Are they for real???

[RJ]

Did Legit Reviews REALLY try to compare a 5600+ X2 with an E6300? Can anyone guess the outcome of this farce? Let's see, a 1.86 ghz against a 2.8 ghz CPU, and the 2.8 gets a Zalman! Their validation for it is they're the same price.....NOW! Are they going to redo the test some time next week as well? Why not put the 5600+ up against an E6600? I think we all know the outcome of that matchup!

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/490/1/

 

[jeff_2087]

:roll: And on a more minor note, the memory they used favours AMD.

 

[RJ]

I sent this email to the hack that wrote the "review"...

Did you really think that we would buy your farce of an article comparing the E6300 with a 5600+? Did you factor in the price of the Zalman, which would almost require you to use an E6400 if you're focused on price point. Did you even consider using a P965 mobo for the Intel, since you didn't test in SLI? The price would have dropped. Did you rush this review out knowing that by this time next week, your test results would be for naught, because you'd have to use a higher performing C2D, possibly the E6600 due to the cost of a Zalman?

Please sir....some of can spot a BIASed review a mile away!

 

[No1sFanboy]

Sometimes a review arrives at a conclusion.
In this case they started with a conclusion and designed the review around it.

That said there is a valid point being made. AMD processors at fire sale prices represent good value. Not every consumer knows that a stock 6300 has one hand tied behind it's back.

For anyone who has never hit "del" on startup and is price sensitive AMD is a solid recommendation. Too bad it isn't a viable business model for the long term

 

[jeff_2087]

If it's supposed to be aimed towards the buyer, nobody using a $185 CPU is going to use PC2-10000. But I just noticed it was clocked down to DDR2-800 specs, so that's better. I'd assumed they were running it full speed on the AMD platform and in sync on the Intel platform, which obviously is pretty unfair.

Still, it would have been more appropriate to run the RAM as CAS 5 DDR2-800 on the AMD platform and CAS 3 or 4 DDR2-533 in sync on the Intel platform. It'd represent a real system and likely better performance better than running DDR2-800 speeds at a 2:3 ratio.

Probably wouldn't change a whole lot though so it's not a big deal.

 

[RJ]

are you for real.

proc's like all things are when you are a buyer, looked at on the basis on price.
if you are shopping with a particular budget, you do not look at performance. you look at what chips are in you budget then look at the performance.

also, the chip was not overclocked so the cooler does not matter. it will not affect performance.

also, the same ram was used in both so nothing wrong there. using two different sets of ram would have invalidated the test. they had to limit the variable as much as possible.

the premise for the review was very good. instead of using top end ones, focus on the types most people can afford.

i don't think your argument has a leg to stand on tbh. nice way to make yourself look like a noob.

How's that foot taste?

Why not use a "stock" cooler? Are you telling me that an aftermarket cooler would have zero effect on performance, even at stock speeds? Why did they need to use 4GB Corsair PC2-10000C5 when the clocks were DDR2-800? If it's about being on a budget, why not use A-Data DDR2-800 (2 x 1 gb) sticks, which are $115 right now? It flies in the face of the "basis" for the article!

Need ketchup?

 

[bardia]

OMG IS THIS POST FOR REALZ?!?!?

(I hope you [RJ] realize how foolish you sound)

As a previous poster pointed out, not everybody is overclocking, and in fact the reviewer himself made it very clear that the E6300 is the way to go for overclocking.

Given the same price (as is the basis of the comparison), if you think an E6300 can outperform an X2 5600+ than you need to read up more bro. The X2 will crush the 6300+ (I'm surprised it was this close to be honest) and the gap will widen even more in X64 mode.

Now overclocking, that's a whole different story...

 

[speedbird]

I live in the UK and the 5600+ X2 comes in at a similar price to a E6300. Intels Core 2 Duo E6300 is only good value for overclockers. AMD still offer excellent bang for buck. The test is fair because its showing what people can buy on a budget.

