, 07:38:33 AM
The Phenom has a bug in it anyways (TLB bug).  You really do not want to use that CPU.
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: eagl on January 29, 2008, 10:02:44 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy
The Phenom has a bug in it anyways (TLB bug).  You really do not want to use that CPU.


Supposedly fixed in silicone with currently shipping CPUs, so the workarounds that slow down performance are no longer necessary.  The trick is getting the right revision.  A little googling ought to help with that since there are still plenty of AMD fans and forums out there that are keeping track of the issue.
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Skuzzy on January 30, 2008, 07:14:35 AM
Thank you for the update eagl.  

Are there really 'fans' of CPU's out there?  I just thought folks went with the best bang for the buck or simply the fastest?
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Getback on January 30, 2008, 10:58:16 AM
Do you want to take a chance and get the buggy version of the amd?

If we're taking a poll. It's bang for the buck.
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Fulmar on January 30, 2008, 12:04:27 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Thank you for the update eagl.  

Are there really 'fans' of CPU's out there?  I just thought folks went with the best bang for the buck or simply the fastest?


OMG yes.  You can find ATI vs Nvidia fans too.  It's about as bad as Ford vs Chevy fans and Mac vs PC.
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: AirFlyer on January 30, 2008, 05:45:25 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Fulmar
OMG yes.  You can find ATI vs Nvidia fans too.  It's about as bad as Ford vs Chevy fans and Mac vs PC.


ATI < Nvidia, Ford < Chevy, Mac < PC. Everyone knows that. :D
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: SD67 on January 30, 2008, 05:51:23 PM
NVIDIA pwns ATI
Fords kick GMH butt here in Oz
PC is much more versatile than Mac.

Oh and Intel Rocks!
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Fulmar on January 30, 2008, 06:51:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by SD67
NVIDIA pwns ATI
Fords kick GMH butt here in Oz
PC is much more versatile than Mac.

Oh and Intel Rocks!

I like your thinking!
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: eagl on January 30, 2008, 07:23:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Are there really 'fans' of CPU's out there?  I just thought folks went with the best bang for the buck or simply the fastest?


Oh yea :)  There be fanbois for pretty much everything.  Surely you remember the story a few years back about how many murders who haven't had girlfriends in decades start getting marriage proposals from hot chicks the day they arrive on death row?  Same genetic trait I think, but the guy version  :confused:
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Skuzzy on January 31, 2008, 06:02:59 AM
I know folks have opinions, but in the face of objective data I would think people would shy away from an opinion which contridicts said data.

Sort of like saying, "I do not think fires do not burn wood!".
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Pudgie on February 02, 2008, 11:25:46 AM
From looking at the charts it is obvious that from a perf/price standpoint that the Intel Core 2 Duo is the better buy over the AMD Phenom X4.

For what it costs I can't logically see ANY reason to buy an AMD Phenom X4 period-except if you're sucked into the concept of the integrated Spider setup that will allow a person to run a "double Crossfire vid card setup".
 
Oh the marketing strategies weave the web & someone is going to be caught by the Spider....................... ............................. .......:lol



:D
Title: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: LePaul on February 03, 2008, 04:02:22 AM
AMD is getting their rear ends handed to them since the Intel Core 2's hit.

As for video card preferences, depends on what you want to spend and who you've had good luck with.  For me, nVidia has done no harm while I've had ATI driver issues since forever.  Someday Ill forgive them :)
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Saurdaukar on March 14, 2008, 10:47:09 AM
I have the choice of an AMD Phenom™ X4 9600 Quad Core for $240 or an Intel® Core™ 2 Duo E6600 for $229.  Which one is the better deal? 

I've heard to stay away from the AMD quad cores, could someone explain why?  At this point, I really can't see why not spend the extra $11 and get a quad core unless the Intel Core 2 Duo is the better of the two chips. 

The things men will spend money on to play their toys, which in this case is Crysis.


ack-ack

Im running Crysis on a Core 2 Duo 3.0Ghz with an 8800GT and 2 gigs of ram on the highest settings allowed by DX9 (XP) at 1400x900 and have never once had a slow down - plays beautifully (and is a stunningly beautiful game, at that). 

Modders are going to have a BALL with that engine.  It can create unbelievable environments.

If you want to run it at DX10 (Vistia), however, you will need a LOT more computing power.  The game will slow down an Intel quad core with a top of the line SLI setup.

