Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

fx-60 vs. e6600

Last response: in CPUs
Share
January 28, 2007 8:28:56 PM

hey guys i need help choosing the best cpu, i wanna now which is the best for gaming and for all my needs, and aspecailly the fastest and the deffrence between these bothe cpus :?:

More about : e6600

January 28, 2007 8:32:05 PM

E6600 period.
January 28, 2007 8:32:38 PM

Quote:
hey guys i need help choosing the best cpu, i wanna now which is the best for gaming and for all my needs, and aspecailly the fastest and the deffrence between these bothe cpus :?:

go with conroe .u can maybe get low-end conroe and overclock it and save then for better video card
Related resources
January 28, 2007 8:34:43 PM

Dual core.
January 28, 2007 8:44:10 PM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 
January 28, 2007 8:53:08 PM

E6600
January 28, 2007 9:02:41 PM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

:D 
E6600. Like 1Tanker said, uses less power and, at stock, outperforms the FX-60. Your motherboard will be usefull for further upgrades as AMDs statis is looking meager.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
January 28, 2007 9:09:12 PM

If you get a water cooler you might aswell get a e6400 or 6300. Not e6600 unless you have the B batch. My 2 cents.
a c 474 à CPUs
a b 4 Gaming
January 28, 2007 9:09:19 PM

Quote:
hey guys i need help choosing the best cpu, i wanna now which is the best for gaming and for all my needs, and aspecailly the fastest and the deffrence between these bothe cpus :?:


E6600. The difference? Architecture.

Here a link of the E6600 beating the FX-62 (both at stock speeds):

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=279...
January 28, 2007 9:31:16 PM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

You guys should get a "Don't buy X2" sticky.
January 28, 2007 9:33:46 PM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

You guys should get a "Don't buy X2" sticky.

Well, then give some input why the OP should get the FX-60 over the E6600, then, instead of just saying "get a "Don't buy X2 sticky"."

Give one good example of why the OP should get an FX-60 over the E6600. Price? Features? Something. Until then, quit crying about people giving advice when asked.
January 28, 2007 9:37:42 PM

Quote:
E6600 period.


for sure, e6600's are great at overclocking, mine is running at a stable 3.6GHz right now and I have gotten it up to 4.0GHz but I need to switch over to phase change cooling from my current high end to get it stable at 4.0 and go higher, but yes it is a amazing overclocker and you can easily get to 3.2 or 3.4 on after market air (like a tuniq tower or scythe infinity)
January 28, 2007 9:45:35 PM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

You guys should get a "Don't buy X2" sticky.

Here you go Baron. Remove that smiley face and put this up there.

:wink:
January 28, 2007 9:53:02 PM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

You guys should get a "Don't buy X2" sticky.

Well, then give some input why the OP should get the FX-60 over the E6600, then, instead of just saying "get a "Don't buy X2 sticky"."

Give one good example of why the OP should get an FX-60 over the E6600. Price? Features? Something. Until then, quit crying about people giving advice when asked.


I told you you guys take this too seriously.
January 28, 2007 9:58:01 PM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

You guys should get a "Don't buy X2" sticky.

Well, then give some input why the OP should get the FX-60 over the E6600, then, instead of just saying "get a "Don't buy X2 sticky"."

Give one good example of why the OP should get an FX-60 over the E6600. Price? Features? Something. Until then, quit crying about people giving advice when asked.


I told you you guys take this too seriously.

I don't take anything here, seriously.

The OP asked a question, and all you can do is spout more supposed X2 bashing, which isn't going on.

Why put that kind of trash in a thread when it does nothing but start crap? You might like to start little fires, that's fine and dandy, but when someone asks for an opinion, and you can't even give an example to get an FX-60, then what's your point?
January 28, 2007 10:06:05 PM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

You guys should get a "Don't buy X2" sticky.And you need to get a "I love AMD" t-shirt.
WTF? The OP asked about gaming performance of FX-60 & E6600, not about X2.
Anyway for gaming the E6600 outperforms all X2 CPUs, including X2 6000+.
January 28, 2007 10:15:21 PM

