Help! Conroe or AMD - Difficult decision.

Pages: 1 2

Index »
Community »
Tech »
Help! Conroe or AMD - Difficult decision.

2006-08-04 02:40:53

Dingarth: Member; +17|6894|Australia

I know it may not sound difficult but this is my situation.

Perfectly working current computer. Wife has finally allowed me to upgrade to a new system. Current plays BF2 on medium. New should do high!

Was set a budget by wife (and myself) of $2,000 Aus dollars.

AMD ordered as follows costs $2300 - $300 over budget!

Antec NeoHe 550
2x Pioneer 111DBK DVD Burners
Gigabyte 7900GT
Windows XP Home
Asus M2N-SLI M/B
Corsair 2gig XMS2 6400 Ram - 5-5-5-12
Samsung SP2504C 250g Hard Drive
Coolermaster Praetorian (PAC-T01-EK) Case
AMD Am2 4600+
+ Installation

I know re installation.....i would rather they do it!

In Aus m/boards for conroes are so dear! For another $150 I can get a E6400 chip and m/b or $300 more I can get a e6600 and m/b. The extra 150 is purely m/b.

As I am already over budget $300 wife will kill me re another $150 or $300....I myself dont really want to spend that much.....thinking new graphics card when dx10 compatable come out etc...

I've read the reviews...appears even the e6400 is better than the 4600+ but two computer programmers/it specs. i've talked to said dont be a guinea pig and wait for the 2nd generation if going conroe. Let them iron out the faults re m/b and chips before going there!

What does everybody think?????????

*confused mental state* AMD no Conroe.....NO AMD.....mmm.....maybe Conroe.

2006-08-04 02:42:51

0akleaves: Member; +183|6915|Newcastle UK

Well ninja will say conroe and i dont think you can disagree at the present time.

You have to learn the rules of the game and then you have to play better than anyone else.

2006-08-04 02:43:47

Dingarth: Member; +17|6894|Australia

Oh. and I've read the m/bs wont support SLI. Therefore two 7900gts ruin easy upgrade option in future.

2006-08-04 03:11:51

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7018

Dingarth wrote:
Oh. and I've read the m/bs wont support SLI. Therefore two 7900gts ruin easy upgrade option in future.

=/ SLI mobos will be out this month... 975X chipset does support SLI, but you need hacked drivers

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2006-08-04 03:31:30

ShotYourSix: Boldly going nowhere...; +196|7021|Las Vegas

Do NOT buy an Antec NEO. Antec makes some great PSU's but the NEO line is shit. A quick search on google will confirm this, see for yourself.

When building my last rig I was having problems with the machine randomly shutting down and after spending some time on the phone with an ASUS tech he says "Oh my god! I know what your problem is, you have an Antec NEO don't you?" (I had an Antec Neo 550) I said, yeah, how did you know this and he told me that they had had hundreds of calls with issues regarding the NEO line. He was quick to say that while Antec made some great PSU's that the NEO was definitely not one of them. Luckily, Fry's refunded my money with no questions.

I am not nearly as impressed with the Conroe models below E6600. My advice is that if you can afford to get to E6600 then by all means go for it. You will not be dissapointed. That $300 chip will best AMD top of the line FX62 across the board. If you simply cannot reach that price level, then AMD is not nearly as much of a tradeoff when looking at the E6300 (Though in BF2 performance and elsewhere the E6300 is still on par with the 5000+).

The AM2 platform only saw gains over the 939 platform of a few percent. You could save by going 939 but your upgrade path is screwed as 939 is already being phased out. As far as upgrade path goes at this point, the Conroe looks MUCH more promising for the time being. I've not owned an Intel rig for 10 years and I hate to say this, but I would have a VERY hard time talking myself into building an AMD rig at this time. It looks to be another year to year and a half before AMD will have a chance to bring out a conroe killer.

As far as sticking to budget, why not buy just one DVD drive and add the other one later. Or better yet, re-use your current harddrives and optical drives for getting the most bang for your buck now. I know your wife may balk at the idea of spending all that money and still having a few parts still to buy later on but hey, if it gets you closer to top performance it would be worth it. This could manage to keep you under budget. Another option is to wait a few months, and save a bit more. In the meantime Conroe and it's mobo prices will settle down and your extra money will go even farther.

Last thing.