As far as the comparison to AMD - the two are not equals in as far as current technology.  AMD has been behind for several months now and has some catching up to do.
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: alskahawk on March 16, 2008, 11:09:51 AM
 here is another hardware comparison site; http://www.yougamers.com/hardware/stats/3dmark06/priceandperformance/?mainnavi=true
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on March 16, 2008, 04:15:17 PM
It's good to keep in mind that 3DMarks tell nothing about real world game performance, its just a synthetic benchmark which regularly get 'optimizations' on drivers. That basically means hardware vendors cheat the score on driverlevel.

Several tests have shown that 3DMark is not a valid measurement of actual gameplay experience. It's more of a hobby or way of earning bragging rights.
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Charge on March 17, 2008, 09:44:05 AM
I use it to see that everything runs as expected and that the drivers do not cause any graphical glitches. A few times I have found a problem for bad game performance by using 3DMark and they were cause by bad drivers or driver installation or bad 3D settings. Re-ran the 3DM to see that all was OK.

It is also good to make a general comparation to similar systems to see that your (new) comp works OK.

I've never understood the "score race" in which some people make ridiculous investments just to get a good score in 3DMark. And that sometimes with settings and cooling methods that cannot be used in everyday use... :P

-C+
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: SIK1 on March 17, 2008, 10:25:28 AM
I know folks have opinions, but in the face of objective data I would think people would shy away from an opinion which contridicts said data.

Sort of like saying, "I do not think fires do not burn wood!".

Or, I reject your reality and substitute my own.
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Getback on March 17, 2008, 09:56:56 PM
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=1075&model2=877&chart=444 (http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=1075&model2=877&chart=444)

This chart compares the two.  E6600 wins most tests.

But why not get the E8400 for $219.99?

E8400 is 3.0ghz, 6mb cache, and a faster 1333mhz FSB.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037&Tpk=E8400 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115037&Tpk=E8400)

Uh, that chip has risen in price to $259. I bought mine at $211 on mwave because it was out of stock on NewEgg at that time. However, what an incredible chip. I couldn't have chosen any better.
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Fulmar on March 19, 2008, 11:09:31 PM
Uh, that chip has risen in price to $259. I bought mine at $211 on mwave because it was out of stock on NewEgg at that time. However, what an incredible chip. I couldn't have chosen any better.
It's true, it has gone up since 2 months ago, but its only $50. 
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: reeb on March 20, 2008, 07:33:44 AM
if you get the E8400 make sure you mobo supports the 45nm tech otherwise go with the e6850. does anyone have any thoughts about the 790i mobo? is it worth the 350$?
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Ghosth on March 20, 2008, 07:49:35 AM
Not everyone is that logical skuzzy.
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Fulmar on March 20, 2008, 09:09:59 AM
Some of the downsides to the E8400 and having an older motherboard is that it will need a BIOS flash.  Like my Asus P5NE-SLI needs a flash to support it.  If looking at building a new system and you want to use the E8400, I'd look to a motherboard that supports it straight out of the box.  I can't say for sure if you bought an E8400 and an older motherboard that it would let you even boot to the point to flash it, meaning you'd need a 'recognizable' CPU to boot for a flash of the bios.  Correct me if I'm wrong on this.  I've never actually booted a computer with an unsupported CPU installed.
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Toad on March 21, 2008, 07:55:17 AM
I clearly waited too long to buy an E8400; they are scarce as hen's teeth right now. Pricewatch only lists about 5 places advertising them and some of those are out of stock.

Wonder how long it will take production to catch up? I wonder what the best price/performance substitute is right now?

Thoughts?
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: BaldEagl on March 21, 2008, 08:40:35 AM
I just bought the Intel Conroe E6750 (2.66 Ghz).  Very good bang for the buck (and supposedly very over-clockable).  Waiting on one last delivery today to put then new machine together.  Check the performance charts and the price per performance chart at Tomshardware.
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Getback on March 21, 2008, 12:43:41 PM
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/intel-wolfdale.html

Skim this article. AMD gets trounced. I wish AMD would get there act together. Prices for the E8400 have skyrocketed.







Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Toad on March 21, 2008, 05:17:43 PM
Has anyone verified this:

Quote
So there you have it, for all intents and purposes the Xeon E3110 is identical to an E8400.
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: jimson on March 21, 2008, 06:01:16 PM
Everything I've read says they are the same processor.
Doesn't really matter right now. You'll play hell trying to find either the XeonE3110 or the 8400 at a decent price.
Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: Getback on March 21, 2008, 07:51:12 PM
Has anyone verified this:


E-mail intel. From what I have read they are the same. Try an E3110 search. I found some. Just don't know (trust ) the sites.

Title: Re: AMD Quad Core vs. Intel Core 2 Dual
Post by: kilz on March 21, 2008, 08:15:14 PM
AKAK i have a Intel Core 2 Dual and its a great CPU