Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Would You Buy A Core 2 Duo System Today?

Last response: in Memory
Share

Would you buy Core 2 Duo today?

Total: 402 votes (3 blank votes)

  • Yes, right away
  • 26 %
  • Yes, but with my next upgrade
  • 40 %
  • No. I''ll stick with AMD
  • 21 %
  • I don''t intend to buy anything
  • 14 %
July 18, 2006 8:02:19 PM

AMD lost its leadership. Should we all dump our Athlon 64 systems? Here is a summary of opinions across our forums.

Speak out in the Toms's Hardware reader survey!
a b } Memory
a b À AMD
July 18, 2006 8:36:00 PM

Being as it is upgrade time an E6600 with 4 gigs of ram and maybe a 7950 should keep me happy for a while. All the rest of the hardware can come from my current system
July 18, 2006 8:37:55 PM

For my part I sure ain't gonna forgive that easy about Intel's crapy products for the last couple of years. And now the bastards are slicing their own throats by lowering the prices, just to hurt AMD.
Maybe I'm a little sentimental here but this would't have happened if it wasn't for Intel's monopolistic behaviour.
Also for a verry long time now AMD has proven to be an inovative company who brings a lot of new ideas and technology to the market. I belive in them, and Intel will definatly have to keep the leadership for a while to redeem themsels.
The rummors I've just heard today speak about 80% perf gains for 4x4.
So the answer is NO. I won't jump boats. AMD has won a lot of comitement from my part because of theyr comittement.
Related resources
July 18, 2006 8:38:33 PM

Quote:
AMD lost its leadership. Should we all dump our Athlon 64 systems? Here is a summary of opinions across our forums.

Speak out in the Toms's Hardware reader survey!


I'm in no rush - we have a mix of excellent-performing AMD and Intel PCs at home as well as a couple of aging Macs. But one of our Intel boxes is nearing the end of its tenure and no doubt a Conroe machine is slotted to replace it - maybe late fall '06 or early winter '07. I'll watch from the sidelines and look for a good deal - and see what mobos arrive on the scene. I'm thinking DFI/XFire!
July 18, 2006 8:39:07 PM

well I am going to wait a month or two and let all the early adopters figure out what does and doesn't work

Heck by then maybe the new video cards will be out and I can get a next gen CPU AND GPU
July 18, 2006 8:49:34 PM

I'll do the same as I've always done which is to pick, when I actually have every penny in my hand to spend, the best machine available for my budget (currently looking to H1 07). IMO, any other long range choice for something you're not going to buy immediately, such as brand loyalty, is pointless. Either you buy what's right for you or you don't, and the latter is a waste. Of course, fanboys of either side will tell you to always go for one or the other, but I don't find that economically wise.

So, to answer the question? Looking at current offerings I would get an E6600, but I will re-evaluate the situation when I'm actually ready to buy.

Synergy6
July 18, 2006 9:15:37 PM

Seeing new technology beat out old is to be expected. I just upgrade to a 3800+, 2GB, and x800gt for a very modest price. Does this computer run blazing fast? Yes. Good for gaming? Yes. Value? High.

If you have a similar setup right now then you should wait a year or two and see what happens then. I feel any dual core cpu is not worth it right now. Even if vista will utilize some of the dual core potential, single core will not be left behind. Nows the time to get a dirt cheap AMD64 or Intels 805 Dualie(price/performance).

But maybe for some people 2 more frames on oblivion is worth it :) .

Its far too early to go new technology, until AMD comes out to match Intel
July 18, 2006 9:16:19 PM

I've no reason to upgrade to another dual core processor; Kentfield or the AMD alternative will be my next purchase.
July 18, 2006 9:17:48 PM

I intend to upgrade in the near future, but am looking to do so on a budget. That being said, now is probably the best time to pick up ddr2 memory, as the prices are starting to go up, not down, and some reports I've seen here and there on the net (sorry, can't remember where, so take this with a grain of salt :p ) indicate it will get worse. Other than that, I'm gonna let others slave over the new systems, work out the bugs, and then get the best Core 2 Duo board I can for a decent price. I only need to upgrade the processor, MB, and Mem though, so it's not all that bad. The other goodies can be added on with time.

