dual core gammer, intel or amd?

im gonna get a new pc, i play games, and i wanna go dual core, should i go intel or amd?
46 answers Last reply
More about dual core gammer intel
  1. How much are you looking to spend? At the lower end of the price spectrum, Intel offers the best deal, however the motherboards are generally more expensive; Intel CPUs currently does not perform as well as most AMD chips. In a few weeks Conroe will be released (Hopefully) and Intel will hold the performance crown for awhile.
  2. Can't put it better than that ^^^

    AMD - still the best

    Intel - looks like they're about to become the best (again)

    Depends on how urgent it is. Conroe cores are gona sell out pretty quick stylee, though, so it mite be a while before they get cheap.
  3. Yep that is a pretty neutral answer!!

    With AMD you should expect lower cpu temperatures and higher speeds and better overclocks (unless you get a D 805) but should also expect more instability and higher priced high end CPUs but cheaprer cheap ones. lol

    With Intel you should expect higher temperatures and less speed but much better multitasking performance, life span and stability. Their CPUs are cheaper too at the moment thanks to pressure from AMD
  4. What's your budget? I think I spent $930 on my sig-rig (just the box; I had the O/S, software, and peripherals already), and it works well for me. I'm not as twitchy as many on here, so you may want a better video card, but mine handles Guild Wars and Sacred quite nicely. I haven't played more than about 20 minutes of Oblivion, and the only FPS I play is the old G.O.T.Y. version of Unreal Tournament. Frame rates in the latter are equal to my monitor refresh rate.
  5. about 750, but im not planning to buy it now, im gonna get it in a little while, gonna wait for the amd x2's to go down in price, but i was thinking on the line of an x2, but im wondering if i should go conroe instead? , id like to get an x1800xt 512 (can get it at newegg for about 280) and 2 gigs of ram.
  6. For $750 PC, I would seriously look at a $200 975 mobo, a $110 Intel 805 or $130 920, and overclock it up to 3.6GHz on air, preparing to master overclocking Intel rigs and waiting on a soon to be released future $220 Conroe, which can be overclocked in excess of anything AMD can offer...
    Intel chips have for the most part always overclocked better than AMD chips... and a dual core Intel plus 975 mobo is cheaper or same price than the lowest dual core AMD CPU alone... 8O
    So gamers/PC users in general now would be silly to go AMD, for either price or performance...
  7. 200 dollar mobo is lot...more than the cpu, and im not really into overclocking, because where i live the dont even really get x2's and that stuff so if i come with a pc and sell it i can prolly get 1200 out of a 750 pc, so im looking for a cheap cpu that has big numbers. and as dual core cpu's barely exist here it will sell for much more than a single core, an amd 4000 costs about 500 bucks here. just to show the price diference
  8. Quote:
    Yep that is a pretty neutral answer!!

    With AMD you should expect lower cpu temperatures and higher speeds and better overclocks (unless you get a D 805) but should also expect more instability and higher priced high end CPUs but cheaprer cheap ones. lol


    You consider AMDs to be less stable? My experiences are the opposite.

    Quote:
    With Intel you should expect higher temperatures and less speed but much better multitasking performance, life span and stability. Their CPUs are cheaper too at the moment thanks to pressure from AMD


    Up until I got a Centrino Duo, I'd never had an Intel that multitasked as well as the AMDs I've used. I'm hoping the Conroe desktops run as well.
  9. As I said, an Intel dual core plus a mobo is less than just the AMD CPU dual core alone...
    Intel can not be touched for budget priced dual core PC's, and they overclock well regardless of if you choose to do so or not... which means at stock they are overbuilt stability wise...
  10. There are not many games that actually make use of a Dual Core, but a fast processor does help. For Gaming, you are probably best getting AMD now, or wait a little bit for a Conroe (single core).

    If you are intent on getting dual core, the Intels are cheap but lacks performance in gaming but good with multitasking. If you favor AMD, then you may be best to wait until Conroe launch and buy the AMD X2 processors when the price goes down.

