Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel/AMD confusion related to same dual core clock speed

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 23, 2007 10:53:44 PM

the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Windsor 2.6GHz and the Core 2 Duo E6700 Conroe 2.66GHz both run at relatively the same clock speed, but i've heard that intel's multi cores are better than amd's multi cores.

HOWEVER, Intel=$512.00 while Athlon=$229.00 on newegg. i am willing to sacrifice a little performance if i know what im losing and get the cheaper one.

so basically which one do you recommend and why? thx

PS. i can still run SLI with an amd mobo right?
February 23, 2007 11:00:33 PM

some amd mobos allow sli, but most hug the crossfire method. the price is similar,but the core2duo will wack away at it. If you are into games,and plan to OC go core2duo,cause you can OC it to the x6800 speeds,if you are into games,and dont plan to oc and arent on a tight budget go to core2duo for the performance vs the x2, if you dont game,or are on a tight budget,the X2 is a nice processor for the price, just not in the same league as the core2duo
February 23, 2007 11:01:34 PM

The Intel 6700 out performs AMD's 5200+, but not too signifcantly. The real question you have to ask youself is, "Is $200 really worth an extra 20 Frames per Second?". If you're going for price to perfomance ratio (which I assume you are) then there is no doubt that the 5200+ will be your best choice. Also, the 5200+ will run any game you throw at it whether you run SLi or not.
Related resources
February 23, 2007 11:04:43 PM

Quote:
the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Windsor 2.6GHz and the Core 2 Duo E6700 Conroe 2.66GHz both run at relatively the same clock speed, but i've heard that intel's multi cores are better than amd's multi cores.

HOWEVER, Intel=$512.00 while Athlon=$229.00 on newegg. i am willing to sacrifice a little performance if i know what im losing and get the cheaper one.

so basically which one do you recommend and why? thx

PS. i can still run SLI with an amd mobo right?



I recommend the cheaper one (5200+) as they will both power SLI very well. More AMD boards are SLI than CrossFire.

Go for it!
February 23, 2007 11:36:14 PM

Quote:

The 5200+ is a good CPU but runs quite abit hotter, so you will also need to get a better heat sink and fan for the 5200+...

jack


The 5200+ may run "hotter" than the 6700 but it is NOT significant. It will run fine on stock cooling. The max temp for the 5200+ is about 75 - 80 degrees Celsius. On stock cooling at full load, the 5200+ will run at about 55 Celsius. In other words, it's not a big deal. Too many Intel fanboys think they have to have the CPU run at room temp. :roll: It's not a bad thing, it's just overrated and not necessary. However if you overclock, through the roof, you will need an aftermarket heatsink and fan for both Intel and AMD. :?
February 23, 2007 11:41:53 PM

Uh oh, Jack is gonna cry. :lol: 
February 23, 2007 11:48:07 PM

I think it's fair to say this:

Well, first you can´t lean between those two just for the speed. With the new amd price cuts, performance is more or less similar between price comparing (except FX series).
Or either you compare the 5200+ with the E6400 or the new 6000+ with the E6700.
From these options, I'd say take whatever you want in within your price range if not overclocking, because they are more or less matched.

New 6000+ reviews:

http://legitreviews.com/article/463/1/

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2007/02/22/amd_athlon_...

ps: i'm not a fanboy :) 
February 23, 2007 11:49:01 PM

I don't know how you feel about overclocking, but your best perfomance/value is to get and E6600 and overclock it to around 3 Ghz. You could overclock higher, but you should invest in a better cooler than the intel stock fan if you wish to do that.

The AMD 5200+ would provide you good performance to be sure, but the best value going right now is to take a lower end to mid range core 2 and do a mild overclock on it.

Toms recently did an article on Core2 overclocking if you would like to be informed on the kind of results you can expect.

Core 2 overclocking article
February 24, 2007 12:04:36 AM

Quote:


This is a bit misleading, an E6600 will out perform an FX-62 which is faster than a 5200+, the only AMD CPU that performs at an E6600 level is the new 6000+ which has been recently publicized in those reviews...