Edit: I'm running on a Athlon 64 2800+ skt 754 (at stock) w/ xpress 200 chipset MB and 1 gig (only 512 works well enough :p ) Mem, and Vista Beta 2 is killing this puppy. I figure that an upgrade is warrented, and I have some cash set aside for it.
July 18, 2006 9:46:31 PM

I'll stick with AMD for now, due to the price cuts (Maybe it's finally my time to buy an A64 X2). :D 
Besides, I bought my current PC in March, and I don't have the cash needed to almost re-build it. :p 
July 18, 2006 9:50:19 PM

Yes, when I upgrade in a couple months. Wait and see what works well together, then order and put together a kick ass rig.
July 18, 2006 9:59:28 PM

Well, I would like to upgrade today, but its just not realistic. Ima 939 user so AMD's price drop is all good to me. :D  Having to shop for new Memory, MB & CPU is a long shot for me right now, unless I come across some quick cash, which I doubt. But defenetly with my next upgrade tho' I just dont see a reason not to. But right now, its just the CPU, and x3800 is still a very good cpu specially with a $150 price tag. Too bad Optys arent declining. :(  .
July 18, 2006 10:16:16 PM

I plan to upgrade my existing AMD machine after the prices drop with an X2. If I expanded my budget to spend on a Conroe, 2gb of fast DDR2 memory and found a good compatible motherboard I probably would go that route. Although AMD's solid platform still has very good value and selection. I don't think people will dismiss AMD now that Conroe is here. Most people will take into consideration things other than just Conroe reviews such as motherboard cost, first revision bugs and availability etc.
July 18, 2006 10:17:07 PM

All in all I have to say I want to upgrade now from my Athlon XP2800+ running on socket A with a gig of ram and an Ati X700. So for me it seems well worth it at the prices, but there is one thing that I still have to wait for....the motherboard....I haven't seen a decent one that suits my needs right now, and as far as the motherboard lookout between intel and AMD, AMD seems to have more choices....then again when conroe comes out that may be different. Plus I was looking forward to possibly using a woodcrest core and something along severclass processors...just look at the opteron and its overclockability...all i can say is sever procs=built for 24/7 operation/desktop=mayb can run 24/7, just depends on environment i guess.

So all in all I won't get one right away, but keep an eye on it for the coming months(i'm sure the conroe's will still be in stock or i hope :p )
July 18, 2006 10:25:13 PM

yup. agreed. as a person with a strict budget, a $150 dual-core 3800+ is an excellent deal. i wouldnt upgrade until vista comes out. i still remember when the P4 was being released and it had the winXP logo on it. the first P4 sucks... so maybe the same will go with the conroe. i'll wait and see if they can improve on the CPU before i get it.

my 2cent.
July 18, 2006 10:41:36 PM

OMFG! BaronMatrix has been immortalized on page 5!

-mcg
July 18, 2006 10:45:41 PM

The system I have I have is more than adequate for what I am doing. I will wait until Fall of '07. Just got my computer in Nov '05. The most intensive thing I am doing is video editing so I am not in any hurry.
July 18, 2006 10:56:55 PM

I'll buy a new computer when the one I have is obsolete.
July 18, 2006 11:04:28 PM

Nobody supports AMD more than I (without them we'd have NOTHING) and AMD loyalty is not misplaced... but
Quote:
Would you buy Core 2 Duo today?

Yes, please! Yesterday would be better.
Hey, the consumer wins :^) it's capitalism at its finest.
AMD's not down & out, they are a strong force and have excellent products. They might just need to tweak their pricing a touch, is all...
Regards
July 18, 2006 11:19:01 PM

No need to upgrade - got an A64 3500+ which is easily fast enough for my gaming needs.

Maybe early next year, but I'll probably get an X2 because then I won't need a new mobo / RAM and all the hassle / cost associated with that.
July 18, 2006 11:34:11 PM

I think this question can be summed up thus:

1 - Anyone who must have the latest and greatest gaming rig, with really deep pockets, or a daddy with deeper pockets, is going to buy the Core 2 now (or at least, when it's available).