    For gaming you are better off putting money on a good GPU
  11. yea i do feel AMDs are more unstable on average

    and intels are better multitaskers especially a D950, you cant fault it
  12. Quote:
    200 dollar mobo is lot...more than the cpu, and im not really into overclocking, because where i live the dont even really get x2's and that stuff so if i come with a pc and sell it i can prolly get 1200 out of a 750 pc, so im looking for a cheap cpu that has big numbers. and as dual core cpu's barely exist here it will sell for much more than a single core, an amd 4000 costs about 500 bucks here. just to show the price diference

    where do you live?
    how much do you have for your gaming rig?
    what kind of games are you going to play?
  13. I dont know what a gammer is. But if you like gaming AMD is the best at the moment. In the coming weeks/months (ive forgotten the release date of conroe) intel will be. Your choice.
  14. Quote:
    where i live the dont even really get x2's and that stuff
    If you have troubles getting x2's where you live, then you'll probably have a harder time getting a Conroe. :?
  15. Quote:
    For Gaming, you are probably best getting AMD now, or wait a little bit for a Conroe (single core).


    Errrr, Conroe Core 2s are all dual core.
  16. Quote:
    about 750, but im not planning to buy it now, im gonna get it in a little while, gonna wait for the amd x2's to go down in price, but i was thinking on the line of an x2, but im wondering if i should go conroe instead? , id like to get an x1800xt 512 (can get it at newegg for about 280) and 2 gigs of ram.


    Wow its pretty tough to fit 1800xt, AMD X2, and 2 gigs of ram into a 750 dollar comp. Unless your using previous hardware. All those above and a A8R-MVP mobo that comes at a combo with the 3800 X2 ($50 dollar saving) is 800 bucks. You then have to add a case, hardrive, monitor, power supply(if it doesnt come with case), and possibly some better cooling.
  17. Quote:
    about 750, but im not planning to buy it now, im gonna get it in a little while, gonna wait for the amd x2's to go down in price, but i was thinking on the line of an x2, but im wondering if i should go conroe instead? , id like to get an x1800xt 512 (can get it at newegg for about 280) and 2 gigs of ram.


    Wow its pretty tough to fit 1800xt, AMD X2, and 2 gigs of ram into a 750 dollar comp. Unless your using previous hardware. All those above and a A8R-MVP mobo that comes at a combo with the 3800 X2 ($50 dollar saving) is 800 bucks. You then have to add a case, hardrive, monitor, power supply(if it doesnt come with case), and possibly some better cooling.

    Actually i dont see why not,

    X2 $150 , after price cuts?
    x1800xt $280
    2GB Ram $150

    he woudl still have to skimp on other parts which i doubt is what he is aiming for, but its doable i think
  18. Quote:
    yea i do feel AMDs are more unstable on average

    and intels are better multitaskers especially a D950, you cant fault it

    first off "cpus" arent unstable, if its anything its the platform or the user. as for multi-tasking, the only cpu that can pass the errr bullshit stage for mutli-tasking over amd is the xe, and yours doesnt pass that stage. regular x2s have beat out the regular 9 and 8 series pds.
  19. personally i would get a low end Opteron 165 and OC it. thats what i game on and it's awesome :D. Right now i have one OC'd to 2.4GHZ with no problems, i could push it further but i don't want to break my PSU.
  20. I hate to hijack a thread but I have a question along the same lines somewhat. Is it better to get Dual Core if the primary use is gaming and playing newer games or will single core still be the way to go for a bit.

    I'm looking at an Athlon 64 X2 4800+ but I hear a lot of people saying that the dual cores have problems with a lot of current to fairly new games from the last couple years. So I'd hate to get a dual core and have problems with games I'm looking to get more perfomance out namely Oblivion. I'm also looking at the same graphics card as was just mentioned above to but the 256 version of the X1800XT how big a difference would this be over my 256 9800 Pro?

