- Nov 28, 2006
- 347
- 0
- 18,780
x2 3600+ (65nm) 3.085Ghz seems to be well worth the $115
- Thread starter RandMcnally
- Start date
Sup
In the end it all comes down to what one wants to do with one's rig, application wise, etc.
Even though running an AMD rig, by looking at all the figures and comparisons run btw Intels Conroe etc and AMDs 64 FX series, would have to say that conroe seems to be the way to go at moment, though by all indications, motherboards and their chipsets are still lagging, not quite up to par yet, so the chips aren't being utilised to full potential yet anyways. Personal observations anyways, stand under correction if necessary.
I reckon AMD will be launching a nice counter to Intel's bad boys soon; they have to, otherwise everyone will eventually convert to the dark side! *lol* But they're fighting to remain competitive in the market, so am keeping an eager eye out for more AMD products in future!
In the end it all comes down to what one wants to do with one's rig, application wise, etc.
Even though running an AMD rig, by looking at all the figures and comparisons run btw Intels Conroe etc and AMDs 64 FX series, would have to say that conroe seems to be the way to go at moment, though by all indications, motherboards and their chipsets are still lagging, not quite up to par yet, so the chips aren't being utilised to full potential yet anyways. Personal observations anyways, stand under correction if necessary.
I reckon AMD will be launching a nice counter to Intel's bad boys soon; they have to, otherwise everyone will eventually convert to the dark side! *lol* But they're fighting to remain competitive in the market, so am keeping an eager eye out for more AMD products in future!
- Nov 28, 2006
- 347
- 0
- 18,780
I didn't say anything about this being better than a conroe, or intel, I was just pointing out how effective it is for the money.
- Nov 28, 2006
- 347
- 0
- 18,780
I suppose you always defend what you buy, but that wasn't the intent of me posting this here. It outperforms an fx-62 when it's overclocked.
- Nov 28, 2006
- 347
- 0
- 18,780
For the money? I'll spot you 12 dollars...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116254
- Nov 28, 2006
- 347
- 0
- 18,780
apt403
Distinguished
- Oct 14, 2006
- 2,923
- 0
- 20,780
For the money? I'll spot you 12 dollars...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116254
Wait, the D 925 is supposted to be a better alternative to the 3600+ and the e6600? 8O
chocobocorey
Distinguished
- Jan 8, 2006
- 327
- 0
- 18,780
that is tempting. especially with the cpu at $105.00 now. - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103036
although, that doesnt include cooling. still.. i think i would rather hold out for the e4300 to drop to $115 in the next month or two.
although, that doesnt include cooling. still.. i think i would rather hold out for the e4300 to drop to $115 in the next month or two.
Sup
I know, not one who touts AMD vs Intel, just observing that basically mobos are now lagging behind cpus n ram. think that the figures reflected in comparisons for the amd chips is strange. why does your boy mentioned do better in some areas than a higher frequency chip of the same brand? Don't understand, would like clarification please.
I know, not one who touts AMD vs Intel, just observing that basically mobos are now lagging behind cpus n ram. think that the figures reflected in comparisons for the amd chips is strange. why does your boy mentioned do better in some areas than a higher frequency chip of the same brand? Don't understand, would like clarification please.
zenmaster
Splendid
- Feb 21, 2006
- 3,867
- 0
- 22,790
Not bad for the price, but if you note the review this was the fastest the chip would do simple benchmarks.
Add in things such as gaming and long-term use and this speed is not something you would be able to use for a "usable" system. Most folks like to use their system for more things than just "turning on" when a friend visits for 90 seconds so they can run a benchmark :>>
One thing that is very much missing in that article are results from "Oblivion" and other intense games. This could indicate severe stability issues even at the posted speeds.
This is not to say this is not a great deal for those on very limited budgets.
Add in things such as gaming and long-term use and this speed is not something you would be able to use for a "usable" system. Most folks like to use their system for more things than just "turning on" when a friend visits for 90 seconds so they can run a benchmark :>>
One thing that is very much missing in that article are results from "Oblivion" and other intense games. This could indicate severe stability issues even at the posted speeds.
