Intel Pentium D805 vs AMD Athlon 64 3200+ vs P4 3.0

Definately the PD805.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time

Pentium D805.

hey mate. i'm building around an 805D on an asus sli board w/ a 7600GT and a gig of ram to start. its actually very reasonable bang for the buck. would be nice if the n-force board can be flashed for conroe but i doubt it.

The Pentium D 805 is likely the best all-around chip as it is dual-core and you can throw a lot at it and it will still go. The 3200+ would be the fastest of the three in single-threaded apps and gaming. Don't consider the P4 3.0 unless it is a Pentium 4 631 (Cedar Mill 65nm) and only if you want to overclock. However, the 631 is about $200 and considerably more expensive than the other chips (roughly $130-140.)

The AMD dual-cores kill the Intel dual-cores of anywhere near the price point, but the least expensive AMD dual-core is the nearly $300 3800+. The Pentium D 805 isn't all that hot of a dual-core CPU, and that is very evident when you put it up against one like the 3800+ or even a Pentium D 920, but the 805 is very inexpensive and gives a lot of bang for the buck. That is what you wanted to ask, that's what we replied.

Pentium D805 is so cheap, it's hard to not recommend.

Thanks for all the help guys, i've decided to opt for the Pentium D805. When it comes ill tell you how it performs.

Thanks again.

QuantumSheep.

I think the Pentium D 805 would be a good choice for multi-media. Also, once games are written for mutli-core it would spank the single core processors.

I wanted to be able to recommend an AMD processor, but AMD dual core is much more expensive. AMD really needs a low-end dual core offering. The lowest rated Athlon X2 (3800+) costs nearly $300 (USD).

The Pentium is good because of its Dual Core... but if you are playing some games on it, then I would say go with the Athlon... ultimatly I would end up picking the Athlon myself, because it would offer better gaming performance, and most likely you aren't going to be playing a game, and running the movie at the same time. Honestly, its a tossup... Don't even bother with the 3 ghz p4...

HKEPC was able to ramp the Intel D 805 up to 3.7GHz on air, suggesting that there's plenty of headroom for overclockers on this chip...

Even if you just modestly overclock it to say 3.33GHz from its stock 2.67GHz, then you have a pretty good performing mainstream and stable CPU for only $130... That is mindblowing to my way of thinking for a low budget powerhouse.

805 is great at mutitasking.
3200+ is better at gaming.
630 is a mix, but not at good at mutitasking as the 805 or at gaming as the 3200+.
All these cpus need some overclocking.

TBO for £90 its still and 2 cpu for intel i think its an good price moot point

amd realy need to bring out an lower priced dual core cpu

id prefer the amd64 X2 3800+ but the dual core intel seems an better buy realy (thats comming from an amd fan :? )

Better option is get an AMD64 3000+ 939 and when newer games come out later on upgrade to an dual core AMD X2 4800+ later on when games come out that can use it fully

You may find a X2 for dirt cheap after Conroe is out,
http://tweakers.net/nieuws/41855/I [...] fases.html
With a E4200 at $169, the 3800+ plus is dead meat.

3200+ is much better performance than 805
805 just gain an advantage of multi-tasking, but you think a little bit deeper, you should know there are not many uses for multi-tasking. such as you won't watching videos and listening musics at the same time.

but there are still some uses for multi-tasking such as playing game and burning your DVD at the same time.

just focus on you uses, i would rather use an amd 3200+ than a 805.
if you are not for multi-tasking, 805 just like a single-core P4 2.66GHz cpu. 3200+ has the same performance as P4 3.2GHz.

Coz this websit has been linked to other forum for reference.