Basically the only reason to buy a X2 or any AMD processor atm is if you are on a budget. the C2Ds outperform anything that AMD has right now.
Which by the way doesnt mean that AMD makes bad chips, or that you shouldn't consider buying one, if you are looking to make a budget system then get a cheap 3800+ X2 ;p
Also screw all you naysayers, AMD still rocks!
they may not have the performance crown atm, but they aint anything like going broke quite yet!
January 28, 2007 10:21:52 PM

lol no where in, "you should get a dont buy x2 sticky" does it say GET an fx60.
he is right, you take it too seriously. Why should he repeat something that is already being repeated? "get the c2d"


for the OP.. if you are planning to OC. get the e6400. if not.. go for the e6600
January 28, 2007 10:23:47 PM

Quote:
Basically the only reason to buy a X2 or any AMD processor atm is if you are on a budget. the C2Ds outperform anything that AMD has right now.
Which by the way doesnt mean that AMD makes bad chips, or that you shouldn't consider buying one, if you are looking to make a budget system then get a cheap 3800+ X2 ;p
Also screw all you naysayers, AMD still rocks!
they may not have the performance crown atm, but they aint anything like going broke quite yet!


Thats right. No one here is 'naysaying', the poster asked about the fastest CPU for gaming and people polled-in. I've had a 64 3500+ and loved it for gaming.

Quote:
lol no where in, "you should get a dont buy x2 sticky" does it say GET an fx60.


...Err? Holy sh.t. Go back and read it really hard. There is no where anyone is saying 'get a FX-60' and if they did, it would be personal opinion - not factual data.
January 29, 2007 12:04:54 AM

Quote:
lol no where in, "you should get a dont buy x2 sticky" does it say GET an fx60.
he is right, you take it too seriously. Why should he repeat something that is already being repeated? "get the c2d"


Cause for Baron to say, "get a c2d" would be like suicide for him.

Look for some of his threads, where he claims that the X2 is fast enough for software, where people are looking for the best that they can afford.

You might not know Baron's antics, but I have seen them. He claims that everyone will suggest a C2D over an X2, even if someone asks for an opinion about a 939 CPU upgrade or an AM2 upgrade.

So, no, I don't take forums seriously, but I don't like it when people just have to chime in, with no real motive other than to start crap.
January 29, 2007 12:52:32 AM

Quote:
Here you go Baron. Remove that smiley face and put this up there.

LMAO

@ salobon: yes, e6600 is a better choice.
January 29, 2007 1:01:51 AM

Quote:
Here you go Baron. Remove that smiley face and put this up there.

LMAO

@ salobon: yes, e6600 is a better choice.

Yeah, but AMD is the Smarter Choice. ;)  ;) 

Quite a marketing slogan. How can you go wrong with that? :lol: 
January 29, 2007 1:06:43 AM

Quote:
lol no where in, "you should get a dont buy x2 sticky" does it say GET an fx60.
he is right, you take it too seriously. Why should he repeat something that is already being repeated? "get the c2d"


Cause for Baron to say, "get a c2d" would be like suicide for him.

Look for some of his threads, where he claims that the X2 is fast enough for software, where people are looking for the best that they can afford.

You might not know Baron's antics, but I have seen them. He claims that everyone will suggest a C2D over an X2, even if someone asks for an opinion about a 939 CPU upgrade or an AM2 upgrade.

So, no, I don't take forums seriously, but I don't like it when people just have to chime in, with no real motive other than to start crap.

I tell one out of two people to get a C2D. The other one I tell to get AMD. That way if Barcelona embarrasses Intel AGAIN then I will be neutral.
January 29, 2007 1:09:39 AM

One cannot exist without the other. For example, day cannot exist without night. Light cannot exist without darkness. Death cannot exist without Life. Intel cannot exist without AMD. :twisted:
January 29, 2007 1:10:59 AM

What if Penryn wipes the floor with K8L. Are you going to recommend Pentium D to be neutral?
January 29, 2007 1:14:14 AM

Quote:
What if Penryn wipes the floor with K8L. Are you going to recommend Pentium D to be neutral?


Then what if Shanghai kicks Penryn in the nuts and the "as-yet undisclosed" 2008 architecture kicks beats WOlfdale like a stepchild?

The best one is what if after 2007, AMD and Intel stay within 5% of each other?
January 29, 2007 1:33:17 AM

$5 bucks says we dont see any innovative new products from intel if k8l doesnt beat c2d. why waste money doing a die shrink if theres nothing to compete with their current lineup?
January 29, 2007 2:23:31 AM

Quote:
$5 bucks says we dont see any innovative new products from intel if k8l doesnt beat c2d. why waste money doing a die shrink if theres nothing to compete with their current lineup?