2 - Anyone with a current s939 board, or a s775 with a <965X chipset, you'd be stupid to throw out a perfectly good motherboard (possibly ram too) unless you belong to the group above. If you've got to have a bit more power on a budget, but not the best, it's a perfect time to upgrade cpu only (maybe another 2 sticks of ram, seeing as your new cpu will be so cheap). people with even less money can probably find second-hand cpus from the first group on ebay.

3 - Anyone with a crappy old computer (myself included, P3-600), who don't play games or encode video will find the speed of _anything_ new so fast that it won't matter what they buy (Core2 or AM2), so price is going to buy the killer. So is upgradeability. If i'm going to buy a motherboard now, i want to be able to buy a new cpu in a year and plug it straight in. With intel, that's always a gamble (admit it, fanboys). I'm still not perfectly clear if 975X can support conroe or not, too many conflicting reports. With AMD, for as long as processors fit the socket, they're upgradeable (yes, it's still a slight gamble as for how long they'll be making AM2 cpus, unless you buy an Asrock mobo with an upgrade slot). So my choice is going to come down to price, with a slight advantage to AMD because of upgradeability. That's too close to call, so i'm probably going to end up flipping a coin...
July 18, 2006 11:46:45 PM

Quote:
OMFG! BaronMatrix has been immortalized on page 5!

-mcg


WTF? :?:

That's true!

8O 8O 8O

But, I don't think "inmortalized" is the word, just "highlighted"... :lol: 
July 19, 2006 12:02:10 AM

I am gonna wait for Tom's mega super CPU benchmarks chart. I want to see all of the amd and intel chips compared before I make any decisions about future upgrades. Where will all of the Core2 chips place in those charts? Some over clocking charts would be nice too! I am one cheap sucker. I usually don't spend anymore than $150.00 on a CPU so I will be looking for the best bang for my dollar. Also I like to recycle as much as my system as I can. I built an AMD system just last year so I will probably wait another year before building a new system. Nice article!
July 19, 2006 12:20:41 AM

Well, seeing how I'm in the middle of planing an upgrade... It's very tempting, however I'm waiting to see how much those gigabyte 965P mobo's with the 12phase voltage regulation and all wind up costing. (I love overclocking, theres something strangely satisfying to know that your pushing the envelope of turning your CPU into a puddle of goo... Well mainly I like getting more bang for my buck and my current computer is old)

With other people, especially gamers, they may not go the core2 way for a while, cause most gamers I know are all about SLI. Less people like the X-fire. So that may keep them from upgrading until the new Nvidia chipset for Intel comes out. Being a MMO / RTS player myself, a single card usually does quite well, seeing how MMO's don't upgrade their graphics too much.

But Core2 is on my shopping list if I can find a mobo I like, I've become a pvr addict and have to transcode about 3-4 hours of video every night and with my Barton 2600+ it takes about an hour and a half with the new divX codec with sharpening. (I use windows movie maker, it's free and the files are good quality and highly portable to other devices / computers) So currently my next upgrade is the most speed for the buck and unless AMD reallyreally slashes prices, it looks like Intel will be the way to go.
July 19, 2006 12:26:55 AM

its basically just the same as the graphics card wars, roughly every six months ati or nvidia brings out a card thats the new best card, then the other company beats it a few months later

if you go around buying the lastest most powerful cards or chips as soon as they come out youre gonna wear your wallet thin rather quick

core 2 duo may be the new fastest chips, but i doubt that i would notice much real performance increase over the 4400+ X2 that im planning to upgrade to, AMD wont just let intel walk all over them, its just a matter of how soon will they have a competitive architecture available
July 19, 2006 12:31:39 AM

I totally agree that Intel has reclaimed the entusiast/performance segment. But AMD will keep the value segment and this is what most people buy.
July 19, 2006 12:36:29 AM

I have to agree with DrCroubie (3 reasons, powerhungery, have 939/775, old pos).