This is not to say this is not a great deal for those on very limited budgets.
Yes, but we already figured it out that their OC is fake.
I am still waiting for a CPUz validation form that low-IQ uneducated ponk(the owner of FUDZone). :lol:
No we didn't. Chopping a screenshot down to size in a photo editor is a very common practice. What you should say is that some people have alleged that the OC was fake.
dasickninja
Splendid
- May 16, 2006
- 7,557
- 0
- 30,810
Okay. Heres my take on the entire CPUZ debacle. You called them out on the grounds that the encoding stated that it was edited in Photoshop. Everyone asked for a verification as a way to shut up both sides. I don't want to deal with those AMDZone guys again. So please, drop it. They won't provide a verification to you, and you won't believe them till they do. Just agree to despise each other.
BaronMatrix
Splendid
- Dec 14, 2005
- 6,655
- 0
- 25,790
I suppose you always defend what you buy, but that wasn't the intent of me posting this here. It outperforms an fx-62 when it's overclocked.
Get used to it. You can't mention AMD without hearing the sermon of the Brood extolling the virtues of C2D.
BaronMatrix
Splendid
- Dec 14, 2005
- 6,655
- 0
- 25,790
Yes, but we already figured it out that their OC is fake.
I am still waiting for a CPUz validation form that low-IQ uneducated ponk(the owner of FUDZone). :lol:
Yeah and you made it onto The Inq as a complainer. He did put up benchmarks with it and just top show their credibility, they showed that they couldn't run benches at 3.1 and had to turn it down to 3.085GHz.
Give it up. That larger avatar makes you look slightly deranged.
zenmaster
Splendid
- Feb 21, 2006
- 3,867
- 0
- 22,790
Fake or not, I view such speed ratings as almsot pointless.
What I want to know is what speeds people are running their PCs at for normal use. What good is a system clocked that fast if it crashes or overheats after x min. or if it cant perform all functions required.
How high did they push the voltage? I want to know if the CPU is going to fry after 3months of regular use. This is not just about the AMD chip.
When I see "P4 Hits 8ghz", I just roll my eyes.
It may be "neat", but for then somebody to say "Gee, the P4 is a good value because I can run it at 8ghz".
Example - I have my E4300 OCed from 1.8 to 3.0Ghz. All Stock Voltages and I needed to adjust my monitoring program because my CPU fan kept giving me warnings that it was running "TOO SLOW". Now the fan kicks up when the system gets closer to full load, but its still nearly inaudible.
I could increase the default speed to beyond 3.0Ghz at some point, but I really dont expect to see much real world benefeit while I add heat, noise, and life reduction to a system that will now run happily until well past it's useful lifetime.
What I want to know is what speeds people are running their PCs at for normal use. What good is a system clocked that fast if it crashes or overheats after x min. or if it cant perform all functions required.
How high did they push the voltage? I want to know if the CPU is going to fry after 3months of regular use. This is not just about the AMD chip.
When I see "P4 Hits 8ghz", I just roll my eyes.
It may be "neat", but for then somebody to say "Gee, the P4 is a good value because I can run it at 8ghz".
Example - I have my E4300 OCed from 1.8 to 3.0Ghz. All Stock Voltages and I needed to adjust my monitoring program because my CPU fan kept giving me warnings that it was running "TOO SLOW". Now the fan kicks up when the system gets closer to full load, but its still nearly inaudible.
I could increase the default speed to beyond 3.0Ghz at some point, but I really dont expect to see much real world benefeit while I add heat, noise, and life reduction to a system that will now run happily until well past it's useful lifetime.
BaronMatrix
Splendid
- Dec 14, 2005
- 6,655
- 0
- 25,790
I believe the V was 1.4 and believe me I would never even try it. That doesn't change the fact that a person who says they are not biased picked this particular time to demand a CPU-Z validation.
I think it was the guy with the really large angry avatar.
It then blossomed out to three websites. I guess a good thing is that it was my thread and I did try to be the voice of reason (between the warring factions).