    Again sorry for being a hijacker. :p

    Current Rig
    3200 Athlon XP proc
    3 Gb PC3200 ram
    ATI 9800 Pro 256mb vid
  21. Quote:
    I'm also looking at the same graphics card as was just mentioned above to but the 256 version of the X1800XT how big a difference would this be over my 256 9800 Pro?


    Can't even be compared, I had a 9800 pro and the x1800xt is another world :) I would say, get the 512 mb version, but that's my opinion. You would get better textures...
  22. Quote:
    im gonna get a new pc, i play games, and i wanna go dual core, should i go intel or amd?


    Considering most games are single threaded, it really doesn't matter...if your machine is gonna be used solely for gaming, then a super fast single core is a better way to go...but if you wanna multi-task and run services in the background while gaming, then a dual core is worth it...AMD vs Intel, doesn't matter...get something at least 2.2GHZ with 1MB cache and it'll rip-snort-chug-a-lug whatever you put at it...

    But given the sum total of posts that ask "which is better for whatever, AMD or Intel?", I say go with whatever tickles your tuckus and make you feel all warm and fuzzy in your special place...
  23. Well, PC users posting here would most likely get a thrill and warm fuzzy feeling if they bought a sub $150 dual core CPU and overclocked it stabily in excess of a $800+ CPU...
  24. personally i would get the dual core as while there aren't alot of dual core supported games, the time will come when more games will be optimized for a dual core rig. Beisdes if the game only uses one core then it will be about the same performance level.

    In regards to older games not running i have sucessfull run and played the following games on my dual core rig.

    Freelancer
    HL2
    HL
    FEAR
    Farcry
    Tremulous (Q3 Based)
    BF 1942
    BF 1942: DC

    Personally if you do equal amounts of gaming and compression/media encoding i would get a low end opteron 165 or 170 and oc it :D.

    My Rig

    Opteron 165 @ 2.4GHZ
    ATI X1900XT
    1GB OCZ PC3500 Ram
    Antec Neo HE 500
    320GB Segate 7200.10 SATA II
    X-Mystique 7.1
    Antec Sonata
    Plextor PX716A
    Asus A8N32-SLI
  25. well i live in chile, and id be getting my stuff off newegg (my bro is going up in a few months) and well i play cs:s, bf2, im gonna get bf2142 when it comes out and games along that line, and im gonna sell my pc now and hope to get about 750 off of it, n i just want to upgrade my pc, its a 2800, 1gb ddr333 and an ati 9600xt, so as u can c...its crap, and id like to get a something better, im guessing conroes r gonna arrive here like 2 months after they come out in the us, and hte will cost about twice as much, so yeah.
  26. Quote:

    With Intel you should expect higher temperatures and less speed but much better multitasking performance, life span and stability. Their CPUs are cheaper too at the moment thanks to pressure from AMD


    Silly boy, Intel is lowering prices to clear out all the netburst procs. Once Core 2 duo is released they will be virtualy worthless. Nothing to do with pressure from AMD
  27. Quote:

    With Intel you should expect higher temperatures and less speed but much better multitasking performance, life span and stability. Their CPUs are cheaper too at the moment thanks to pressure from AMD


    Silly boy, Intel is lowering prices to clear out all the netburst procs. Once Core 2 duo is released they will be virtualy worthless. Nothing to do with pressure from AMD
  28. Thanks for the info all if I could find an X1800XT 512 I would pick it up but all I'm finding right now is the 256 model in stock. Good to know about all those games that worked for dual core that gives me hope, lcdguy.

    I asked this in a couple places the majority so far told me to just get a decent single core because it will be a while before enough games are dual core to matter and for how I'm backing up my media I don't need too much power. I just don't want to get a single core and end up replacing it again next year because the majority of apps and games have switched to dual core but it seems like that's a ways off so maybe I will just find a decent single that I won't need to oc for performance.
  29. Quote:
    Thanks for the info all if I could find an X1800XT 512 I would pick it up but all I'm finding right now is the 256 model in stock. Good to know about all those games that worked for dual core that gives me hope, lcdguy.