I have a number of people that I am making systems for right now. You really have to ask what do you want out of your system and what are you using it for. One wants a powerhouse gaming machine... Intel and 7950! Most people have no clue about what hardware to get they only look at the price tag. 2 questions, do you want something that has decent power now, is low cost and can live with replacing in as early as 2 years or do you want something that will have a little more upgradeability. People who want cheap can flip a coin. If you want something you can upgrade in 2 or 3 years get AMD. AM2 cpus are currently slatted to be around for 18 more months, a 4 to 6 month transition peroid to AM3 which should be around for at least another year. Since AMD has already said AM3 cpus will work in AM2 slots you can make significant upgrades 3 years from now drastically extending the systems life. My mother will like that =)
July 19, 2006 12:37:27 AM

Page 2

"Core 2 Duo will unlock the system side of many video games that are performance hindered by current CPUs. This will put the onice back on the graphics cards and I should see better frame rates in the games I play. "

Onice: Synonym of onyx.

Onus: o·nus (ns)
n.
1. A difficult or disagreeable responsibility or necessity; a burden or obligation.
2.
a. A stigma.
b. Blame.
3. The burden of proof: The onus was on the defense attorney.

Sorry, I just had to laugh when I saw that. The black rock is on the graphics industry now.
:lol: 
July 19, 2006 12:41:02 AM

Well, that depends on my moneylender's (mom and dad) disposition on upgrading my system (I sorely need to :(  )

The thing that still isn't clear to me is the motherboard compatibility of Conroe. 'Cause I've seen Socket T mobos for just 'bout $300 that state Core 2 Support. But the cheaper ST mobos are a gamble, and I haven't found comparisons between a 2MB-cache version of Core 2 paired with a "not-Ultra-Premium-Deluxe-$300+" motherboard. Although you could argue that upgrading from my current rig to ANYTHING will give me ASTONOMICAL improvements, since I don't live in the US, it's quite possible that your $186 Core 2 CPU will cost me (if i buy here) almost $600 :x and it will all come down to weather I can buy the whole system (CPU-mobo-ram-vid.card-HD) for less money, and still have a relatively easy upgrade path. (Not like my current mobo thar PCB HAD to be 1.05. to work with XP cores :x )

Suggestions accepted.

LichoCPU
---------------Current Rig---------------------------
AMD Athlon 1200MHz (Thunderbird Core, 266FSB)
ASUS A7V133 (VIA KT133A, PCB 1.05)
512MB SDR-SDRAM (256 PC133;256 PC100@133MHz)
ATi All-in-Wonder Radeon 9600XT 128MB (TV Part damaged :x )
Western Digital Caviar WD200BB 20GB 7200rpm HDD (ATA100)
Western Digital Protegè WD200EB 20GB 5400rpm HDD (ATA100)
Lite-On SOHW-16936S DVD+/-RW
LG GCE-8526B CD-RW
Creative Labs Sound Blaster Live! 5.1OEM
Netgear FA310TX 10/100 NIC
Realtek RTL8139 10/100 NIC
--------------------------------------------------------
July 19, 2006 12:49:53 AM

Quote:
No need to upgrade - got an A64 3500+ which is easily fast enough for my gaming needs.

Maybe early next year, but I'll probably get an X2 because then I won't need a new mobo / RAM and all the hassle / cost associated with that.



Exactly what I'm saying. People that will need to upgrade are the ones that have a socket A amd or old school p4. The cpus right now are more than sufficient for the joe++
July 19, 2006 12:57:50 AM

I'm buying now . . . but only because I'm on the falling edge of what makes for a decent gaming computer. My MSI k8t neo A64 3000+ (skt. 754) nvidia 6600 gt agp card, 1gig of corsair ram was pretty nice for about 2/12 years (with the video card being the last upgrade a little over a year ago), but sadly I'm about to drag the poor bastard out behind the barn and put a slug in its northbridge.

It probably doesn't hurt that I know a person who works in Intel's R&D dept (who does mass spectrometry) and gets one helluva a discount on chips, otherwise I'd consider myself more of an "AMD guy."