Check these links for an informative and unbiased look at Conroe:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sh … 95&p=1
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sh … spx?i=2802

2006-08-04 03:36:30

=Karma-Kills=: "Don't post while intoxicated."; +356|6886|England

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Dingarth wrote:
Oh. and I've read the m/bs wont support SLI. Therefore two 7900gts ruin easy upgrade option in future.
=/ SLI mobos will be out this month... 975X chipset does support SLI, but you need hacked drivers

http://www.asus.com/products4.aspx?l1=3 … odelmenu=1

Oh Really?

Last edited by =Karma-Kills= (2006-08-04 03:38:07)

2006-08-04 03:38:16

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7018

=Karma-Kills= wrote:
cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Dingarth wrote:
Oh. and I've read the m/bs wont support SLI. Therefore two 7900gts ruin easy upgrade option in future.
=/ SLI mobos will be out this month... 975X chipset does support SLI, but you need hacked drivers
http://www.asus.com/products4.aspx?l1=3 … odelmenu=1

http://uk.asus.com/products4.aspx?l1=3& … odelmenu=1

Oh Really?

ya rly, theyre not even out yet. comming out next week i think, but that mobo has SLI support. 1 problem: it hits fsb wall at 320 fsb, not that much of an OCer.

2006-08-04 09:22:04

Reizors: Ninja's > BF2s; +42|6825|Australia

I go the gigabyte DQ6, it's definetly not going near the FSB wall for a long time.

Conroe > AMD, at this point in time, if you want to wait till 2008+ to see if AMD strikes back, thats your decision.

But like ninja says, Conroe, if buying from a cheap wholesaler, or even cheap retailer, you can get them for as cheap, or cheaper then the AMD equivalent.

2006-08-04 09:44:58

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

Evil-fruits|ST4R wrote:
Well ninja will say conroe and i dont think you can disagree at the present time.

Mr.Ninja would be correct.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-04 09:49:10

ALT-F4: Member; +4|6852

*FPS= Frames Per Second*

Quake 4
AMD FX 62 - 156 fps
Intel 6800 - 192 fps
Intel - 23% faster

HL2
AMD FX 62 - 170 fps
Intel 6800 - 263 fps
Intel - 55% faster!!!

Fear
AMD FX 62 - 164 fps
Intel 6800 - 236 fps
Intel - 44% faster!!!

BF2!
AMD FX 62 - 108 fps
Intel 6800 - 142 fps
Intel - 31% faster

C2E X6800 2.93GHz $999 Athlon 64 FX 62 $ 830.00
C2D E6700 2.67GHz $530 Athlon 64 X2 5000+ $ 301.00
C2D E6600 2.4GHz $316 Athlon 64 X2 4600 $ 240.00
C2D E6400 2.13GHz $224 Athlon 64 X2 4200 $ 187.00
C2D E6300 1.86GHz $183 Athlon 64 X2 3800 $ 152.00

Need we say more ..lol

2006-08-04 09:51:06

_NL_Lt.EngineerFox: Big Mouth Prick; +219|6832|Golf 1.8 GTI Wolfsburg Edition

AMD's are better than Intel at the moment. When Conroe will be released it will be 40% better but Conroe will be expensive and the prices of the AMD Athlons and X2 will drop massive.

2006-08-04 10:03:09

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7038|Salt Lake City

ALT-F4 wrote:
*FPS= Frames Per Second*

Quake 4
AMD FX 62 - 156 fps
Intel 6800 - 192 fps
Intel - 23% faster

HL2
AMD FX 62 - 170 fps
Intel 6800 - 263 fps
Intel - 55% faster!!!

Fear
AMD FX 62 - 164 fps
Intel 6800 - 236 fps
Intel - 44% faster!!!

BF2!
AMD FX 62 - 108 fps
Intel 6800 - 142 fps
Intel - 31% faster

C2E X6800 2.93GHz $999 Athlon 64 FX 62 $ 830.00
C2D E6700 2.67GHz $530 Athlon 64 X2 5000+ $ 301.00
C2D E6600 2.4GHz $316 Athlon 64 X2 4600 $ 240.00
C2D E6400 2.13GHz $224 Athlon 64 X2 4200 $ 187.00
C2D E6300 1.86GHz $183 Athlon 64 X2 3800 $ 152.00

Need we say more ..lol

Conroe has speed advantages outside of games, but in the gaming area, those numbers you posted don't mean squat. The tests are intentionally run in such a manner that the video card is not a bottleneck. Unfortunately, when you get down to real world game settings and performance, the video card is going to be what makes or breaks your game speed.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … 00_review/

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.h … VzaWFzdA==

2006-08-04 10:30:03

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Need we say more ..lo
Conroe has speed advantages outside of games, but in the gaming area, those numbers you posted don't mean squat. The tests are intentionally run in such a manner that the video card is not a bottleneck. Unfortunately, when you get down to real world game settings and performance, the video card is going to be what makes or breaks your game speed.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … 00_review/

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.h … VzaWFzdA==

Please correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the link you posted show the Conroe beating out the AMD in gaming results?
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … page11.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … /page6.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … /page7.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … /page8.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … /page9.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … page10.asp

https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/conroe%20preview_060606100650/12221.png

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/05/ … page5.html
Overclockers will lean towards the Conroe as well.