That might be true, but the way AMD handed intel it's ass the last few years, I doubt intel will just sit and wait for AMD to do it again.

If anything, they will continue to push their technology, and maybe even hold some back. But stop completely, I doubt it.

Quote:
I tell one out of two people to get a C2D. The other one I tell to get AMD. That way if Barcelona embarrasses Intel AGAIN then I will be neutral.


You haven't recommended C2D to anyone here since it's release. If I am mistaken, fine. But I don't believe I have ever seen you say, get the C2D, cause it's a better CPU for your task. Nope. All I've read was - "the X2 is fast enough for the software today", or "if anyone ever suggests an X2, then just get flamed" type answers.

You would tell 2 out of 2 people to get AMD no matter what the situation was. Neutrality, in your case, does not exist. It's evident in your "if Barcelona embarasses Intel AGAIN" statement.
January 29, 2007 3:07:40 AM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

You guys should get a "Don't buy X2" sticky.

Oh Baron Stop

This guy asked FX60 vs 6600 and the answer is clear...even you know it. Just like the guys who ask about uprgading their AM2s and intelliots who come screaming out of the wood work - "Cet a C2d - it rOxOrZ": wrong-just plain stupid wrong. If you can play nice with those guys, where the answer is clear (NOT C2D) why cant you place nice here where the answer is?
January 29, 2007 3:14:21 AM

Quote:
You haven't recommended C2D to anyone here since it's release. If I am mistaken, fine. But I don't believe I have ever seen you say, get the C2D, cause it's a better CPU for your task. Nope. All I've read was - "the X2 is fast enough for the software today", or "if anyone ever suggests an X2, then just get flamed" type answers.

You would tell 2 out of 2 people to get AMD no matter what the situation was. Neutrality, in your case, does not exist.


I second, 8) :) 
January 29, 2007 3:30:26 AM

Quote:
You haven't recommended C2D to anyone here since it's release. If I am mistaken, fine. But I don't believe I have ever seen you say, get the C2D, cause it's a better CPU for your task. Nope. All I've read was - "the X2 is fast enough for the software today", or "if anyone ever suggests an X2, then just get flamed" type answers.

You would tell 2 out of 2 people to get AMD no matter what the situation was. Neutrality, in your case, does not exist.


I second, 8) :) 

I just today recommended E6300 for an Intel buyer who was looking at PD. You need Jesus.
January 29, 2007 3:31:24 AM

Quote:
You haven't recommended C2D to anyone here since it's release. If I am mistaken, fine. But I don't believe I have ever seen you say, get the C2D, cause it's a better CPU for your task. Nope. All I've read was - "the X2 is fast enough for the software today", or "if anyone ever suggests an X2, then just get flamed" type answers.

You would tell 2 out of 2 people to get AMD no matter what the situation was. Neutrality, in your case, does not exist.


I second, 8) :) 

the only thing you second is your other hand on your ****
after watching you know what :p 
January 29, 2007 3:34:42 AM

Quote:
You haven't recommended C2D to anyone here since it's release. If I am mistaken, fine. But I don't believe I have ever seen you say, get the C2D, cause it's a better CPU for your task. Nope. All I've read was - "the X2 is fast enough for the software today", or "if anyone ever suggests an X2, then just get flamed" type answers.

You would tell 2 out of 2 people to get AMD no matter what the situation was. Neutrality, in your case, does not exist.


I second, 8) :) 

I just today recommended E6300 for an Intel buyer who was looking at PD. You need Jesus.

hey b.m. how they hangin?
oh low and always getting kicked i see :lol: 

there is one way to reccomend an x2 over a c2d.
if you already have a nice sys with either a s939 or am2 single core.
January 29, 2007 3:35:12 AM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

You guys should get a "Don't buy X2" sticky.

Oh Baron Stop

This guy asked FX60 vs 6600 and the answer is clear...even you know it. Just like the guys who ask about uprgading their AM2s and intelliots who come screaming out of the wood work - "Cet a C2d - it rOxOrZ": wrong-just plain stupid wrong. If you can play nice with those guys, where the answer is clear (NOT C2D) why cant you place nice here where the answer is?

The answer is clear that for 95% of buyers either one will provide MORE THAN a pleasant Vista experience.

Even gamers can still use X2 to power games.

