Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

What is the best? intel Core 2 Duo E6400 2.18 Or AmdX2 5200

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 14, 2007 7:55:17 PM

i will buy a new computer but i want know what is the best?
February 14, 2007 7:57:01 PM

c2d of course :!:
February 14, 2007 8:03:45 PM

the AMD chip, of course, cause it can go to a barcelona upgrade later.
Related resources
February 14, 2007 8:10:26 PM

If your doing strictly e6400 vs x2 5200 without overclocking, the AMD chip will win, however, with a little overclocking, Intel's conroe will run away with all the benchmarks.
February 14, 2007 8:11:37 PM

Quote:
If your doing strictly e6400 vs x2 5200 without overclocking, the AMD chip will win, however, with a little overclocking, Intel's conroe will run away with all the benchmarks.


agree, and boy can c2d oc! :) 
February 14, 2007 8:13:49 PM

If you have the time and inclination to overclock, this forum and the overclocking articles will help, and the C2duo is a good choice. Cooling is quite important, since the chips have a randomly degraded lifespan from the overclocking.
February 14, 2007 8:19:27 PM

Quote:
i will buy a new computer but i want know what is the best?


You can OC the C2D. That will easily beat any AMD-X2.
Even not overclocked, I think the E6400 is cheaper also.
February 14, 2007 8:34:17 PM

Quote:
If your doing strictly e6400 vs x2 5200 without overclocking, the AMD chip will win, however, with a little overclocking, Intel's conroe will run away with all the benchmarks.


agree, and boy can c2d oc! :) 


God I hate this question. Sempron/Celeron is best.
February 14, 2007 8:35:46 PM

Quote:
God I hate this question.


why?
February 14, 2007 8:39:13 PM

Quote:
God I hate this question.


why?

I'm going to assume it's because it's a waste of time. Bebo123 could of easily just done a google search for some benchmarks, and that would of been the end of it. Instead takes the lazy way out and posts here.

I'm just assuming :roll:
February 14, 2007 8:43:09 PM

never assume anything, it leads to mistakes... (no offence bro :lol:  )
February 14, 2007 10:02:49 PM

I don't know over there, but here in Australia the X2 5200 just dropped in price to be now about $15 Aussie cheaper than the E6400 C2D. With cheaper AM2 MOBO's then the C2D,s IF you don't want to overclock then in pure cash flow terms, that means. AMD is a better choice. 8)
February 15, 2007 12:09:07 AM

depends of your purposes.
February 15, 2007 12:55:55 AM

Quote:
go with a 5600 like me and OC to 3.0 ghz on air cooling alone will be plenty for ya! Of course Im a Amd Fanboy and proud of it!
pfffff.....
my pen1$ is bigger than yours......
mine C2D E6400 is OCed to 3.2GHz on air and wipes the floor with your 5600+ @3.0GHz in every application and every benchmark know to man kind. :lol: 
February 15, 2007 12:56:43 AM

well said :wink:
February 15, 2007 1:19:31 AM

:wink:
February 15, 2007 2:09:12 AM

I if OC'ing is the case, then C2D is the way. I would take my 3040 @ 2.80ghz over the 5600 @ 3ghz anyday!

Best,

3Ball
February 15, 2007 3:27:55 AM

I wouldn't mind having either one but if I had to choose, I'll take the E6400. If I had to only upgrade I'll take the 5200 coz I already have an AM2 rig coz I didn't have enough to get me a c2d after christmas when my old rig died...
February 15, 2007 4:46:41 AM

Quote:
i will buy a new computer but i want know what is the best?

Go for the Intel at stock or OC'd :D 

You'll OC later, if not immediately :lol: 
February 15, 2007 12:47:25 PM

Quote:
the AMD chip, of course, cause it can go to a barcelona upgrade later.


This may be a gamble, could you show some benchmark data that would affirm that this is a wise move... aside from spending money now to later throw it away, if this is the case then the 3800+ is a better option.

Life is a gamble. Don't let fear control your choices, or you lose out in the long run.

Better to take chances. That's how people end up "lucky", as they say.
February 15, 2007 12:52:51 PM

Quote:
If you have the time and inclination to overclock, this forum and the overclocking articles will help, and the C2duo is a good choice. Cooling is quite important, since the chips have a randomly degraded lifespan from the overclocking.


Just how much degradation do you expect?? Do you have data to share?

No. Just the ancedotes I've read. Since the OP question is a novice one, basic info (cooling is important) is worthwhile for him.

Your question is a curious one though, coming from someone as knowledgeable as you.

What's up??