    I asked this in a couple places the majority so far told me to just get a decent single core because it will be a while before enough games are dual core to matter and for how I'm backing up my media I don't need too much power. I just don't want to get a single core and end up replacing it again next year because the majority of apps and games have switched to dual core but it seems like that's a ways off so maybe I will just find a decent single that I won't need to oc for performance.


    The other advantage of the dual core, although i haven't seen this work yet.

    But in theory with a game running on one core and doing some other processor heavy process on the other (video encoding, zip files, backup)

    Also the reason for the OC is that i now have a $400 processor running a full 600MHZ faster than it's stock clock. with no ill effects.

    PUt it this way i was playing fear at the following settings

    1680x1050
    Everything Maxed out
    AVG FPS 45-60 nothing below 25 :D
  30. Quote:
    Also the reason for the OC is that i now have a $400 processor running a full 600MHZ faster than it's stock clock. with no ill effects.


    Big deal, my Sempron runs over 500mhz faster and only cost £30 :wink:
  31. Quote:
    How much are you looking to spend? At the lower end of the price spectrum, Intel offers the best deal, however the motherboards are generally more expensive; Intel CPUs currently does not perform as well as most AMD chips. In a few weeks Conroe will be released (Hopefully) and Intel will hold the performance crown for awhile.


    Hey, you answered write! Even if you are in the AMD side it is possible to notice that you do not take the AMD part. But why don't switch to Intel? ihihihih! ahahaha! Ok just kiddig! Don't get mad! But when Conroe come out I don't want to say: " I told you to switch to Intel!".

    Ok ok you right! Is only because I'm excited with this D805 that I have under my a**!! Ahhhh!! 3.6GHz double core!! Ahhh.... what pleasure!

    ehehehe :lol:

    My advice to the dual core gamer is... go Intel dual core or wait Conroe. But yes, I need to admit that AMD for games is a good machine :)

    :arrow: I think that you need only to take one side in your life: AMD or Intel! The fight has began! Choose your destiny!

    My side is clear:....
  32. Quote:


    The other advantage of the dual core, although i haven't seen this work yet.

    But in theory with a game running on one core and doing some other processor heavy process on the other (video encoding, zip files, backup)

    Also the reason for the OC is that i now have a $400 processor running a full 600MHZ faster than it's stock clock. with no ill effects.

    PUt it this way i was playing fear at the following settings

    1680x1050
    Everything Maxed out
    AVG FPS 45-60 nothing below 25 :D


    What kind of system do you have to play such resolution?
    I mean graphic card , CPU and memory?
  33. Quote:
    Also the reason for the OC is that i now have a $400 processor running a full 600MHZ faster than it's stock clock. with no ill effects.


    Big deal, my Sempron runs over 500mhz faster and only cost £30 :wink:

    First off the sempron doesn't even play in the same ballpark as an opteron. Secondly my opteron at 2GHZ would wipe the floor with yours in any sort of Data Compression/Video Encoding. And considering i have upped the cpu speed by 600MHZ a full 100MHZ faster than your oc i think i still got a better deal. BTW this is all on the stock cooling.

    Now onto more important things than petty bickering.

    NetSpiderZ-Net Wrote:

    Quote:
    What kind of system do you have to play such resolution?
    I mean graphic card , CPU and memory?


    Here is my Current System Specs right down the fans.

    CPU: Opteron 165 @ 2.4 GHZ (266mhz*9)
    Mobo: Asus A8N32-SLI DX
    Vid: ATI X1900XT 512MB
    Ram: 1GB OCZ XTC GX PC3500 2-2-2-5 1T
    HDD: Seagate 7200.10 320GB SATA II NCQ
    PSU: Antec NEO HE 500
    Case: Antec Sonata
    DVD: Plextor PX716A DVDRW DL
    FDD: 1.44mb Floppy
    Sound: X-Mystique 7.1
    Misc: L.I.S. 2 VFD
    Fan: 2x120mm Silenx Ixtrema Pro
    OS: XP Pro
    Monitor: Viewsonic VX2025WM 20.1" LCD
    Mouse: Logitech MX500
    Kybd: Generic Mitsumi