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-08-04 10:36:23)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-04 10:33:17

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7038|Salt Lake City

Kmarion wrote:
Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Need we say more ..lo
Conroe has speed advantages outside of games, but in the gaming area, those numbers you posted don't mean squat. The tests are intentionally run in such a manner that the video card is not a bottleneck. Unfortunately, when you get down to real world game settings and performance, the video card is going to be what makes or breaks your game speed.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … 00_review/

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.h … VzaWFzdA==
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/05/ … page5.html
Overclockers will lean towards the Conroe as well.

I'm sure they will. My point has been that when a purely gaming perspective, Conroe really has no advantage over a decent AMD setup. The video card is a much larger factor.

Outside of gaming Conroe shows definite advantages.

I'm just trying to clarify that people keep people keep posting these gaming benchmarks, which doesn't tell the true story once you get the resolution and IQ settings up to where they would normally be when playing a game.

2006-08-04 10:37:09

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
My point has been that when a purely gaming perspective, Conroe really has no advantage over a decent AMD setup. The video card is a much larger factor.,

Agreed.. but we would be debating vid cards and not chips. For years the AMD folks have claimed thier chip as the best for gaming, now it doesn't matter. Huh?..lol

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-08-04 10:39:35)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-04 10:41:53

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7038|Salt Lake City

Kmarion wrote:
Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
Need we say more ..lo
Conroe has speed advantages outside of games, but in the gaming area, those numbers you posted don't mean squat. The tests are intentionally run in such a manner that the video card is not a bottleneck. Unfortunately, when you get down to real world game settings and performance, the video card is going to be what makes or breaks your game speed.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … 00_review/

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.h … VzaWFzdA==
Please correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the link you posted show the Conroe beating out the AMD in gaming results?
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … page11.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … /page6.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … /page7.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … /page8.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … /page9.asp
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/int … page10.asp

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/conr … /12221.png
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/06/05/ … page5.html
Overclockers will lean towards the Conroe as well.

No they don't. Hey, 2-4 fps is almost within margins of error. If you want to spend hundreds of dollars to gain 2-4 fps, go right ahead.

2006-08-04 10:54:26

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
No they don't. Hey, 2-4 fps is almost within margins of error. If you want to spend hundreds of dollars to gain 2-4 fps, go right ahead.

umm, have you looked at the prices of Core duos?
Soem of those games are running up to 30 frames faster.
Due to the effieciency of the conroes and the lower power consuptions the most certainly will be overclocking monsters. Mobo's will be the only thing setting the limits on these chips.

Edit:Double post.

Last edited by Kmarion (2006-08-04 10:57:34)

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-04 10:58:49

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7038|Salt Lake City

Kmarion wrote:
Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:
No they don't. Hey, 2-4 fps is almost within margins of error. If you want to spend hundreds of dollars to gain 2-4 fps, go right ahead.
umm, have you looked at the prices of Core duos?
Soem of those games are running up to 30 frames faster.
Due to the effieciency of the conroes and the lower power consuptions the most certainly will be overclocking monsters. Mobo's will be the only thing setting the limits on these chips.

Oh really, 30 fps huh? STOP LOOKING AT THE 800X600 BENCHMARKS!!! THAT WAS MY POINT ABOUT TESTING RUN AT LOW RESOLUTIONS THAT REMOVE THE VIDEO CARD FROM THE EQUATION. WHEN YOU GET TO THE RESOLUTION WHERE PEOPLE WILL ACTUALLY PLAY, GIVEN THE HARDWARE TESTED, THE DIFFERENCE IS 2-4 FPS!!!

2006-08-04 11:01:19

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

Better res?

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-04 11:12:40

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6795|N. Ireland

Wait until January for DX10 cards..

