CPU to replace 3.4GHz Intel EE

[Mackle]

I've currently got a S478 Intel 3.4 Extreme Edition overclocked to a whisker below 3.8GHz and my old ATi 9700PRO AGP card is where the bottleneck in my system is.

To replace this card with a newer faster card (e.g. an X1950XT AGP) is going to cost me around £160 I guess, so I am beginning to think it's time to start looking moving to something newer.

If I bought a PCI eXpress motherboard, what is the minimum speed CPU that would provide comparible performance to my current 3.4GHz EE?


Thanks

 

[shinigamiX]

I've currently got a S478 Intel 3.4 Extreme Edition overclocked to a whisker below 3.8GHz and my old ATi 9700PRO AGP card is where the bottleneck in my system is.

To replace this card with a newer faster card (e.g. an X1950XT AGP) is going to cost me around £160 I guess, so I am beginning to think it's time to start looking moving to something newer.

If I bought a PCI eXpress motherboard, what is the minimum speed CPU that would provide comparible performance to my current 3.4GHz EE?


Thanks

A 1.86GHz Core 2 Duo E6300 would be faster.

 

[apt403]

Just get an E4300 or 3600+ Brisbane, they're both cheap, and either one will smoke your Pentium. Getting anything slower is a waste of money.

 

[1Tanker]

Just get an E4300 or 3600+ Brisbane, they're both cheap, and either one will smoke your Pentium. Getting anything slower is a waste of money.

Agreed, and don't cheap out and settle for a single-core CPU. Grab a dual-core now, while the prices are sweet. GL

 

[Orion63]

Man, y'all are depressing me! I feel like I have a 486 compared to you guys...

Still, it will cost too much to trash everything and "get caught up". I will just sit in my rocking chair and play computer solitaire...j/k

 

[ajfink]

Your CPU is in many ways not slow at all. A 3.8Ghz Gallatin? Crikey. I'd take it for some fun...

Buy an E4300 or X2 3600+ as they're saying, and since you overclock, you'll have a FIELD DAY with these things.

 

[49ers540]

I've currently got a S478 Intel 3.4 Extreme Edition overclocked to a whisker below 3.8GHz and my old ATi 9700PRO AGP card is where the bottleneck in my system is.

To replace this card with a newer faster card (e.g. an X1950XT AGP) is going to cost me around £160 I guess, so I am beginning to think it's time to start looking moving to something newer.

If I bought a PCI eXpress motherboard, what is the minimum speed CPU that would provide comparible performance to my current 3.4GHz EE?


Thanks

If you were able to afford the 3.4 extreme edition before, can you afford to go with the new quad core. There are games being develop for the new chip.
But, the E6400 will meet the challenge and it's not that expensive. I myself would highly recommend the E6600 for the sweet spot for performance and pricing.

 

[Kurz]

Quad cores are still a bit too new.
I would wait till AMD puts out their Quad.
Prices should fall by then.

The only reason you should want a Quad is Encoding, video editing, or Crunching (Like Folding@Home or SETI).

Other than that the Quad is a waste.

However the game Supreme Commander does make use of all cores.

 

[Mackle]

Your CPU is in many ways not slow at all. A 3.8Ghz Gallatin? Crikey. I'd take it for some fun...

Buy an E4300 or X2 3600+ as they're saying, and since you overclock, you'll have a FIELD DAY with these things.

I wouldn't mind having a CPU that straight out of the box as standard is faster than my overclocked Gallatin.

The problem I have with my Gallatin at the moment is that the 9700PRO card is the bottle neck in the system, and all I seem to read about these days is that if you have an AGP system then it's not worth upgrading the graphics card, it's best to go straight for a PCI eXpress system instead :?

If you were able to afford the 3.4 extreme edition before, can you afford to go with the new quad core. There are games being develop for the new chip.
But, the E6400 will meet the challenge and it's not that expensive. I myself would highly recommend the E6600 for the sweet spot for performance and pricing.

I can't afford a quad core CPU no. Even the E6600 would be a stretch too far at the moment!


Just out of curiosity though, what spec system would I need to run Company of Heroes at 1920x1080 (so 1080P resolution basically) without having to disable a lot of the graphics options? (I currently am running at 720P, and due to my graphics card can't turn the detail levels up).

Quad cores are still a bit too new.
I would wait till AMD puts out their Quad.
Prices should fall by then.

The only reason you should want a Quad is Encoding, video editing, or Crunching (Like Folding@Home or SETI).

Other than that the Quad is a waste.

However the game Supreme Commander does make use of all cores.

Number crunching? Well, I do play Football Manager 2007 a lot, that game does an awful lot of number crunching ;-)

 

[ajfink]

An E6400 would be faster right out of the box at an affordable price. That being said, the X2 5600+ may be a good deal for you, too. The 5600+ would probably perform a little better than the E6400 in most benchmarks, but it won't overclock as far. AMD recently cut their prices significantly, so there's definitely competition in the price range you seem to be looking for, all the way up to the X2 6000+ having a higher perf/$ rating at the moment until Intel cuts their prices on the 22nd and things become a little more even again.

You have lots of options - I think it really depends on your budget.

 

[Mackle]

Still haven't bought anything yet :-/

No news on the new AMD CPUs, and with the Intel price cuts was tempted to go for maybe something like an E6600, but then with the news of 1333FSB procs coming out soon makes me put my wallet away again!