Regards
SpeedBird

 

[Periander]

It is nice how they managed to time their "equal price point" review in between AMD's April 9 price cuts and Intel's April 22 price cuts.

Wonder if they are gonna redo it on Monday matching the 5600 against the 6420? Somehow I doubt it.

 

[epsilon84]

It's odd that they release the article two days before the Intel pricecuts... seems a bit pointless really. It will be totally worthless in two days time, I wonder if they realise that. :roll:

It's like, DUH, why do you think Intel are cutting their prices too?! :lol:

Xbitlabs does a much better job on this topic:
http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/dualcore-roundup.html

 

[chuckshissle]

Wow! That's some heavy rigging right there. :lol: They might as well, test is against Pentium II. :roll: What was the point of that test? Hey you guys, you forgot to use the $20 cheap motherboard for the Intel chip.

 

[Vash-HT]

The op has some valid point to complain about this, and people bashing him aren't thinking of it obviously. Hardware aside, posting a price based review 3 days before a major price cut is retarded, and obviously creates a small bias in the favor of the cpu which isnt going to drop in price. Sure they may be the same price right now, but who's going to buy a 6300 right now when prices drop in 2 days.

 

[Major_Spittle]

I agree. I thought it was a decent article except for the fact that they didn't OC at all. Hell, if you are going to run a system with 1ghz ram you might want to show the C2D's ability to do a 60%-80% OC with a stock cooler. This is one of the biggest selling points to someone building their own system on a budget.

My real world conclusion this subject would be to get the C2D if you plan to

a. OC
b. have a good upgrade path
c. want to save money by using cheaper/slow RAM you may already own
d. are most concerned with having just a cool quiet low power system

Get a AMD X2 5600 if you plan to:

a. not OC
b. plan to use top of the line memory anyway
c. want to save some money on a SLI MB


Hell, everyone know the 6300 is the best buy. You get it, OC it, and have a top of the line processor performance for minimal money. To not include that tidbit of info in the review would be losing credibility.

 

[TechnologyCoordinator]

Did Legit Reviews REALLY try to compare a 5600+ X2 with an E6300? Can anyone guess the outcome of this farce? Let's see, a 1.86 ghz against a 2.8 ghz CPU, and the 2.8 gets a Zalman! Their validation for it is they're the same price.....NOW! Are they going to redo the test some time next week as well? Why not put the 5600+ up against an E6600? I think we all know the outcome of that matchup!

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/490/1/

Both processors are $185 on newegg. Who cares how fast they run, what their cache is, etc...

SAME PRICE = GOOD COMPARISON

 

[qcmadness]

have a good upgrade path

Totally wrong.

A modified 975x is needed to run Penryn processor. So your good old boards........

Socket AM2 is at least compatible to AM2+ CPUs.

 

[piesquared]

Sometimes a review arrives at a conclusion.
In this case they started with a conclusion and designed the review around it.

That said there is a valid point being made. AMD processors at fire sale prices represent good value. Not every consumer knows that a stock 6300 has one hand tied behind it's back.

For anyone who has never hit "del" on startup and is price sensitive AMD is a solid recommendation. Too bad it isn't a viable business model for the long term

Fortunatly, the many people that don't hit DEL may be saving themselves money in the long run.

http://www.techpowerup.com/?29784

 

[Major_Spittle]

have a good upgrade path

Totally wrong.

A modified 975x is needed to run Penryn processor. So your good old boards........

Socket AM2 is at least compatible to AM2+ CPUs.

Dude, you're like totally totally wrong. That is just the MB they used for the review, like shayyyyy.

 

[qcmadness]

have a good upgrade path

Totally wrong.

A modified 975x is needed to run Penryn processor. So your good old boards........

Socket AM2 is at least compatible to AM2+ CPUs.

Dude, you're like totally totally wrong. That is just the MB they used for the review, like shayyyyy.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=2972&p=2

The processors were plugged into a modified Intel BadAxe2 motherboard, with the modification being necessary to support Penryn.

 

[Major_Spittle]

have a good upgrade path

Totally wrong.

A modified 975x is needed to run Penryn processor. So your good old boards........

Socket AM2 is at least compatible to AM2+ CPUs.

Dude, you're like totally totally wrong. That is just the MB they used for the review, like shayyyyy.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=2972&p=2

The processors were plugged into a modified Intel BadAxe2 motherboard, with the modification being necessary to support Penryn.

Yay dude, they used a 975x BadAxe2 MB. So this makes all the 965 chipsets none compatible? You know of course that 965 is a newer chipset than 975. Like you almost totally got me.

 

[qcmadness]

Yay dude, they used a 975x BadAxe2 MB. So this makes all the 965 chipsets none compatible? You know of course that 965 is a newer chipset than 975. Like you almost totally got me.

Do 965 series and 975x get the same VRM? Yes, even 975x has a better VRM.

 

[jeff_2087]

have a good upgrade path

Totally wrong.

A modified 975x is needed to run Penryn processor. So your good old boards........

Socket AM2 is at least compatible to AM2+ CPUs.

Dude, you're like totally totally wrong. That is just the MB they used for the review, like shayyyyy.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=2972&p=2

The processors were plugged into a modified Intel BadAxe2 motherboard, with the modification being necessary to support Penryn.

Perhaps it's changed but I had heard previously that Penryn would run on 965 boards. Likely the only modification made to the BadAxe was to allow it to support Penryn's 1333FSB.

 

[Scooby2]

Why not use a "stock" cooler? Are you telling me that an aftermarket cooler would have zero effect on performance, even at stock speeds?

None at all. It will only help keep the chip cooler allowing a higher overclock.

Seems like a reasonably fair review bar the timing. They do mention the Intel price cuts and also promise an update so even that is a moot point.

 

[Major_Spittle]

Yay dude, they used a 975x BadAxe2 MB. So this makes all the 965 chipsets none compatible? You know of course that 965 is a newer chipset than 975. Like you almost totally got me.

Do 965 series and 975x get the same VRM? Yes, even 975x has a better VRM.

OK, I see what you were thinking. Penryn should run on 965 MBs if the vendor supports it. But even a 2.93 + Conroe is a better upgrade than anything AMD has. Unless you count Agena/Kuma as being better when they are released in ????? vs what ever Intel has pumped Conroe up to by then.

I personally have seen nothing that would lead me to believe that K10 will be better than Conroe for a desktop. If you have benchmarks or anything substantial on AMD's desktop K10s that haven't even been finalize for production, please let me know.

 

[shadowmaster625]

Did Legit Reviews REALLY try to compare a 5600+ X2 with an E6300? Can anyone guess the outcome of this farce? Let's see, a 1.86 ghz against a 2.8 ghz CPU, and the 2.8 gets a Zalman! Their validation for it is they're the same price.....

eh? Sounds like a damn good validation for me, but its still not fair because an acceptable AMD mobo can be bought for $53. Whereas a tolerable intel mobo can not be had for less than $85. And if you want that uber overclock you morons keep talking about, you gotta drop like $120~150 on a mobo. Why bother?

I just bought from newegg, all the parts for an AMD X2 4600 "budget system" with 2GB of ram, case, PSU, dvd, everything for under $400. Try all you will, use whatever fuzzy numbers you want, but there is no way an intel system can compete anywhere near this price range. I really don't get what the deal is with you intel fanbois.

 

[qcmadness]

OK, I see what you were thinking. Penryn should run on 965 MBs if the vendor supports it. But even a 2.93 + Conroe is a better upgrade than anything AMD has. Unless you count Agena/Kuma as being better when they are released in ????? vs what ever Intel has pumped Conroe up to by then.

I personally have seen nothing that would lead me to believe that K10 will be better than Conroe for a desktop. If you have benchmarks or anything substantial on AMD's desktop K10s that haven't even been finalize for production, please let me know.

Because I do not have solid NGA benches now, I will leave this question until the NGA debut.