Please do not make misleading and incorrect posts to casual users asking simple questions. This is ethically wrong...

At the original poster --- here are quick links to see all the data for yourself.... the E6700 significantly out performs the 5200+ just as the cheaper E6600 would do as well...

AnandTech- http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795
Bit Tech - http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2006/07/14/intel_core_2_duo_processors/1.html
ByteSector - http://www.bytesector.com/data/bs-article.asp?id=661
Chile Hardware - http://www.chilehardware.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=hardware_reviews&file=200607131
Club IC - http://www.clubic.com/article-36354-1-le-pentium-laisse-la-place-intel-core-2-duo.html
Computer Base - http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/prozessoren/2006/test_intel_core_2_extreme_x6800/
Digit Life - http://www.digit-life.com/articles2/cpu/intel-core2-duo-e6600.html
Extreme Tech - http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1989036,00.asp
Firing Squad - http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_2_performance/
GD Hardware - http://www.gdhardware.com/hardware/cpus/intel/conroe/X6800_E6700/001.htm
GotFrag - http://hardware.gotfrag.com/portal/story/33492/
Guru3D - http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=185555
HardOCP - http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTEwOCwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
Hardware Secrets - http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/348
HardwareZone - http://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/articles/view.php?cid=2&id=1980
Hardware.fr - http://www.hardware.fr/articles/633-1/express-core-2-duo-p965-vs-i975x.html
Hexus - http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=6184
Hot Hardware - http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=845&cid=1
Legion Hardware - http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=569
Legit Reviews - http://www.legitreviews.com/article/362/1/
MadBox PC - http://www.madboxpc.com/contenido.php?id=2394
Mad Shrimps - http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=470
Maximo PC - http://www.maximopc.org/articulos/intel_core_2_duo_review_parte_1.html
NeoSeeker - http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reviews/core2duo_e6700/
OCAU - http://www.overclockers.com.au/article.php?id=489587
OC Workbench - http://www.ocworkbench.com/2006/intel/core2duo/g1.htm
PC Perspective - http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=272
Phoronix - http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=512&num=1
Planet X64 - http://www.planetx64.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=283&Itemid=14
Sharky Extreme - http://www.sharkyextreme.com/hardware/cpu/article.php/3620036
Sim HQ - http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_090a.html
Tech Report - http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q3/core2/index.x?pg=1
Tom's Hardware - http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/
Trusted Reviews - http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?art=3161
TweakTown - http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/923/
Xbit Labs - http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e6300.html


Uh, could you post some links to back up your assertions? :wink:
February 24, 2007 12:06:53 AM

Quote:
Please do not make misleading and incorrect posts to casual users asking simple questions. This is ethically wrong...


right...



Sorry Jack. Just because you have more posts than I, doesn't mean I'm going to let you "post bullie me". Take your "know it all" attitude and shove it where the sun don't shine.

P.S. I said the Intel 6700 would out perform the 5200+ by about 20FPS. Perhaps I should have said 20%, but it's fairly close.
February 24, 2007 12:10:04 AM

wow...how did this thread dissolve into this?
February 24, 2007 12:15:57 AM

Quote:
I think it's fair to say this:

Well, first you can´t lean between those two just for the speed. With the new amd price cuts, performance is more or less similar between price comparing (except FX series).
Or either you compare the 5200+ with the E6400 or the new 6000+ with the E6700.
From these options, I'd say take whatever you want in within your price range if not overclocking, because they are more or less matched.

New 6000+ reviews:

http://legitreviews.com/article/463/1/

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2007/02/22/amd_athlon_...

ps: i'm not a fanboy :) 


Actually based on this, and other review data --- the E6600 is the better compare...

Hang tight while I compile the data into one chart...

Jack

Well, I know the benches too. I was trying to be practical and give a match for each processor he mentioned.
I got an E6600 and I know it rocks 8)
February 24, 2007 12:20:53 AM

Quote:
wow...how did this thread dissolve into this?