    I think i got everything, ooh wait my speakers, i need to put my speakers in :D

    Reciever: SONY STR-DE697 7.1 700Watt
    Speakers: Yamaha YSP-106 6.1 Surround Speakers

    There that should be everything for one of my computers :D
  34. Quote:
    First off the sempron doesn't even play in the same ballpark as an opteron. Secondly my opteron at 2GHZ would wipe the floor with yours in any sort of Data Compression/Video Encoding. And considering i have upped the cpu speed by 600MHZ a full 100MHZ faster than your oc i think i still got a better deal. BTW this is all on the stock cooling.

    Now onto more important things than petty bickering.


    Wow, I just checked the AMD website, it turns out your Opteron is higher up in the range than my Sempron.

    Sorry for my mistake!
  35. Not a problem, i just got kinda offended considering the opteron is a server chip :D.
  36. I see. So with that CPU and that GPU you run fear at 1680x1050 with an average of 45-60? wow! That's great... but seams a little too much?

    I mean I think we are going close to the highest 7800-7900 GT(x) SLI values.
  37. Quote:
    Not a problem, i just got kinda offended considering the opteron is a server chip


    Ohjeez.

    Anyway...
  38. Quote:
    I see. So with that CPU and that GPU you run fear at 1680x1050 with an average of 45-60? wow! That's great... but seams a little too much?

    I mean I think we are going close to the highest 7800-7900 GT(x) SLI values.


    well some of the revies i read about the X1900 series was that the XT/XTX where getting cvlose to 7800 SLI performance, I had a single 7900GTX at first and the frame rates were a little higher, but then recurring defect in the 7900's reared it's ugly head and i switch over to ATI.

    And no it's not a little too much. I have heavy tweaked my system for high performance.
  39. Quote:

    well some of the revies i read about the X1900 series was that the XT/XTX where getting cvlose to 7800 SLI performance, I had a single 7900GTX at first and the frame rates were a little higher, but then recurring defect in the 7900's reared it's ugly head and i switch over to ATI.

    And no it's not a little too much. I have heavy tweaked my system for high performance.


    I don't want to go off-topic here, but... what do you mean with heavy tweaked? Are you squeezing your system like an orange when you want to make the orange-juice? eheheh I'm interested in system-juice.
    Now I tweaked my system a little more ... I reached 3.7GHz ... still testing.
  40. According to Tomshardware interactive CPU chart Athlon 64 3700+ San Diego is slightly faster than Athlon 64 X2 4400+ and even 4600+ when it comes to games. In some other benchmarks dual core is clearly better.
  41. Quote:

    well some of the revies i read about the X1900 series was that the XT/XTX where getting cvlose to 7800 SLI performance, I had a single 7900GTX at first and the frame rates were a little higher, but then recurring defect in the 7900's reared it's ugly head and i switch over to ATI.

    And no it's not a little too much. I have heavy tweaked my system for high performance.


    I don't want to go off-topic here, but... what do you mean with heavy tweaked? Are you squeezing your system like an orange when you want to make the orange-juice? eheheh I'm interested in system-juice.
    Now I tweaked my system a little more ... I reached 3.7GHz ... still testing.

    Just be carefull, i am not sure if intel boards are like this but on some nvidia boards the SATA controller was part of the main chipset and when people bumped the FSB to high it caused data corruption on the drives.

    Oh and the D805 os very over clockable, just keep an eye on your temps.
  42. I see, I think that I need to upgrade my system to SLI. As soon as I can I will buy another 7900 GT. Me too I want higher resolution playing FEAR.

    BTW, what is your playing hours and your nick... we might se each others online (if you play online)
  43. i am usually playing in the evening for EST but i don't play alot of online stuff (still working through the SP)
  44. I see.. ok.
  45. sorry, i just don't have a lot of spare time these days to play online, that and i have been going over my ISP's bandwidth cap on kinda of a regular basis :D
  46. no problem :)
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Intel Dual Core AMD