This is probably the first time in five years I've purposefully gone out and built an intel based system - I feel almost dirty in a way :oops: 
July 19, 2006 1:11:38 AM

I dont see myself getting a new system anytime soon!

Possibly a upgrade but an AMD it will be as spending $200 ~$300 on a new dual core AMD is still cheaper than $500 ~ $600 for a Conroe + MB + two 1GB sticks of memory..........and it will only be a little bit quicker (the Conroe) as I wont be purhcasing top of the line CPUs....

But if I had to get a new system now......A Conroe machine it will be!!
Getting a new machine later on..........which ever CPU has the best performance/ value at that time!!
July 19, 2006 1:31:46 AM

Building my conroe system oct-dec timeframe. Waiting for a few more
parts to be released/benchmarked - RD600 chipset - hopefully R600
graphics card.
July 19, 2006 1:42:25 AM

Ok here is the cheap of the cheapo upgrades for me. I am running an Athlon 64 3200+ in my ASRock 939Dual-SATA2 Socket 939 ULi M1695 ATX AMD Motherboard. This has full a speed agp and pci express slot. No SLI but I don't care. Now for upgrades. With a bios flash and a $30.00 adapter for the board I can run any X2 chip with DDR2 memory. not bad for a $67.00 board. As for video cards I can continue to use my AGP X800GTO until I upgrade to a decent pci video card. I love this board and chipset. I hope that AsusRock continues to make products for cheap geeks like myself. Hey and it has SATA too:!: Watch out AMD and Intel a company called ChaoLogix is working on the Chaos chip. The company is looking to put out a working chip some time in January 2007. Sounds pretty cool :!: Could be the next big thing :!: If this chip works the way it is supposed to you will no longer need separate chips for the CPU, memory, video ram, graphics accelerators, or arithmetric processing units etc. One chip will do it all. :D 
July 19, 2006 1:47:55 AM

well, i'll put it this way. it is worth getting a core2 if you are looking to build a new computer anytime between now and the foreseeable future. i am a person who sides with the best performance, not fanyboy hype.

right now, i built a computer less than a year ago (4200+, asus sli-premium, x850 xt, 1 gig value ram), and i do not plan to jump to a core2 system anytime soon. i plan to get a good 2 gig kit of ram, and maybe a new video card(s) (possilby the next line of nvidia's, if they support the nforce sli chipset). i see the gaming market moving towards better dual core efficiency, so i think i will get any extended gaming performance life on my cpu and i will ride out my comuter as long as my cpu is still usuable.

but when i plan my next rig, i will certainly buy what offers the best performance. as it lies now, the core2 kicks the crap out of any amd offering, so i would go with the core2.
July 19, 2006 2:03:10 AM

Well I built my 805D just to play around with untill Core 2 becomes more availiable :)  *rubs hands together* its almost time !!!
July 19, 2006 2:23:53 AM

Meh, core2 is impressive but not compelling enough for me to swap out dual opty's, an SLI capable mobo, a 7900GT, 4GB of RAM, and a 3Ware RAID controller on a 133MHz PCI-X slot...
July 19, 2006 2:24:28 AM

Would I buy a Core 2 processor today? Of course not. right now, I have a perfectly good, overclocked Athlon64 2800+ (Socket 754 and all) I didn't toss it out when socket 939 (and PCI express) came along, and neither when Socket AM2 and DDR2 came along. The same would go for Core 2.

Like many "true" hardware enthusiasts/freaks, it is not necessary for me to leap up and always buy the best technology when it comes out. Rather, I shoot to have high-level performance at a low price. My complete system came well under $1,000US, yet it handles the latest and most intensive games (like Oblivion and F.E.A.R.) better than even the Xbox 360. Plus, it handles everything else one a serious PC user expects, from modding/editing to more mundane tasks.

Granted, I will agree that I've been salivating over the prospects of Core 2 just a little over the past year, when Conroe was announced. Converting the Pentium M arcitecture to be a full-fledge, dedicated desktop PC design was a prospect that sent all sorts of thoughts racing through my head; I already truly admired the Pentium M for the high performance-per-clock cycle ratio it achieved in gaming, (roughly 1:85 compared to NetBurst) all while maintaining a rather low thermal envelope.