It's normal having fights here because $1 or 2 seconds in a benchmark... :roll:
February 24, 2007 12:26:06 AM

its easy to answer, I did in the simplest way possible,and BM was even polite though i think hes wrong, Jack was straight foreword, then it degenerated
February 24, 2007 12:29:29 AM

Quote:
wow...how did this thread dissolve into this?


Somebody put a hex on it :lol: 
February 24, 2007 12:31:38 AM

Quote:
This is a bit misleading, an E6600 will out perform an FX-62 which is faster than a 5200+, the only AMD CPU that performs at an E6600 level is the new 6000+ which has been recently publicized in those reviews...

Please do not make misleading and incorrect posts to casual users asking simple questions. This is ethically wrong...

At the original poster --- here are quick links to see all the data for yourself.... the E6700 significantly out performs the 5200+ just as the cheaper E6600 would do as well...



You definitely take this too seriously. I just , just, can't even think of anything to say.

To the OP, skip to the part where one is cheaper and both are gamer CPUs.
a b à CPUs
February 24, 2007 12:35:54 AM

Benchmarks, benchmarks, and more benchmarks. On paper, er on screen they all look very nice and impressive. Fact is, either of those processors set up in a rig running SLI will perform quite nicely. You won't notice any difference actually sitting in front of your machine gaming.
It's kind of like buying a Ferrari or Lamborghini. The Lamborghini is going to outperform the Ferrari, it should it costs more. But take them out on the freeway and open them up, what difference does it really make? Either car will be more than most reasonable people could ever want, or handle for that matter.
At this point in time and technology you will be happy with either one.
Just get what fits your budget.
February 24, 2007 12:50:20 AM

Hex,

It is not so much a post bully thing rather a facts bully thing.

I can pick a single bench from a source that shows just about anything I wish.

I can pick a result for instance from an AMDZone comparison (we all know that those are fair and un-bias since the name fully implies that).

Hex,

Jack replies with careful because you are probably about to be schooled in a big way. It might even be humiliating.. Although it would be pretty hard to humiliate a poster that asks folks if they are going to cry...

Quality post there!!

To the OP. Save the 3600+ like jack said you are better off for the moment getting a lower grade C2D Core 2 Duo and overclocking it. The OC potential is phenomenal with the E4300.

But as jack has demonstrated please do not believe just the words we type but rather the links posted... Like these:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/cpuoverclocking/
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_2_duo_e4300_review/
http://www.techspot.com/review/40-core2-e4300-vs-e6300-overclocking/
http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/01/27/intel-core-2-e4300-and-e6300-processors-overclocking-test-reviews/
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2903
February 24, 2007 12:58:33 AM

Quote:
its easy to answer, I did in the simplest way possible,and BM was even polite though i think hes wrong, Jack was straight foreword, then it degenerated


So the 5200+ is not a gamer's CPU and isn't worth $229?
February 24, 2007 12:59:54 AM

Quote:
Hex,

It is not so much a post bully thing rather a facts bully thing.

I can pick a single bench from a source that shows just about anything I wish.

I can pick a result for instance from an AMDZone comparison (we all know that those are fair and un-bias since the name fully implies that).

Hex,

Jack replies with careful because you are probably about to be schooled in a big way. It might even be humiliating.. Although it would be pretty hard to humiliate a poster that asks folks if they are going to cry...

Quality post there!!

To the OP. Save the 3600+ like jack said you are better off for the moment getting a lower grade C2D Core 2 Duo and overclocking it. The OC potential is phenomenal with the E4300.

But as jack has demonstrated please do not believe just the words we type but rather the links posted... Like these:

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/cpuoverclocking/
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_2_duo_e4300_review/
http://www.techspot.com/review/40-core2-e4300-vs-e6300-overclocking/
http://www.mydigitallife.info/2007/01/27/intel-core-2-e4300-and-e6300-processors-overclocking-test-reviews/
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2903




The Brood speaks. Heed while you can.......