I really doubt you need such info, but, yes, temperature of the cpu is drastically important for cpu life:

http://www.overclockers.com/tips30/

http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/cpu/conroe-vs-zalma...


It's odd you asking this question.
February 15, 2007 2:01:10 PM

Best is a vauge term as you can see at stock the AMD will outperform the Core2Duo. The Core2Duo can easily be overclocked 10% on the stock cooler and outperform the AMD. The ASUS P5N-E 650i board is a relatively inexpensive 775 socket T board that can be overclocked automatically in the BIOS if you aren't familiar with overclocking.

Overclocking does increase the aging of the insulation within the chip due to increased temperature and/or voltages. Arrenhius curves for insulation aging indicate typically a 10C increase in temperature corresponds to a 50% decrease in insulator life, however, unless you run it 24/7/365 for 10 years I wouldn't get concerned with running 10C hotter. The bigger concern in overclocking is increasing the CPU voltage as it increases the stress on the insulation layer accelerating both the aging mechanism and moving the failure point up on the insulation life curve.
February 15, 2007 2:10:57 PM

In most games the 6400 wins by a margin of 1 - 2 FPS and in CoD 2, it won by 20 FPS.(compared to the 5000+ on Toms CPU Chart) Most applications that I looked at the 6400 won or was very close, like in the specific one that you showed. The 5200+ is online a cache increase, which we all know that on AMD K8 arch doesnt mean a whole lot because of the IMC. On 3Dmark06, the CPU score and the Graphical scores, trade minimal blows on both, which evens them out. The price to performance ratio also was better on the C2D, so Even without OC'ing it seems that the better purchase could weigh towards the C2D simply because it appears that it is better for the price, but still neck and neck at stock speeds with the 5000 and most likely the 5200+ as well. If OC'ing is even brought into the equation at all then it is no contest and the C2D wins. Also remember that the AMD is going to require good speed and latency memory to be used to its full potential where as the C2D fairs better when you can achieve FSB and Memory sync. It is possible this could lower cost, but the difference will be quite marginal IMO, so from the facts I have seen and experienced through ownership of different parts and looking at Toms CPU chart the 6400 appears to be the better way to go. This is just my 2 cents, I am not trying to sound like an Intel fanboy, I am just trying to help. I honestly think that the better choice is C2D at this point, but either way the OP goes he/she will have a very fast chip and will not be disapointed in the performance, unless OC'ing is an option here, which it may have been stated somewhere whether it is or isnt and I just missed it and apologise, but never the less I recommend C2D, but at the same time am not saying you should not get the 5200+. I am telling what I would do if I was in his/her situation.

Best,

3Ball
February 15, 2007 2:31:44 PM

Quote:
CPU Chart
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

AMD 5000+ is faster than E6400 so AMD 5200+ must be faster but not faster than E6600/E6700.

Nope! 5000+ is NOT faster than E6400!
In most real-world applications E6400 is faster. The difference is marginal and unnoticeable, but 5000+ is not faster than E6400. Go check the charts again. :wink:

Multitasking 1:

Multitasking 2:
February 15, 2007 2:40:38 PM

Thats what I was tryin to get at, but you did a better job than me. lol

Best,

3Ball
February 15, 2007 3:27:26 PM

Quote:
In most games the 6400 wins by a margin of 1 - 2 FPS and in CoD 2, it won by 20 FPS.(compared to the 5000+ on Toms CPU Chart) Most applications that I looked at the 6400 won or was very close, like in the specific one that you showed. The 5200+ is online a cache increase, which we all know that on AMD K8 arch doesnt mean a whole lot because of the IMC. On 3Dmark06, the CPU score and the Graphical scores, trade minimal blows on both, which evens them out. The price to performance ratio also was better on the C2D, so Even without OC'ing it seems that the better purchase could weigh towards the C2D simply because it appears that it is better for the price, but still neck and neck at stock speeds with the 5000 and most likely the 5200+ as well. If OC'ing is even brought into the equation at all then it is no contest and the C2D wins. Also remember that the AMD is going to require good speed and latency memory to be used to its full potential where as the C2D fairs better when you can achieve FSB and Memory sync. It is possible this could lower cost, but the difference will be quite marginal IMO, so from the facts I have seen and experienced through ownership of different parts and looking at Toms CPU chart the 6400 appears to be the better way to go. This is just my 2 cents, I am not trying to sound like an Intel fanboy, I am just trying to help. I honestly think that the better choice is C2D at this point, but either way the OP goes he/she will have a very fast chip and will not be disapointed in the performance, unless OC'ing is an option here, which it may have been stated somewhere whether it is or isnt and I just missed it and apologise, but never the less I recommend C2D, but at the same time am not saying you should not get the 5200+. I am telling what I would do if I was in his/her situation.

Best,

3Ball


This is a great analysis, but I reach a different conclusion.

Although price/performance is generally my standard, I'm now looking also at the upgrade path. I don't mind gambles, and so I prefer the unknown of the coming barcelona drop-ins. Call me adventuresome if you like.

The prices are pretty close. Newegg gives the prices at $229 and $222 respectively, although MB costs should be included in any comparision.
February 15, 2007 3:34:49 PM

Don't forget with c2d, if you buy the correct m/b, you can also upgrade to quad later.
February 15, 2007 3:40:09 PM

Quote:
Best is a vauge term as you can see at stock the AMD will outperform the Core2Duo. The Core2Duo can easily be overclocked 10% on the stock cooler and outperform the AMD. The ASUS P5N-E 650i board is a relatively inexpensive 775 socket T board that can be overclocked automatically in the BIOS if you aren't familiar with overclocking.

Overclocking does increase the aging of the insulation within the chip due to increased temperature and/or voltages. Arrenhius curves for insulation aging indicate typically a 10C increase in temperature corresponds to a 50% decrease in insulator life, however, unless you run it 24/7/365 for 10 years I wouldn't get concerned with running 10C hotter. The bigger concern in overclocking is increasing the CPU voltage as it increases the stress on the insulation layer accelerating both the aging mechanism and moving the failure point up on the insulation life curve.


Good points. From what I read, and I don't ever pretend to be an expert on overclocking, it's important in some views to keep the C2duo well under 60C, which isn't hard in most cases I bet. Especially if the builder has an old cooler designed for a bigger job anyway. A novice (the OP) needs to at least be aware of it though, since he'll see occasional reference to stock cooling being enough, etc.
February 15, 2007 4:47:11 PM

Touche!

Best,

3Ball
February 16, 2007 3:51:49 AM

Good point Jack. I don't have a C2duo, and haven't read about overclocking it enough to know how much cooling is efficient to get for an ambitious overclocker. The second link was someone suggesting 60C should be avoided on the C2duo, and made me wonder if that sensible sounding limit was also critical (instead of only conservative). My X2 4200 generally runs in the 40s and 50s, since I just reused the Arctic Silencer cooler designed for a slower A64 single core, even though it's suppose to be not enough for a X2. When it got to 60C once (software thing), and the alarm I set was ringing, I was more concerned to turn off the alarm than about the cpu. I would probably have begun to worry at 70C. But then, if my main computer fails, I have a lot of backup, and it's no big deal. I could even drop in the old A64 and be reading email in under ten minutes. The OP probably needs guidance on cooling if he follows the recs to overclock.
February 16, 2007 4:18:42 AM

Quote:
except Prescott which was actually considered rather cool :)  :)  :) 
Are we allowed to use those two words together...in the same sentance???
February 16, 2007 4:29:51 AM

Yeah tell me about it (the creeping up thing). My gf wants to sell her laptop coz it's overheating. She bought it without asking me first so I don't feel as bad as I would have if it was my choice. She really wants an alienware though...Credit card here we come. :cry: 
February 16, 2007 11:09:29 AM

Change your avatar, please. Because with that childish outlook, I do not wish for you or I too be confused for one another.

@ op sorry for going off topic :wink:
February 16, 2007 1:39:26 PM

Quote:
bet you paid alot more than i at $325 for it too, and my monitor is bigger than yours Gateway 24in 1920 x 1200 and dual 8800 gtxs in sli so nanan nanaa lol
Remind me again what the point of spending $1,200+ on two graphics cards for a monitor that could be powered by one is?
February 19, 2007 2:57:54 AM

It has to be for braggin rights...
September 27, 2007 7:34:06 PM

hey im currently working on getting a degree in E&TC and wanted to pick up a PC asap. see the AMD 5200+ is gonna cost me ~5000 rs. (100 US) less than a c2d at 2.66,
the intel is on a dd33fbc board and the amd is on an asus m2nmx.
which way do i go? i dont wanna overclock atleast not for the next year or so cause im gonna be insanely busy, and reliability is very important. people tell me the amd's marginally better but i dont want it to wind up overheating.
September 27, 2007 9:30:39 PM

A C2D at 2.66GHz is faster than any AMD on the market, roughly the equivalent of a AMD 6600+ if it existed. The C2D is also cooler running, probably using at least 20W less at load.
!