I'll agree that the Core 2 is a modern marvel of PC microprocessor engineering. In fact, I'd recommend it for anyone who's making a new machine, and has enough cash earmarked for it. However, it is like any other new "top dog" processor: an improvement over its predecessors. One can live without it, and I'm pretty sure many will. It's good enough to supplant all of the other brand-new high-end processors, but not enough to supplant the usefulness of the ones we already own.
July 19, 2006 2:40:45 AM

At the moment, no because I can upgrade my existing 939 A64 to an X2 after the price cuts take place.

On the other hand if I was looking to start from scratch then i would go with a core 2 system.
July 19, 2006 2:52:44 AM

My System is more than enough for my gaming and rendering needs. Besides
I would not upgrade just for a nice processor. AMD is not finished, but just adjusting, there is more components to contribute to a fast PC besides a CPU.
Ram is # 1 priority in a nice PC, my answer is no.

Asus SLI premium, X2 4400+
2Gigs Corsair XMS, X1900XT 512MB
Creative XFi Xstrmusic,550 Watt PSU
250 Gig HD.
July 19, 2006 2:55:13 AM

Rather than buying the new Core 2 Duo, I'll just see if overclocking my current PC will help it keep up. Maybe with liquid nitrogen cooling I'll finally be able to push this lil' 486 past 150MHz (AMD 486 to 586 133MHz Upgrade)
July 19, 2006 3:18:46 AM

I'm with the group that says...

If you were going to upgrade to a mid to high level computer then core2duo is definitely the choice.

If you want a budget build, man the AMD price reductions look good, go AM2 though.

If you want just a boost and you have a 939 board then a new amd processor is the way to go.

Me? I'm good for another year I think. Probably start looking after all the Vista kinks are worked out (well not all that would take forever, just he major ones).
July 19, 2006 3:20:07 AM

Quote:
Rather than buying the new Core 2 Duo, I'll just see if overclocking my current PC will help it keep up. Maybe with liquid nitrogen cooling I'll finally be able to push this lil' 486 past 150MHz (AMD 486 to 586 133MHz Upgrade)


you should instead oc your pda with liquid nitrogen. Id like to see solitare running at 1ghz
July 19, 2006 4:07:06 AM

A cool article overall, and for newcomers it sure beats reading through 9 pages of posts on the original articles... sums the opinions up fairly nicely I think.

Now to quote some people whose opinions I can relate to:

Quote:
For my part I sure ain't gonna forgive that easy about Intel's crapy products for the last couple of years. And now the bastards are slicing their own throats by lowering the prices, just to hurt AMD.

Maybe I'm a little sentimental here but this would't have happened if it wasn't for Intel's monopolistic behaviour.

Also for a verry long time now AMD has proven to be an inovative company who brings a lot of new ideas and technology to the market. I belive in them, and Intel will definatly have to keep the leadership for a while to redeem themsels.

The rummors I've just heard today speak about 80% perf gains for 4x4.
So the answer is NO. I won't jump boats. AMD has won a lot of comitement from my part because of theyr comittement.


I wouldn't say they're slicing their throats in the effort to hurt AMD, but I do very much support the little guy in this situation. As a consumer, brand loyalty is something that should be avoided--buying something "just because" it's the company. The better company should be the one to survive, however I don't just judge them based on their product. I also take into consideration their marketing, (anti-)competitive practices, and the general attitude of the company. AMD really impressed me when they went from being the bargain chip to the performance king with the Athlon 64 and FX series. Intel's response: "Clock speed is where it's at! 3.06, 3.2, 3.6 GHz, keep revving it! Uhh... what? They're putting out too much heat? Well then they'll be HYPERTHREADED! The coolness factor of the word will get us more added income than the measily performance gain. Crap, they're still ahead? Well then we'll make EXTREME EDITION! A Hyperthreaded Pentium 4 Extreme Edition sounds like a mighty powerful product." All the while, AMD just said "Oh, they've caught up? Put out a new chip, 200 MHz faster... that should do it." I watched the high-end enthusiast gaming PCs go from being all P4 (3.06 GHz, 2x1 GB Rambus, anyone?) to being all AMD (FX 5_, 3x1 GB DDR400). Oh, Intel was entertaining, I got a good chuckle when I booted up a game with an ad, telling me how I needed Intel processors.