<insert ominous laugh>
:oops: 
February 24, 2007 1:02:54 AM

Quote:
Please do not make misleading and incorrect posts to casual users asking simple questions. This is ethically wrong...


right...



Sorry Jack. Just because you have more posts than I, doesn't mean I'm going to let you "post bullie me". Take your "know it all" attitude and shove it where the sun don't shine.

P.S. I said the Intel 6700 would out perform the 5200+ by about 20FPS. Perhaps I should have said 20%, but it's fairly close.

Careful....




Why does this happen every time someone new asks an "AMD vs. Intel" question?

@ Hex, Just because you disagree with someone doesn't give you the right to flame away, Jack isn't a "post count bully", he has contributed a lot to the forums and I have learned a lot from him (well, what I understood anyway) so show some respect man.

@ Vista, AMD is competitive with Intel price for performance wise up to the 5200+, anything higher than that or if you plan on overclocking you should definitely go with Intel. So it depends on your budget and what you are planning to do.
February 24, 2007 1:13:26 AM

Quote:
right...



Sorry Jack. Just because you have more posts than I, doesn't mean I'm going to let you "post bullie me". Take your "know it all" attitude and shove it where the sun don't shine.

P.S. I said the Intel 6700 would out perform the 5200+ by about 20FPS. Perhaps I should have said 20%, but it's fairly close.
Perhaps if you didn't use Quake 4 run at 1600x1200 as an example of CPU performance you'd be right, but in reality the E6600 is often faster than the X2 6000+ and if you're able to overclock, would dish out a serious beating to any AMD chip on the market.
February 24, 2007 2:19:36 AM

Quote:
the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Windsor 2.6GHz and the Core 2 Duo E6700 Conroe 2.66GHz both run at relatively the same clock speed, but i've heard that intel's multi cores are better than amd's multi cores.

HOWEVER, Intel=$512.00 while Athlon=$229.00 on newegg. i am willing to sacrifice a little performance if i know what im losing and get the cheaper one.

so basically which one do you recommend and why? thx

PS. i can still run SLI with an amd mobo right?


Hey guys this is the question that was asked, remember. :D 

We need to set up a permanent Jack vs Byron Thread for these two to flame each other on. :wink: I'm sure it would be entertaining for all, Tune in this week for the continuing saga! :D 

FYI: Jack will always recommend Intel, and Byron will always recommend AMD



In answer to your question: IMHO The intel chip is the faster of the 2 because of architectural differences in the chips. The intel E-6700 is about 40-50% faster than the AthlonX2 5200. Either chip will play 95% of all games to an acceptable level. The E-6700 will play 100% of all games.
Hope this helps.

________________________
No matter where you go or what you do, you live your entire life within the confines of your head. ~Terry Josephson
February 24, 2007 3:20:17 AM

Sir,

I think you need to check your statement that Jack will always recommend Intel.

I have on many occasions seen him recommend AMD procs.

I will dare to guess that if Barcelona is the monster it is made out to be Jack and I both will be singing its praises and recommending it to folks. Of course that is when it makes it to the Desktop.

It is about performance for price not about AMD/Intel.
February 24, 2007 3:27:29 AM

ive seen Jack,the other jack,not me, recommend AMD several times, and he is the most civil flamer i have ever seen... :lol: 
February 24, 2007 10:16:40 AM

just thought i would give my views on this subject. Why do we upgrade, answer is we want to go faster. Do i by this or do i buy that. Answer i myself buy the fastest regardless. why because if i buy the slower today because it's cheaper, i spend more tomorrow just to reach the speed you could have reached yesterday. It's simple the faster one will always last you longer before you feel the need to upgrade again, and spend more money.

that's my view, does anyone agree.
February 24, 2007 11:23:16 AM

Theres so many new things on the horizon that upgrade path should be a consideration too. I think Intel has that over AMD right now. Mind you this time next year you'll need a new MB and memory ETC for the latest and greatest chips whichever camp you go with. I agree with the posts about the E4300. If you don't need to upgrade now, wait for it to drop to $113 in April. OC it and youll beat both your suggested chips for far less money.
a b à CPUs
February 24, 2007 1:42:09 PM

You have a good point.
For me the upgrade bug bites me every 6 months. It's not that I need to upgrade, but as somewhat of an enthusiast, it's the fun of upgrading that peaks my interest. I could not afford to buy the very best every six months, I like the fun of researching what is 6 months to a year old, and finding the best value for the buck.
Years ago you really needed the best lastest thing out, but todays hardware is extremely powerful compared to 5 or more years ago. Todays even mid-range hardware is plenty of horsepower for most software. There will always be that 1 new game that taxes even the newest hardware to the fullest on highest settings. But midrange hardware will still run it quite well if you just back a few of the settings down a little.
Anyhow that's the route I go.
February 24, 2007 1:59:35 PM

Original Poster

Quote:
just thought i would give my views on this subject. Why do we upgrade, answer is we want to go faster. Do i by this or do i buy that. Answer i myself buy the fastest regardless. why because if i buy the slower today because it's cheaper, i spend more tomorrow just to reach the speed you could have reached yesterday. It's simple the faster one will always last you longer before you feel the need to upgrade again, and spend more money.

that's my view, does anyone agree.


this has been the most simple post to understand and the most helpful to me.

I've decided not to get athlon but instead intel but which chip OCs better without aftermarket cooling? E6600 or E6700

also i wish jack and hex could just keep to themselves :roll:
February 24, 2007 2:14:47 PM

Quote:
Original Poster

just thought i would give my views on this subject. Why do we upgrade, answer is we want to go faster. Do i by this or do i buy that. Answer i myself buy the fastest regardless. why because if i buy the slower today because it's cheaper, i spend more tomorrow just to reach the speed you could have reached yesterday. It's simple the faster one will always last you longer before you feel the need to upgrade again, and spend more money.

that's my view, does anyone agree.


this has been the most simple post to understand and the most helpful to me.

I've decided not to get athlon but instead intel but which chip OCs better without aftermarket cooling? E6600 or E6700

Nostromo's advice is not the best advice in every case. For example... why would you purchase the "top of the line" CPU if it is only 10% faster than its nearest competition, but costs 100% more? But, you go right ahead... :wink:

Quote:
also i wish jack and hex could just keep to themselves :roll:


Maybe Jack should refrain from helping you out anymore. :?
February 24, 2007 3:24:32 PM

I've been collecting a lot of data lately regarding price/performance. Recently, I made my own graphs, one for general and one for gaming. It seems to me that games really like processors with a lot of cache, and this gives the C2D an even greater boost in that category. I don't have data (yet) for the X2 5200+, but the E6400 easily beats the X2 5000+. See this graph. Originally posted on this thread.
February 24, 2007 3:50:35 PM

So what have we learned today. I think the first thing of which may not have come across but may be an important lesson is that you cannot use clock speeds to compare chips. Within the same generation yes, but different companies and/or different architecture NO.
As for buying the most expensive chip, you will pay a premium for it. Generally a step or two below is the sweet spot. Which is I guess where you are looking as I haven't heard anyone suggesting the extreme edition at least.
And finally you should consider an upgrade path. How important to you is personal but for me I want to get some mileage out of my builds.
February 24, 2007 3:51:26 PM

Example time

january 2007
i buy cpu at $300
why
because the other cpu is $500 and only 10% faster
tecknology now moves on and as a rule cpu's usually jump up in speed by roughly 5 to 10% (ok c2d was a big jump for Intel, but this won't happen everytime, look back in history and the jumps in cpu speeds will verify this)

january 2008
i need to upgrade
i buy this years cpu not bad either $300 dollars same as i paid last year for a slower chip and i have a 10% increase not bad, but oh wait a minute, if i had bought the $500 dollar one last year i would have had the 10% speed increase for the last 12 months and only spent $500.

What i am trying to say is TRY (i know it's not always possible) to buy the best you can, it can be cheaper in the long run and you have had that extra speed just that little bit longer.

If all else fail buy the cheapest but best overclocker and crank it up. LOL
February 24, 2007 4:20:49 PM

I'm not taking any sides, but I'm pretty sure you were the one that started the "bullying". Now if you want to get pissy with me... rant all you want. I've got nothing to gain from taking on someone that behaves in such a manner.
February 24, 2007 5:22:54 PM

Hex:

A friendly piece of advice to a forum n00b:

Back off and apologize to Jack. Now.
February 24, 2007 6:02:10 PM

Quote:
Example time

january 2007
i buy cpu at $300
why
because the other cpu is $500 and only 10% faster
tecknology now moves on and as a rule cpu's usually jump up in speed by roughly 5 to 10% (ok c2d was a big jump for Intel, but this won't happen everytime, look back in history and the jumps in cpu speeds will verify this)

january 2008
i need to upgrade
i buy this years cpu not bad either $300 dollars same as i paid last year for a slower chip and i have a 10% increase not bad, but oh wait a minute, if i had bought the $500 dollar one last year i would have had the 10% speed increase for the last 12 months and only spent $500.

What i am trying to say is TRY (i know it's not always possible) to buy the best you can, it can be cheaper in the long run and you have had that extra speed just that little bit longer.

If all else fail buy the cheapest but best overclocker and crank it up. LOL


I can see your point to some degree. But you did say that you would buy the best at the time... Hence... your example could look more like this:

january 2007
i buy the best cpu at $500
why
because the other cpu is $300 and 10% slower.

january 2008
i need to upgrade
i buy this years best cpu at $500 dollars same as i paid last year for a slower chip and i have a 10% increase not bad.

So... now you just spent $1000 instead of $600.
February 24, 2007 6:03:00 PM

ok i've decided to stick with my original plan and get the 2.66 intel thx for your opinions
February 24, 2007 6:49:13 PM

Quote:

We need to set up a permanent Jack vs Byron Thread for these two to flame each other on. :wink: I'm sure it would be entertaining for all, Tune in this week for the continuing saga! :D 

FYI: Jack will always recommend Intel, and Byron will always recommend AMD


not exactly.. jack will recommend the cpu thats best for the money. which many times lately is intel.

baron will recommend the amd processor thats best for everyone. regardless of price. or needs. or wants.
February 24, 2007 9:40:57 PM

Quote:
Well, it is a public forum and it would be dishonest not to provide the people with questions with the correct information.

Either CPU will OC just fine... I have an E6700 at 3.33 GHz on air, idle temps 36-38, full load 48-51. The best value for the money though is the E6600 overall.



So I guess you do take yourself this seriously. Wow, I can't believe it. :oops: 
February 24, 2007 9:45:36 PM

Quote:

We need to set up a permanent Jack vs Byron Thread for these two to flame each other on. :wink: I'm sure it would be entertaining for all, Tune in this week for the continuing saga! :D 

FYI: Jack will always recommend Intel, and Byron will always recommend AMD


not exactly.. jack will recommend the cpu thats best for the money. which many times lately is intel.

baron will recommend the amd processor thats best for everyone. regardless of price. or needs. or wants.


No, if a person asks about AMD I tell them what they can expect. If they ask about Intel I tell them what they can expect. If they aren't sure I say toss a coin.
Either one will do the job unless you're a victim of penis envy and have to be able to get the highest clock. Word can only open so fast and the human eye can only see 60fps.
I would like to recommend half and half. I just hope AMD leapfrogs Intel so all of you can take all of these months of AMD abuse and jam them.


EMBRACE THE DUOPOLY!!
February 24, 2007 10:01:02 PM

Quote:
Hex:

A friendly piece of advice to a forum n00b:

Back off and apologize to Jack. Now.


^^^ What he said.

If you want good advice and you don't know Jack, your screwed. 8O
February 24, 2007 10:04:15 PM

Quote:
Hex:

A friendly piece of advice to a forum n00b:

Back off and apologize to Jack. Now.


^^^ What he said.

If you want good advice and you don't know Jack, your screwed. 8O

Must....
Protect....
Brood....
Queen....
February 24, 2007 10:08:00 PM

Quote:
Hex:

A friendly piece of advice to a forum n00b:

Back off and apologize to Jack. Now.


^^^ What he said.

If you want good advice and you don't know Jack, your screwed. 8O

LOL seems Jack has himself a couple puppets. :oops:  :lol: 
February 24, 2007 10:17:17 PM

Quote:

Must....
Protect....
Brood....
Queen....

Please stop this "brood" crap. It's really corny.

Come on Baron... Jack is not trying to mislead anyone. Quite the contrary, he provides well thought out suggestions with data to back up his assertions.
February 24, 2007 10:19:02 PM

Quote:
LOL seems Jack has himself a couple puppets. :oops:  :lol: 


Oh my! 8O I am embarrassed for you. :lol: 
February 24, 2007 10:38:50 PM

Quote:
Hex:

A friendly piece of advice to a forum n00b:

Back off and apologize to Jack. Now.


^^^ What he said.

If you want good advice and you don't know Jack, your screwed. 8O

LOL seems Jack has himself a couple puppets. :oops:  :lol: 



:roll: :roll:
February 24, 2007 10:50:15 PM

Quote:

Must....
Protect....
Brood....
Queen....

Please stop this "brood" crap. It's really corny.

Come on Baron... Jack is not trying to mislead anyone. Quite the contrary, he provides well thought out suggestions with data to back up his assertions.


The Brood, a group of insect-like creatures who search for superior hosts for their eggs. Once implanted the host becomes a Sleazoid. The only known defense is to have a mutant immune system like Wolverine.

Beware the Brood. Scourge of the Internet community.
:oops: 
February 24, 2007 10:52:37 PM

Quote:
LOL seems Jack has himself a couple puppets. :oops:  :lol: 


You broke the "less than five words per Emoticon" rule in this forum.

We don't take kindly to people Emoticon hoarding in these parts, so put one of 'em back right now. :x
February 24, 2007 11:00:12 PM

Im looking at the price verses performance?
I have had both AMD and Itel systems dating back to 1994.

the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Windsor 2.6GHz and the Core 2 Duo E6700 Conroe 2.66GHz both run at relatively the same clock speed, but i've heard that intel's multi cores are better than amd's multi cores.

HOWEVER, Intel=$512.00 while Athlon=$229.00 on newegg. i am willing to sacrifice a little performance if i know what im losing and get the cheaper one.

so basically which one do you recommend and why? thx

PS. i can still run SLI with an amd mobo right?
As you can see the price is almost 300 more for the core 2? Depends on what you want to do spend more money or save some with some less performance.
The 5200 is a fine chip no need to knock it, It will run sli and it will run any and all current games on the market now!
Needless to say so is the intel chip but why pay more? unless you have it.
BTW I own a 6300 and you know I dont see a big difference from what I had from before.
I myself cant see or understand why paying 300 dollars more to OC a 6700 to 6800 clock speeds.
Bottom line its your money and either way you cant go wrong I am neither taking a Intel or Amd side on this.
What I am taking is the cost factor, I myself would not pay the 300 bucks more for the intel chip for what its worth because we all know the 5200 will game just fine , use that extra money for more ram or a good vid card.
My 2 cents worth.
February 24, 2007 11:01:04 PM

Quote:
The Brood, a group of insect-like creatures who search for superior hosts for their eggs. Once implanted the host becomes a Sleazoid. The only known defense is to have a mutant immune system like Wolverine.

Beware the Brood. Scourge of the Internet community.
:oops: 



This one time, I touched a squirrel. Then it ran away.
!