Truth to tell it was the tackiest thing I've ever seen. Said individual should be ashamed. I mean called out on The Inq. Obviously he won't make many friends outside of Tom's.
Anyway, the numbers are looking really good for 65nm. The next rev should be even better. I expect at least one more Brisbane before Barcelona though they may still have their main resources concentrating on Barcelona.
It would be better to get the new chips higher than 3.2GHz, but the improvements should give them a 400MHz cushion over K8.
It doesn't seem like either company is going to "officially" release a 4GHz part for quite a while.
zenmaster
Splendid
- Feb 21, 2006
- 3,867
- 0
- 22,790
Well, the one thing that can be said for sure is that it appears as if AMD has tweaked it's process and that the chips are more over-clockable than in the past. This is a good thing.
And yes, there are lots of Intel Fan boys who get quite upset if you have anything good to say about AMD :>. There are those on the other side, but are a little less vocal with C2Duo out. I fully expect them to be quite loud once the next Gen AMDs ship.
The fact that this chip is $60 less than the 4300 is quite important for those folks building budget systems. There are many folks who have very limited budgets and that $60 is critical.
What would be nice is if some of the non-biased sites did more testing.
We all know that any site with "AMD" in its name is not going to be fully objective. This does not invalidate their results, its just that we would like to see others do stuff.
Example - I don't think Toms is a biased site one way or the other. They may draw conclusions you dont like sometimes, may fail to test something, etc.. etc... but in the end they try their best to be objctive. The same is true for many other sites such as Andt..........
And yes, there are lots of Intel Fan boys who get quite upset if you have anything good to say about AMD :>. There are those on the other side, but are a little less vocal with C2Duo out. I fully expect them to be quite loud once the next Gen AMDs ship.
The fact that this chip is $60 less than the 4300 is quite important for those folks building budget systems. There are many folks who have very limited budgets and that $60 is critical.
What would be nice is if some of the non-biased sites did more testing.
We all know that any site with "AMD" in its name is not going to be fully objective. This does not invalidate their results, its just that we would like to see others do stuff.
Example - I don't think Toms is a biased site one way or the other. They may draw conclusions you dont like sometimes, may fail to test something, etc.. etc... but in the end they try their best to be objctive. The same is true for many other sites such as Andt..........
BaronMatrix
Splendid
- Dec 14, 2005
- 6,655
- 0
- 25,790
Yeah, this is a "perfect" HTPC chip and with the right case could run with just heat pipes.
I never get into these "conspiracy debates" as eventually people will have them in hand and conjecture or speculation will no longer apply.
And if I remember correctly the C2D "scandal" didn't start here, it just ended up here. I believe it was started by Sharikou with the Anand "closed-box" tests.
Anyway, it's a good OC, but AMD will usually go for power conservation first so later the higher clocks keep their TDP reasonable.
I even heard somewhere that they are going to start using average TDP and not max like they do now so the "official" numbers will be lower.
- Nov 28, 2006
- 347
- 0
- 18,780
Yeah, this is a "perfect" HTPC chip and with the right case could run with just heat pipes.
I never get into these "conspiracy debates" as eventually people will have them in hand and conjecture or speculation will no longer apply.
And if I remember correctly the C2D "scandal" didn't start here, it just ended up here. I believe it was started by Sharikou with the Anand "closed-box" tests.
Anyway, it's a good OC, but AMD will usually go for power conservation first so later the higher clocks keep their TDP reasonable.
I even heard somewhere that they are going to start using average TDP and not max like they do now so the "official" numbers will be lower.
I'd really like to see 35w x2 65nm parts, that'd make my day, maybe even lower than that.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question Using cloning software for a dying HDD which shows only 10% health ?- Started by Mashuumatics
- Replies: 1
-
Question Wifi card speed fluctuating on my Lenovo Ideapad pro 5 16APH8- Started by sirdariush
- Replies: 6
-
News Windows 11 will reportedly display a watermark if your PC does not support AI requirements- Started by Admin
- Replies: 24
-
Question Recovering an old version of a Notepad file in Windows 10 ?- Started by MC72
- Replies: 2
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram