Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Friend says X2 4200+. I say C2D.

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 9, 2007 1:49:25 AM

My friend is planning on a cheap build coming up soon. He has planned a system with an ASUS mobo (srry don't know which), X2 4200+, and 1 Gb of OCZ DDR2800. I told him the OCZ wouldn't work well with the mobo, and he said he'd think about another brand. But the real issue is the processor. For the same price, he could get a decent mobo w/a E6300. I told him even without ocing the C2D was better, but he won't agree. He says "2.2 Ghz is better than 1.87" and I can't explain why exactly the C2D is faster but I know it is. How do I convince him to get the E6300?

More about : friend 4200 c2d

February 9, 2007 2:22:54 AM

Show him this thread, every person here will say that the E6300 is superior to the 4200+ in every way. The E6300 is faster because of the way its built, it can do more in one clock cycle then the 4200+, so the clock speed doesnt need to be as high.


1700 post btw. :D 
February 9, 2007 2:25:51 AM

Quote:
My friend is planning on a cheap build coming up soon. He has planned a system with an ASUS mobo (srry don't know which), X2 4200+, and 1 Gb of OCZ DDR2800. I told him the OCZ wouldn't work well with the mobo, and he said he'd think about another brand. But the real issue is the processor. For the same price, he could get a decent mobo w/a E6300. I told him even without ocing the C2D was better, but he won't agree. He says "2.2 Ghz is better than 1.87" and I can't explain why exactly the C2D is faster but I know it is. How do I convince him to get the E6300?


Ask him if he can potentially get 3.5 ghz outta the 4200+

I have an E6600 and a 4400+ x2. I OC'ed the 4400 to 2.4 ghz to bring the AMD on par with the C2D, or so I thought. Even overclocked, the X2 can't touch the C2D in ANY test I use to compare. The best OC I got out of my AMD was 25%, which seemed pretty impressive. I've got a 68.7 % OC out of my C2D. The C2Ds also run cooler than the K8 did. It even throttles itself back when it's not under load. Now considering my previous 8 CPUs were AMD, you could conclude that this is an unbiased opinion.

You could turn it back on him in asking how an AMD with a lower clock could outperform the previous generation Intel.
Related resources
February 9, 2007 2:41:35 AM

Just get him to look at the CPU guide on THG
February 9, 2007 2:44:05 AM

ya - honestly does he have the internet?

tomshardware.com
anandtech.com
firingsquad.com

AMD did have the speed crown for a few years but that changed about 6 months back
February 9, 2007 2:48:51 AM

Show him some of the benchmarks right on THG. Right Here.

Unfortunately, the 6300 isn't on there yet, so you'll have to compare the 6400.
Just to make it fair, bump the AMD up to a 4800+ and still watch it get smoked....

If you don't need the build for a little while, the C2D prices are set to drop in Q2. If you're really patient, AMD's new chips come out later this year, which will either beat C2D, or at least compete, lowering prices on both sides.

Best of Luck
February 9, 2007 3:00:20 AM

If that's his only argument, then try to show him the error of his ways. But if he's going to stay amd no matter what, then he just wants an amd.
February 9, 2007 3:02:18 AM

first, start off by telling your friend that thats the same issue as was when the pentium 4 faced off against the athlon 64, athlon 64 had a lower clockspeed but was faster so his argument is invalid. Second search some benchmarks and show the 6300 pwning the hell out of even a 4800+
February 9, 2007 3:04:40 AM

Quote:
My friend is planning on a cheap build coming up soon. He has planned a system with an ASUS mobo (srry don't know which), X2 4200+, and 1 Gb of OCZ DDR2800. I told him the OCZ wouldn't work well with the mobo, and he said he'd think about another brand. But the real issue is the processor. For the same price, he could get a decent mobo w/a E6300. I told him even without ocing the C2D was better, but he won't agree. He says "2.2 Ghz is better than 1.87" and I can't explain why exactly the C2D is faster but I know it is. How do I convince him to get the E6300?


Ask him if he can potentially get 3.5 ghz outta the 4200+

I have an E6600 and a 4400+ x2. I OC'ed the 4400 to 2.4 ghz to bring the AMD on par with the C2D, or so I thought. Even overclocked, the X2 can't touch the C2D in ANY test I use to compare. The best OC I got out of my AMD was 25%, which seemed pretty impressive. I've got a 68.7 % OC out of my C2D. The C2Ds also run cooler than the K8 did. It even throttles itself back when it's not under load. Now considering my previous 8 CPUs were AMD, you could conclude that this is an unbiased opinion.

You could turn it back on him in asking how an AMD with a lower clock could outperform the previous generation Intel.

To be fair, you didn't OC that 4400+ anywhere near its potential.
February 9, 2007 3:41:10 AM

Quote:
To be fair, you didn't OC that 4400+ anywhere near its potential.


True, but to be fair, he didn't OC the 6600 AT ALL.....
February 9, 2007 4:04:07 AM

Slap him and call him an idiot. When he realizes that the situation has hit the fan to the point of physical contact he will understand that you mean business. Also you could just tell him that I said C2D was better and there is a chance he may listen. lol

Best,

3Ball
February 9, 2007 5:07:57 AM

Quote:
My friend is planning on a cheap build coming up soon. He has planned a system with an ASUS mobo (srry don't know which), X2 4200+, and 1 Gb of OCZ DDR2800. I told him the OCZ wouldn't work well with the mobo, and he said he'd think about another brand. But the real issue is the processor. For the same price, he could get a decent mobo w/a E6300. I told him even without ocing the C2D was better, but he won't agree. He says "2.2 Ghz is better than 1.87" and I can't explain why exactly the C2D is faster but I know it is. How do I convince him to get the E6300?


Ask him if he can potentially get 3.5 ghz outta the 4200+

I have an E6600 and a 4400+ x2. I OC'ed the 4400 to 2.4 ghz to bring the AMD on par with the C2D, or so I thought. Even overclocked, the X2 can't touch the C2D in ANY test I use to compare. The best OC I got out of my AMD was 25%, which seemed pretty impressive. I've got a 68.7 % OC out of my C2D. The C2Ds also run cooler than the K8 did. It even throttles itself back when it's not under load. Now considering my previous 8 CPUs were AMD, you could conclude that this is an unbiased opinion.

You could turn it back on him in asking how an AMD with a lower clock could outperform the previous generation Intel.

To be fair, you didn't OC that 4400+ anywhere near its potential.
So I OC the 4400+ to 2.75 ghz and the E6600 to 3.6 ghz, and you think THAT'S going to be a fair comparison? Even if I only clocked the E6600 to 2.75, it would still knock the snot out of the X2. Are you suggesting I didn't hit the ceiling with the X2? Do you think I've hit the ceiling with the C2D yet? :roll:
February 9, 2007 5:13:36 AM

Quote:
Here is a good cheap machine for starters that will outperform the E-6300
even the E-6400

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2848310&Sku=A455-2129%20C

At this time this is one of the better deals out there. The only drawback is that it is a dead socket 939 no longer supported by AMD.
It depends on what he is going to use the machine for.
Just food for thought!
Check it out on the thg cpu performance charts.

You're kidding right? :lol: 

Why are they showing an LGA775(intel) HSF in the ad?
February 9, 2007 5:22:27 AM

RJ, that is one sic OC you have there! What NB and CPU voltage settings are u using? Also what is ur memory set at, just curious, cause I may take mine higher!

Best,

3Ball
February 9, 2007 5:31:47 AM

Quote:
My friend is planning on a cheap build coming up soon. He has planned a system with an ASUS mobo (srry don't know which), X2 4200+, and 1 Gb of OCZ DDR2800. I told him the OCZ wouldn't work well with the mobo, and he said he'd think about another brand. But the real issue is the processor. For the same price, he could get a decent mobo w/a E6300. I told him even without ocing the C2D was better, but he won't agree. He says "2.2 Ghz is better than 1.87" and I can't explain why exactly the C2D is faster but I know it is. How do I convince him to get the E6300?
I have to agree with RandMcNally. If your friend "truly" values your opinion/input, he'll take your word for it. From the sounds of it, he isn't listening. Just tell him that you gave him advice, and if he's unhappy/regretful with his purchase.....talk to the hand. :wink: Some people have to learn the hard way... and even then, will never admit to being wrong. Don't fret over his choices. :) 
February 9, 2007 5:46:41 AM

Sorry to say dude. everyone on this forum Right. That amd chips is not faster then a core 2.

Explain to him Smart cache with high fsb 1066. Intel alot better.

Other thing that intel can do that Amd can't

Upgrade from core 2 to core 2 Quad.

My laptop that a core 2 t7600 2.33ghz 4mb cache at 667fsb is faster then the system he looking at I think it runs on par with a fx 62

I would compare core 2 E6300 1.83GHz is faster then a Amd 4600+ 2.4GHz.
a b à CPUs
February 9, 2007 6:04:32 AM

Hes an AMD fanboy, the C2D is by far the better choice
February 9, 2007 6:51:51 AM

Quote:
RJ, that is one sic OC you have there! What NB and CPU voltage settings are u using? Also what is ur memory set at, just curious, cause I may take mine higher!

Best,

3Ball


CPU 1.48v
mem 1.90v
MCH (nb) 1.40v
ICHIO(sb) 1.60v

Mem settings.....5-6-6-20

40 mm fan on NB heatsink, 70 mm fan sitting over memory sticks undervolted for silence.
February 9, 2007 6:53:29 AM

If he's planning a cheap build then why not look at something like the 3600+?

It's possible to overclock it past 2.5Ghz and will not make a huge dent in his budget.

There is not a huge difference in price between E6300 & X2 4200 so the Intel system would seem to be the logical choice.
February 9, 2007 7:01:57 AM

Quote:
My friend is planning on a cheap build coming up soon. He has planned a system with an ASUS mobo (srry don't know which), X2 4200+, and 1 Gb of OCZ DDR2800. I told him the OCZ wouldn't work well with the mobo, and he said he'd think about another brand. But the real issue is the processor. For the same price, he could get a decent mobo w/a E6300. I told him even without ocing the C2D was better, but he won't agree. He says "2.2 Ghz is better than 1.87" and I can't explain why exactly the C2D is faster but I know it is. How do I convince him to get the E6300?


Quote the example of P-D vs A64x2 :wink:
February 9, 2007 7:35:28 AM

I don't think that will affect performance.
February 9, 2007 12:45:56 PM

OK. First off, ignore everyone above.

Let me put it this way. If your friend wants an AMD still, let him get an AMD. It's his choice of what computer he wants. If he's not going to do extra research/cares about the numbers game, then let him get what he wants.

Go ahead and suggest he gets a C2D, but don't push him. He knows what he likes and that's respectable.

I'm an AMD fan, BUT I did my research and decided to go Core 2 Duo for this round, but even with the knowledge I still almost went AMD still b/c I have had great expeience in the past. Performance isn't everything. Some people think it is, but it's not.

Unless he wants to try and majorly OC the processor it won't really matter in the end anyway. You shoudl care that your friend is happy in what HE decides, not what other people decide for him.
February 9, 2007 1:04:28 PM

Im not trying to be a smart ass, but why would you say that performance isnt everything? If AMD and Intel stopped making new processors today would you be happy? I really dont mean this in an dick kinda way, but really? I just dont understand, and was completely baffled when I saw this comment. That makes it seem that the name means more than performance and that is just play dumb. IMO! Believe me I know about brand loyalty. Everyone has it in one way or another. If I HAD to chose one company for the rest of my life it would be Intel and ATI since I have seen the best results from them in my shop (Also have seen an Athlon XP and nVidia 4200 catch on fire, but that is a different story), but that doesnt stop me from going lets say AMD and nVIDIA when the performance is right.

Best,

3Ball
February 9, 2007 1:07:08 PM

Quote:
Im not trying to be a smart ass, but why would you say that performance isnt everything? If AMD and Intel stopped making new processors today would you be happy? I really dont mean this in an dick kinda way, but really? I just dont understand and was completely baffled when I saw this comment. That makes it seem that the name means more than performance and that is just play dumb. IMO!

Best,

3Ball


F.Y.I


performance seemed to stop mattering around the same time as core2duo launch


LOL
February 9, 2007 1:10:15 PM

!LMAO!

Best,

3Ball
February 9, 2007 1:34:31 PM



You know what is pathetic? That Chris Tom can't keep his inflated ego in check and now has shown that he is just another non-objective fanboy site. It is one thing to snipe at each other in the forums, but to post articles calling people names is just showing how idiotic he is. It would be one thing if it was in an "editorial" column, but oh well. We see the poor little kid trying to kick sand at everyone now.

Centurion
February 9, 2007 1:39:38 PM

Quote:
My friend is planning on a cheap build coming up soon. He has planned a system with an ASUS mobo (srry don't know which), X2 4200+, and 1 Gb of OCZ DDR2800. I told him the OCZ wouldn't work well with the mobo, and he said he'd think about another brand. But the real issue is the processor. For the same price, he could get a decent mobo w/a E6300. I told him even without ocing the C2D was better, but he won't agree. He says "2.2 Ghz is better than 1.87" and I can't explain why exactly the C2D is faster but I know it is. How do I convince him to get the E6300?


It's easy. DON'T. You can either laugh at him later or not.
February 9, 2007 1:56:51 PM

A replacement for your "flip a coin" response Baron? :wink:
February 9, 2007 2:07:09 PM

Quote:
OK. First off, ignore everyone above.

Let me put it this way. If your friend wants an AMD still, let him get an AMD. It's his choice of what computer he wants. If he's not going to do extra research/cares about the numbers game, then let him get what he wants.

Go ahead and suggest he gets a C2D, but don't push him. He knows what he likes and that's respectable.

I'm an AMD fan, BUT I did my research and decided to go Core 2 Duo for this round, but even with the knowledge I still almost went AMD still b/c I have had great expeience in the past. Performance isn't everything. Some people think it is, but it's not.

Unless he wants to try and majorly OC the processor it won't really matter in the end anyway. You shoudl care that your friend is happy in what HE decides, not what other people decide for him.


Dunno, if his friend cares at all about performance he will be pissed off. From the sounds of it he does, since he thinks the 4200 is faster, and wants it based on that reason over the C2D. I have had great experiences with both Intel and AMD chips, you shouldn't limit yourself to AMD just because you've had good experiences with them before.
February 9, 2007 2:17:55 PM

Quote:
A replacement for your "flip a coin" response Baron? :wink:


I just don't understand why all of you are worried about CPUs when SARS, no fish in 50 years, more virulent strains of AIDS, and all kinds of stuff is much more important.
February 9, 2007 2:23:34 PM

Frankly, I stopped caring about peoples builds when I started doing reviews. You take my advise, good for you. You don't, no skin off my back, no money lost for me. And to answer you questions:

SARS is a joke compared to bird flu,
I don't eat fish,
Don't bone everything with legs and a rack,
I lack a proper joke for this one.

I'm only joking for Gods sake.
February 9, 2007 2:24:37 PM

I was hoping the 27 seconds I could save by crunching Genomes with a C2D would save an extra life! ;) 
February 9, 2007 2:29:15 PM

Quote:
My friend is planning on a cheap build coming up soon. He has planned a system with an ASUS mobo (srry don't know which), X2 4200+, and 1 Gb of OCZ DDR2800. I told him the OCZ wouldn't work well with the mobo, and he said he'd think about another brand. But the real issue is the processor. For the same price, he could get a decent mobo w/a E6300. I told him even without ocing the C2D was better, but he won't agree. He says "2.2 Ghz is better than 1.87" and I can't explain why exactly the C2D is faster but I know it is. How do I convince him to get the E6300?


Intructions per cycle... the C2D executes more insturctions at every cycle.

To use a retarded example, its like two assembly line workers, A works 2200 hours(Ghz), B works 1870 hours(ghz) a year, A finishes three shirts(instructions) per hour and B four. SO over the same one year time period assembly worker one finishes 6600 shirts(instructions), assembly worker two finishes 7480. Simply looking at the hours (Ghz) worked doesn't give you any information unless you know how many shirts (instructions) are finished.

But, based on the same logic why isn't he pushing a 2.8 Ghz Pentium D since its "faster"? ;) 
February 9, 2007 2:31:25 PM

Quote:
A replacement for your "flip a coin" response Baron? :wink:


I just don't understand why all of you are worried about CPUs when SARS, no fish in 50 years, more virulent strains of AIDS, and all kinds of stuff is much more important.


lol, i love the way you say something and when all hell breaks out you stand back and say "i dont know why you's care so mutch" like it is something you dont even give a second thought.

looking at how many times a day you post you seem to care a hell of a lot.
February 9, 2007 2:37:27 PM

I say Opteron 8)
February 9, 2007 2:57:21 PM

RJ you definatly didnt hit the limit on the amd(ive got mine at 2.6 on stock aircooler, had it at 2.7 but heat was an issue, buyng a watercooler kit to compensate and go higher), but none the less the C2D is the best preforming processer at this moment and time apart from the quads.
February 9, 2007 3:02:14 PM

Quote:
I was hoping the 27 seconds I could save by crunching Genomes with a C2D would save an extra life! ;) 


No wonder I decided on my current sig.
:twisted:
February 9, 2007 3:05:04 PM

Quote:
A replacement for your "flip a coin" response Baron? :wink:


I just don't understand why all of you are worried about CPUs when SARS, no fish in 50 years, more virulent strains of AIDS, and all kinds of stuff is much more important.


lol, i love the way you say something and when all hell breaks out you stand back and say "i dont know why you's care so mutch" like it is something you dont even give a second thought.

looking at how many times a day you post you seem to care a hell of a lot.

I don't make CPU recommendations, I talk about CPU news. I may tell a person how good a chip may improve their system but I don't have time for the C2D/X2 arguments.

WHat difference does it make which CPU a person gets, you won't get a penny either way?

Maybe it's that lack of sef-confidence I notice here.
February 9, 2007 3:09:06 PM

Quote:
Im not trying to be a smart ass, but why would you say that performance isnt everything? If AMD and Intel stopped making new processors today would you be happy? I really dont mean this in an dick kinda way, but really? I just dont understand, and was completely baffled when I saw this comment. That makes it seem that the name means more than performance and that is just play dumb. IMO! Believe me I know about brand loyalty. Everyone has it in one way or another. If I HAD to chose one company for the rest of my life it would be Intel and ATI since I have seen the best results from them in my shop (Also have seen an Athlon XP and nVidia 4200 catch on fire, but that is a different story), but that doesnt stop me from going lets say AMD and nVIDIA when the performance is right.l


I'd try to educate the friend about C2D vs AMD a little, then let him decide without any pressure from me. I did just that recently by presenting a price comparison, emailing some links, etc. Then I left him to his own decision process. My friend chose to go with a C2D6400 which I think was a great choice for his needs. He does 3-D programming and other CPU intensive apps like Photoshop, so he will benefit from the performance advantage over current AMD CPUs. Even if he'd gone up to a 6600, I think it would have been a good value choice.

But to get back to your point above, performance really isn't everything for many people. Monitor your CPU usage and document the fraction of the time that you push both cores to 100%. I do it often when rendering or running a 3-d app, but it looks like most people here are gamers and they need to worry more about the GPU, so for them, CPU performance isn't everything.
February 9, 2007 4:57:49 PM

I would just say get him drunk, steal his credit card, and buy the C2D FOR him. Then when he asks what the hell happened say "I dunno, you said you needed to buy something last night......"
February 9, 2007 8:14:08 PM

Yeah I'll give him some proof and show him the benchmarks. Maybe I'll even plan a $500 system for him with a C2D.
February 9, 2007 8:35:17 PM

Quote:
OK. First off, ignore everyone above.

Let me put it this way. If your friend wants an AMD still, let him get an AMD. It's his choice of what computer he wants. If he's not going to do extra research/cares about the numbers game, then let him get what he wants.
If you're going to offer "blanket statements" like that, make sure you've read all the posts yourself!

Quote:
I have to agree with RandMcNally. If your friend "truly" values your opinion/input, he'll take your word for it. From the sounds of it, he isn't listening. Just tell him that you gave him advice, and if he's unhappy/regretful with his purchase.....talk to the hand. :wink: Some people have to learn the hard way... and even then, will never admit to being wrong. Don't fret over his choices. Smile :) 


Breaking it down into something you can understand....let him buy what he wants. :x
February 10, 2007 12:20:38 AM

My advice - tell him to get a freaking PD-805.

Cheap as chips, and 2.66GHz is better than 2.2GHz, right? :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
February 11, 2007 4:20:48 AM

Me thinks the original poster is really the "friend". 8O
February 11, 2007 5:44:55 AM

Don't laugh in the wrong place Jack. You might catch SARS.
February 11, 2007 6:26:16 AM

Quote:
My friend is planning on a cheap build coming up soon. He has planned a system with an ASUS mobo (srry don't know which), X2 4200+, and 1 Gb of OCZ DDR2800. I told him the OCZ wouldn't work well with the mobo, and he said he'd think about another brand. But the real issue is the processor. For the same price, he could get a decent mobo w/a E6300. I told him even without ocing the C2D was better, but he won't agree. He says "2.2 Ghz is better than 1.87" and I can't explain why exactly the C2D is faster but I know it is. How do I convince him to get the E6300?


core duo is faster because it is made from 65nm tech while the 4200+ is still 90nm, and because core duo is made of 65nm technology it can have a bigger cache than the 4200+
!