What it all boils down to in the end when you've spent $xxx on an AMD processor and $xxx on an Intel processor is usually is just a few frames per second or seconds of encoding time difference, if AMD drops prices and gets new products out there then that's how things will stay. Thus with just a small percentage of performance gain at stake, I tend to support the company I like more, which is usually the innovative, small underdog (why innovative? If the products were not well known AND worse in most ways, the company would be dead in a flash). Furthermore, remember that Intel doesn't really have any other rival, and the worse AMD does, the less Intel has to work to improve their products--and if AMD goes under entirely, Intel can be as lazy as they want. As sappy as it sounds, it's times like these that AMD needs all the support they can get. This logic will cease if or when AMD reaches the same percentage market share as Intel (or if AMD does a really really unforgivably stupid and crippling blow to itself), in which case the "underdog" tag ceases to apply and the company's products and attitude determine who gets my hardware dollar.

Quote:
Seeing new technology beat out old is to be expected. I just upgrade to a 3800+, 2GB, and x800gt for a very modest price. Does this computer run blazing fast? Yes. Good for gaming? Yes. Value? High.


;)  My point exactly. I was very happy to see that somebody noticed my post and put it in the article.
July 19, 2006 4:13:05 AM

Is the fact that Intel has installed the "Trusted Platform Module" escaped everyone's notice, including the media and reviewers ????

Public opinion has beat this idea down every time it pops up, now Intel has married it to one of the most desirable chips in many years and managed to keep the whole thing quiet.

Now think about this... Apple will soon start using this Intel Core 2 Duo chip as well and that leaves only AMD as the lone holdout that has refused to install this "Cop on a chip".

Want to install your purchased copy of something on your other pc too? NOPE, none of that.
Did your brother drop by to install something he bought?
NOPE, none of that.
Got Media Licenses to match all those media files?
NOPE, none of that.
No telling what other uses the Movie, Record and Software industry has in store for us. I just know I dont want to be a part of it.

I for one, do not want anyone to be able to reach in my system and start disabling software. I buy tons of software and register almost none of it, that would probably set off a flag too.

Sure there's good reasons for having "Trusted Computing" on my PC. All the other crap they stuck in there has the smell of big Media and large Corporations all over it.

I've been waiting for months for the Conroe to be released, but now, I wouldnt touch it.

I'm buying whatever AMD is selling now.


Wake Up People - Google "Trusted Computing" and "Trusted Platform Module" if you want to get a taste of what Im talking about.
July 19, 2006 4:22:03 AM

Just adding my two cents here . . .

I loved it in '99 when Athlon first came out.

I didn't love it because I'm a fan of a corporation, only because what no one really talks about too much is that the high end Pentium back then, which I believe was about a 500 MHz Pentium III cost approximately $1000, and that was at its cheapest price off of pricewatch, before newegg was the phenomenon they are today.

Intel was forced to slash prices on all of its processors and AMD followed suit. We, the consumers were graced with the ability to buy processors which were priced in the $1000 range the month before at a price under $400. It was an awesome time.

Now, its the same story. AMD has had the performance lead for such a long time that the market prices had gone up to ridiculous levels. I always said back then that AMD wasn't our friend because they are a publicly owned corporation and the only friends a publicly owned corporation cares about are its stockholders.

Intel isn't our friend either, another publicly owned corporation who doesn't care one iota about its customers, only its stockholders.

Anyone who says any different about either company is just plain naive.

So, basically what has happened now, is awesome for us, because where top of the line processors had once again drifted up above the $1000 range, now they are back down into the sub $400 range. An exciting time for anyone who is in the market for computer components.

Neither time was fueled by a company who wanted to do something great for its customers, but fueled only by the respective companies' needs to satiate the needs of their stockholders. If AMD had never done what they did back in '99 we'd probably all be happy with 2 GHz "top of the line" machines right now in 2006 and we'd be paying about $1000 for a 2 GHz level CPU for that machine right here and now. If Intel hadn't done what they've done this year, AMD would have ridden the Athlon64 wave as long as possible, as evidenced by their relentless pricing right up to Core 2 Duo launch, and we'd be forced to be happy with the FX-62 well into 2007 and beyond.

So, in conclusion, I'd strongly implore the foolhardy to refrain from foolish "fanship" of publicly owned corporations. Corporations are evil by nature. They don't care about you at all. (As a side note, I laugh at Google's motto now, "don't be evil". Yeah right, that motto became meaningless the second they became slaves to their stockholders, who care only about making money)

Just rejoice that we finally have another time where we can actually come close to getting our money's worth for a while. It won't last long, I can guarantee that, so we should take advantage of it while it lasts, whether you upgrade your current AMD or Intel system(s) or buy (a) new AMD or Intel system(s), or whether your a system builder like I am, now is the time to do it where you'll actually get your money's worth.

One thing Tom's CPU chart is horribly lacking is the retail cost of each CPU at the time it came out at its launch. If Tom's CPU chart showed this, you'd see just how much these corporations "care" about you, which is absolute zero. You'd see that as each company gained a significant lead, performance wise over the other, they would work quickly to jack the prices of their products to ridiculous levels. Basically as absolutely as high as they could possibly get away with, i.e. AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 at over $1200 just this month, and Intel Pentium III 500 Mhz at over $1000 back in '99.

This is the actual reality of this topic. Hopefully the sober minded will agree.

And no doubt, whether you agree or not, I think all would agree, the time to get our money's worth from buying computer components is now, and that is definitely something to be happy about.


Cheers
July 19, 2006 4:27:07 AM

I would possibly buy a core 2 duo in my next upgrade. It wouldn't be a sure thing, and I would probably actually buy an AMD chip. My concern is that I would want to buy a computer to last me many years. Right now, the processing capabilities of say, a 4400+ x2 amd chip are beyond my needs. Now I know that the AMD chips last, are reliable, and plenty fast. So why would I really want anything else? I'd rather purchase a chip which I know to be fast and reliable than buy the latest and greatest and possibly have issues with it in the future. I just don't have the money to go around buying another new computer six months down the road if this one crashes. Otherwise, the Core 2 duo chips look amazing, and if I had the extra money to do so, I would certainly buy the latest and greatest and go with them at this point in time.
July 19, 2006 4:42:08 AM

In all honesty I would with my next upgrade, however my next upgrade should be around the time when quad cores are emerging. I realise they may be overkill but seeing as I am still running a gimpy single core (all be it OC'd fairly well) it seems like a reasonable jump to me.

Go go Core 2 Quad!!!!! lol
July 19, 2006 5:01:59 AM

We use dual-core and dual CPU setups at my work and the truth is, while they offer advantages for serious networking, databases, and data crunching, for games and most of what people usea computer for, it's just not that effective.

Comparing a Core 2 Duo to an overclocked 805 should give us interesting results. I suspect that it's a moderate gain for the new chip at best, for twice the price. $300+ is a lot of money for most of us, afterall.
July 19, 2006 6:18:07 AM

Lets see, $350 (6700 ?) for a CPU, $250 (or slightly less) for a decent motherboard, and thats 600 bux right there, for just the CPU, and motherboard . . . I dont care if it outperforms the FX-62, theres a reason I buy mid range parts from AMD, and thats cost effectiveness (at a fairly cheap price tag).

I think Intel perhaps may be getting closer to a reasonable price for thier CPUs, but I dont see any justification spending that kind of money on thier CPUs JUST BECAUSE they outperform 'anything' AMD (just as you'll probably never see me buy a FX series CPU).

This however is a good thing, even for pure AMD fans, because, this means, that around the 27th of July, X2 CPU prices will be dropping :) 

[EDIT]

Ah yeah, lets not forget that AMD still owns in the memory bandwidth department :) 
!