I would recommend Opteron 185 over FX60 or E6600 for a person looking at 939. It's not like it's a ripoff.
January 29, 2007 3:36:24 AM

Quote:
You haven't recommended C2D to anyone here since it's release. If I am mistaken, fine. But I don't believe I have ever seen you say, get the C2D, cause it's a better CPU for your task. Nope. All I've read was - "the X2 is fast enough for the software today", or "if anyone ever suggests an X2, then just get flamed" type answers.

You would tell 2 out of 2 people to get AMD no matter what the situation was. Neutrality, in your case, does not exist.


I second, 8) :) 

I just today recommended E6300 for an Intel buyer who was looking at PD. You need Jesus.

hey b.m. how they hangin?
oh low and always getting kicked i see :lol: 

there is one way to reccomend an x2 over a c2d.
if you already have a nice sys with either a s939 or am2 single core.

They're hanging fine thx. No one kicks anything but their own bad habits. Well, maybe they don't kick that either.
January 29, 2007 3:45:35 AM

Quote:
You need Jesus.


Maybe you're right. :) 
January 29, 2007 3:46:37 AM

Quote:
the only thing you second is your other hand on your ****
after watching you know what :p 


:? thanx?
January 29, 2007 3:50:05 AM

Quote:
the only thing you second is your other hand on your ****
after watching you know what :p 


:? thanx?

:tongue:

hows it been goin mr. a$$

i have been tryin to dog as many thg members as possible this weekend.
:lol: 
January 29, 2007 3:52:29 AM

Mr. Assman, thank you. And I'm drunk and happy. You?
January 29, 2007 3:54:46 AM

Quote:
Mr. Assman, thank you. And I'm drunk and happy. You?


sorry mr. a$$ man.

i am the same :lol: 
January 29, 2007 3:55:28 AM

I can see that.
January 29, 2007 3:55:46 AM

What MB are you currently using?
January 29, 2007 3:56:20 AM

Quote:
Dual core.
They're both dual-core. Get the Core2Duo. Outperforms the FX-60, and uses less energy/is easier to cool...overclocks world's better. GL :) 

You guys should get a "Don't buy X2" sticky.

Oh Baron Stop

This guy asked FX60 vs 6600 and the answer is clear...even you know it. Just like the guys who ask about uprgading their AM2s and intelliots who come screaming out of the wood work - "Cet a C2d - it rOxOrZ": wrong-just plain stupid wrong. If you can play nice with those guys, where the answer is clear (NOT C2D) why cant you place nice here where the answer is?

The answer is clear that for 95% of buyers either one will provide MORE THAN a pleasant Vista experience.

Even gamers can still use X2 to power games.

I would recommend Opteron 185 over FX60 or E6600 for a person looking at 939. It's not like it's a ripoff.

I would agree with your vista statement except for one thing. It is out of context to the OP. He never mentioned Vista...so it has no point to the argument.

And of course you can game with X2...whoever said you couldnt? You never saw that from me, so what is the point...its out of the context of the OP.

As for the opteron, it would depend on the context of the request. If a person asked about a 939 upgrade, I would agree. If a person started adding conditions, i.e limited price, upgrade time frame/limitations, it would depend, now wouldnt it.

The guy asked a simple question FX60 vs 6600. No need to get AMDefensive. Its wasted effort better reserverd for the idiots who jump in (out of context) the CPU upgrade threads with the "C2D rocks all" crap.
January 29, 2007 4:11:46 AM

Quote:
$5 bucks says we dont see any innovative new products from intel if k8l doesnt beat c2d. why waste money doing a die shrink if theres nothing to compete with their current lineup?


That might be true, but the way AMD handed intel it's ass the last few years, I doubt intel will just sit and wait for AMD to do it again.

If anything, they will continue to push their technology, and maybe even hold some back. But stop completely, I doubt it.

Quote:
I tell one out of two people to get a C2D. The other one I tell to get AMD. That way if Barcelona embarrasses Intel AGAIN then I will be neutral.


You haven't recommended C2D to anyone here since it's release. If I am mistaken, fine. But I don't believe I have ever seen you say, get the C2D, cause it's a better CPU for your task. Nope. All I've read was - "the X2 is fast enough for the software today", or "if anyone ever suggests an X2, then just get flamed" type answers.

You would tell 2 out of 2 people to get AMD no matter what the situation was. Neutrality, in your case, does not exist. It's evident in your "if Barcelona embarasses Intel AGAIN" statement.

In defense of BM, I have personally seen him recommend an E6600 over an FX-60.

I rest my case.
January 29, 2007 4:16:36 AM

Quote:
$5 bucks says we dont see any innovative new products from intel if k8l doesnt beat c2d. why waste money doing a die shrink if theres nothing to compete with their current lineup?


That might be true, but the way AMD handed intel it's ass the last few years, I doubt intel will just sit and wait for AMD to do it again.

If anything, they will continue to push their technology, and maybe even hold some back. But stop completely, I doubt it.

Quote:
I tell one out of two people to get a C2D. The other one I tell to get AMD. That way if Barcelona embarrasses Intel AGAIN then I will be neutral.


You haven't recommended C2D to anyone here since it's release. If I am mistaken, fine. But I don't believe I have ever seen you say, get the C2D, cause it's a better CPU for your task. Nope. All I've read was - "the X2 is fast enough for the software today", or "if anyone ever suggests an X2, then just get flamed" type answers.

You would tell 2 out of 2 people to get AMD no matter what the situation was. Neutrality, in your case, does not exist. It's evident in your "if Barcelona embarasses Intel AGAIN" statement.

In defense of BM, I have personally seen him recommend an E6600 over an FX-60.

I rest my case.

Dante,

I have to concur with SEALboy. I have seen Baron recommend C2D over AM2. Although I have sen him use the "toss a coin" bit much more often.
January 29, 2007 9:50:31 PM

Quote:
$5 bucks says we dont see any innovative new products from intel if k8l doesnt beat c2d. why waste money doing a die shrink if theres nothing to compete with their current lineup?


That might be true, but the way AMD handed intel it's ass the last few years, I doubt intel will just sit and wait for AMD to do it again.

If anything, they will continue to push their technology, and maybe even hold some back. But stop completely, I doubt it.

Quote:
I tell one out of two people to get a C2D. The other one I tell to get AMD. That way if Barcelona embarrasses Intel AGAIN then I will be neutral.


You haven't recommended C2D to anyone here since it's release. If I am mistaken, fine. But I don't believe I have ever seen you say, get the C2D, cause it's a better CPU for your task. Nope. All I've read was - "the X2 is fast enough for the software today", or "if anyone ever suggests an X2, then just get flamed" type answers.

You would tell 2 out of 2 people to get AMD no matter what the situation was. Neutrality, in your case, does not exist. It's evident in your "if Barcelona embarasses Intel AGAIN" statement.

In defense of BM, I have personally seen him recommend an E6600 over an FX-60.

I rest my case.

Dante,

I have to concur with SEALboy. I have seen Baron recommend C2D over AM2. Although I have sen him use the "toss a coin" bit much more often.

Like I said, I could be mistaken, since most of the time, BM will just say "X2 is enough for gaming now" or some other thing.

I personally, have not seen any time when BM has recommended a C2D over any X2/FX CPU, but again, I don't go looking for BM's posts. I will take both yours and SEALBoy's word on that fact.

But to BM:
I do have Jesus in my life, thank you.
January 29, 2007 10:03:16 PM

I was hoping this topic would die. I tell a sarcastic joke and everything flies out of whack.

Quote:
I would agree with your vista statement except for one thing. It is out of context to the OP. He never mentioned Vista...so it has no point to the argument.

And of course you can game with X2...whoever said you couldnt? You never saw that from me, so what is the point...its out of the context of the OP.

As for the opteron, it would depend on the context of the request. If a person asked about a 939 upgrade, I would agree. If a person started adding conditions, i.e limited price, upgrade time frame/limitations, it would depend, now wouldnt it.

The guy asked a simple question FX60 vs 6600. No need to get AMDefensive. Its wasted effort better reserverd for the idiots who jump in (out of context) the CPU upgrade threads with the "C2D rocks all" crap.


I mention Vista because after tomorrow you can't get XP. MS usually cancels retail of the previous OS.

Everyone said, basically, don't consider FX60, I say that's nonsense. Who gives a sh it if ti's the fastest chip in the price range or generally.

If you guys keep this up I'll stop SELLING Intel.
January 29, 2007 10:19:13 PM

i dont know about an fx-60 but if someone already has
an amd mobo be it s939 or am2 with a sinlgecore cpu then
going to an amd dualcore would be the best way to go.

i think most people here would agree.
January 29, 2007 10:29:08 PM

I agree, Sir Heck 8)
!