What to Buy?

2006-07-31 17:48:08

#1

petethecheese: Member; +9|7065|England

Here's my dilemma. Do I get an AMD Athlon AM2 X2 5000 with a 512mb GF 7900GTX or Intel Core Duo E6600 with only a 256mb GF 7900GT? 90% of my PC use is playing games (mainly BF2)

As they're all so new, I can't find any performance tests in these configurations, so what do you think?

I know the Core Duo Kicks the AMD's ass all over the place - this chip is almost as quick as the FX-62-, but will I get better gaming performance with the slower CPU and faster Graphics card or faster CPU and slower Graphics?

The rest of the system will be the same (except Mobo, obviously) with 2GB DDR2 800 RAM, 7.1 sound and 300GB Seagate HD.

Gimme some guidance, please!!!

2006-07-31 17:49:44

#2

fatmarik: Member; +23|6884|Anywhere i am needed

i would go with the core 2 duo e6700 with 512 GF 7900GTX that would be a kickass pc to play on

2006-07-31 17:49:58

#3

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|7022|California

uhh... core duo!

from what i have heard and read the difference between performance in the 7900GT and GTX is small

and it isnt almost as good as the FX-62, its better

2006-07-31 18:03:43

#4

_j5689_: Dreads & Bergers; +364|7019|Riva, MD

Definately the Core 2 Duo and 7900GT.

2006-08-01 00:59:56

#5

i3igpete: Support Specialist; +6|6814

_j5689_ wrote:
Definately the Core 2 Duo and 7900GT.

both of them will overclock to the heavens.

2006-08-01 02:15:17

#6

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

The performance gains many hoped AM2 would bring to the table never materialized.

Core 2 Duo E6600 and up outperform any AM2 chip currently on the market. If you can afford an E6700 you will not regret it. If you can only spend the $300+ for an E6600 you are still looking great (Anandtech were able to get E6600 up to 4GHz on air and obviously we will see more than that on water cooling). There is simply no reason to build an AM2 rig at this time when Core 2 Duo has such a large advantage.

I'm sure people are getting tired of hearing this but when a $300 E6600 can beat up an $800 FX62, AMD just does not make any sense.

2006-08-01 14:26:38

#7

Adonlude: Member; +2|7081

Get the Core2 below the E6600 and get the GTX graphics card. Core2 overclocks like crazy according to tests by every major tech site so you should have no problem surpassing the AMD with a lower Core2.

2006-08-01 14:27:39

#8

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|7022|California

the E6400 is probably your best bet at the moment.

2006-08-01 14:34:44

#9

dankassasin42o: Member; +68|6981|Reefersyde, CA

Intel still sucks balls tho.

They got 1 up on amd. Its about time, seeming AMDs BEAT intel to EVERYthing so far. x2 EVERYTHING.

Intel, still following AMDs lead.

2006-08-01 14:38:35

#10

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|7018

dankassasin42o wrote:
Intel still sucks balls tho.

They got 1 up on amd. Its about time, seeming AMDs BEAT intel to EVERYthing so far. x2 EVERYTHING.

Intel, still following AMDs lead.

Orly? no bullshit 1000 dollar cpus, no bullshit SLI or crossfire, real gaming performance of 2 cpu's around the same price.

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

2006-08-01 15:11:53

#11

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,060|7074|PNW

To people who promote the GTX:

No, Thank You.

The 7(6/9)00GT is more than enough to satiate peoples' needs, and will still have enough resale (or old PC re-use) value to be a suitable stepping stool for a G80. Remember: you'll be wanting that SM4.0 and DX10 pretty soon.

Unless you're rolling in cash, of course. Then I'd recommend a 7950.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2006-08-01 15:12:26)

2006-08-17 11:16:21

#12

Adonlude: Member; +2|7081

dankassasin42o wrote:
Intel still sucks balls tho.

They got 1 up on amd. Its about time, seeming AMDs BEAT intel to EVERYthing so far. x2 EVERYTHING.

Intel, still following AMDs lead.

Hello mr ignorant, you really don't know your history so how bout I bring you up to date. Intel invented the microprocessor and the computer!!! Read your history here:
http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa092998.htm

AMD was nothing more than an Intel cloner that stole intel's ideas by taking them to court and forcing them to give up their designs. Intel had to foster AMD due to anti-trust laws. Read this history here:
http://www.digital-daily.com/editorial/ … /index.htm

AMD did not beat Intel to everything and Intel does not follow AMDs lead, it is quite the opposite. AMD has enjoyed a brief period of surpassing Intel in performance but they did so by standing on Intels shoulders. That time is now over with the introduction of Conroe. Eventually we will probably see tides constantly changing just as it does in the GPU industry but the important lesson here is that AMD was nothing more than an Intel cloner with no ideas of its own that wouldn't exist today without Intel.

When it comes down to it all the games you play and all the processing power you enjoy never would have been possible without the brilliant minds that founded Intel. AMD had nothing to do with it. Show respect and know your history silly fanboy.

Last edited by Adonlude (2006-08-17 11:28:26)

BF2S Forums What to Buy?

_j5689_ wrote:

dankassasin42o wrote:

dankassasin42o wrote:

Board footer