2006-08-04 11:17:26

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

Real gaming results at a "RESOLUTION WHERE PEOPLE WILL ACTUALLY PLAY,

All games are run at a resolution of 1280x1024, with details turned up high. We wanted to test by running the games the way real gamers do—at a reasonably high resolution with all the eye candy turned on. The vast majority of monitors sold these days are either 17" or 19", and 1280x1024 is almost always the native resolution for these displays. We're using a high-quality, speedy, but affordable graphics card: a GeForce 7900 GT (currently costing less than $300). While we want to play the games the way people expect to be able to—with the graphics options turn up high—we didn't want the graphics card to be the limiting performance factor, so we never enabled anti-aliasing or anisotropic filtering. And at last, here are the six games we tested with:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1 … 939,00.asp

BF2ers might like this. this is the BF2 test http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1 … 942,00.asp
The Athlon 64 X2 looks good, rarely dipping below 60fps and usually hovering closer to 80fps, but the Core 2 Duo puts it to shame. Never, not once, did the Core 2 Duo system drop below 60fps. Through three 5-minute tests, the Intel-based system stayed between 80 and 100fps the vast majority of the time.

Average out those three runs to remove the peaks and troughs and you get a clear picture of how much better that $316 Core 2 Duo chip runs Battlefield 2. It's not just that the average frame rate is almost 20% faster, it's the consistency that impresses us. Not only is it that much faster on average, it's that much faster the whole time, and that's an important distinction. http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1 … 942,00.asp

I think the threshold was 60 fps.
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1 … 946,00.asp

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-04 11:23:27

Agent_Dung_Bomb: Member; +302|7038|Salt Lake City

Kmarion wrote:
Better res?
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/conr … /12221.png

And no AA.

Look at the system setup specs. In the Firingsquad article they are running a system with 2GB of RAM, and using an X1900XTX for single card, and X1900 Crossfire. Do you honestly think people are going to spend hundreds of dollars on a new CPU, a couple of hundred more on 2GB of RAM, and another $400-500 on the video card to play at 800x600 or 1024x768 with low IQ settings? Get real. People that drop that kind of cash on their computer are typically running 21" CRT displays, or 20"+ LCD displays. They will be running 1600x1200 or higher, and utilizing the eye candy supported by their card; especially those that have dropped the cash for SLI/Crossfire.

Pacific Fighters, a flight sim (traditionally CPU bound anyway) and the city area of Oblivion, in Crossfire, are where you see any really separation at ~8-9 fps.

If your only goal is gaming:

- If you have an old system and were going to build a whole new system = Conroe
- If you already have a decent system with an A64 = Upgrade your video card
- If you already have an A64 with high-end video card = Save your money
- If you already have a decent system with a fast P4 = Upgrade your video card
- If you already have a fast P4 and high-end video card = Save your money

2006-08-04 11:25:14

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7018

Funny how AMD ppl keep on saying amd is teh best for teh games!!! better than intel!!!! now some of them are going gpu limit ftw! which is true but.... point is conroe will save you cash on electricity bill in the long run, 60 watt load for E6600... even after price drop conroe is still better than X2 cpus, and you dont need uber expensive ram to bring out full potential unlike AM2 cpus.

If any of you saying AMD's K8L will beat conroe, im gonna say if it does it better, coz by 2008 intel will have a new architecture...

2006-08-04 11:25:38

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

You posted after i put the other results up to see. Please look at the other test. i think those specs are reasonable to test on.

All games are run at a resolution of 1280x1024, with details turned up high. We wanted to test by running the games the way real gamers do—at a reasonably high resolution with all the eye candy turned on.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

2006-08-04 11:26:58

Kmar: Truth is my Bitch; +5,695|6903|132 and Bush

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:
Funny how AMD ppl keep on saying amd is teh best for teh games!!! better than intel!!!! now some of them are going gpu limit ftw! which is true but.... point is conroe will save you cash on electricity bill in the long run, 60 watt load for E6600... even after price drop conroe is still better than X2 cpus, and you dont need uber expensive ram to bring out full potential unlike AM2 cpus.

If any of you saying AMD's K8L will beat conroe, im gonna say if it does it better, coz by 2008 intel will have a new architecture...

Around Kentsfield time..lol

Hold your chin up high intel peeps, it's been awhile.

Xbone Stormsurgezz

Pages: 1 2

Index »
Community »
Tech »
Help! Conroe or AMD - Difficult decision.

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Help! Conroe or AMD - Difficult decision.

Dingarth wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Dingarth wrote:

=Karma-Kills= wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Dingarth wrote:

Evil-fruits|ST4R wrote:

ALT-F4 wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Board footer