5600 vs. E6300 Head-to-Head

[DJ_Jumbles]

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

Found this a little earlier and thought it was interesting. AMD right now for the money seems to cream the pants off the Cores. Let me say that again: FOR THE MONEY...
Also, before you Intel Fanboys start the crap: it's a straight comparison, no overclocking. Just the way tests should be.

 

[corvetteguy]

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

Found this a little earlier and thought it was interesting. AMD right now for the money seems to cream the pants off the Cores. Let me say that again: FOR THE MONEY...
Also, before you Intel Fanboys start the crap: it's a straight comparison, no overclocking. Just the way tests should be.

There are 2 other threads about this btw. You are about to get pounced on for not reading.

 

[Arrowyx]

I would say something about this already being posted multiple times but you probably don't care anyways.

 

[epsilon84]

Wow, 3 threads on this already, talk about clutching at straws... 8O

Btw, that article is already outdated, Intel has cut their prices and introduced newer models. The direct competitor to the X2 5600+ is now the E6420.

http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/dualcore-roundup.html

 

[DJ_Jumbles]

Didnt realize about the 3 other threads. Kind of hard to tell what its about when the subject says "Hey guys" or something and it's about the R600's... nice. I dont read everything, just the stuff that interests me in the topics. Sorry about the redundancy. Won't happen again.
Oh, and you're right, I don't give a shit.

 

[NMDante]

It isn't a big deal. Some people just don't want to wade through all the posts.

@MrsBytch -

Yeah, Intel was clutching at straws through those years, but how many of those years produced a profit loss?

 

[gOJDO]

AMD right now for the money seems to cream the pants off the Cores. Let me say that again: FOR THE MONEY...

"Right now" is not when the article was written. You should have checked current prices and current threads before you opened this one.
Today is 22nd of April and today Intel officialy have droped the prices of their CPUs.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/dualcore-roundup.html

Also, before you Intel Fanboys start the crap: it's a straight comparison, no overclocking. Just the way tests should be.

What a crapload of BS.
A straight comparison could be the power consumption or the heat dissipation. No enthusiast cares about power consumption on the desktop, but all care about heat dissipation and loudness of their system. And hell yes, the OVERCLOCKING. For example, my OCed C2D E6400 wipes the floor with every AMD overclocked or not overclocked CPU I have seen with my eyes or on internet. But hey, when I bought it, there was NO AMD CPU offering the same or higher performance for the same money.

 

[DJ_Jumbles]

So the article is dated and your data is here to make up for it, right?
Ok, according to YOUR graph, the 5600 has a higher performace benchmark (just a little) at a little lower cost than the E6420(maybe a few dollars). Right? Ok, so straight out of the box (stock cooling), both of these chips are on the same teir, performance wise ACCORDING TO YOUR DATA. That's a true comparison. Another true comparison is the game benches...

I understand while most people on here are enthusiasts, not all overclock. I personally dont overclock my CPU because I: A) Dont have the time to screw with everything for 2 days just to find my "stable" configuration and B)depend on my computer to work for things other than games and I dont care to lose my warranty just for a little extra omph... (not like it's much on my AMD $130 chip, but it is still a warranty).
Most "enthusiasts" do overclock, but they're also willing to spend the extra dough on configurations that (frankly) no one can say what will happen for extended periods of time. Not that a true "enthusiast" will really keep a CPU for more than a year or more anyway, but I don't consider my CPU or MOBO disposable.


That said, no 2 chips are exactly the same. You cant tell someone to go buy a E6400 and GUARANTEE them that they will be able to reach 3.66GHZ overclock no matter what, because that batch of chips could have faults or looser tolerances that only allow it to stably reach 3.2ghz, or even a paltry 2.6ghz. This descrepancy in ability to overclock CPU's even among like-model chips is why comparing overclocked CPUs is inherantly foolish and not realistic.
I'll repeat that again:
This descrepancy in ability to overclock CPU's even among like-model chips is why comparing overclocked CPUs is inherantly foolish and not realistic.

Also, a question: does anyone know how the new 6420's OC?

 

[eregular]

BUT C2D'S ARE SO GOOD AT OVERCLOCKING!!! I'M FLAMING YOU CAUSE I'M A FANBOI WHO DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO TURN OFF CAPS LOCK!! DER!

 

[corvetteguy]

BUT C2D'S ARE SO GOOD AT OVERCLOCKING!!! I'M FLAMING YOU CAUSE I'M A FANBOI WHO DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO TURN OFF CAPS LOCK!! DER!

DEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :? :?

(SLAPS CHEST WITH BACKWARDS HAND REPEATEDLY)

 

[djplanet]

Didnt realize about the 3 other threads. Kind of hard to tell what its about when the subject says "Hey guys" or something and it's about the R600's... nice. I dont read everything, just the stuff that interests me in the topics. Sorry about the redundancy. Won't happen again.
Oh, and you're right, I don't give a ****.

I agree with this, vague thread titles are annoying.

 

[djgandy]

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

Found this a little earlier and thought it was interesting. AMD right now for the money seems to cream the pants off the Cores. Let me say that again: FOR THE MONEY...
Also, before you Intel Fanboys start the crap: it's a straight comparison, no overclocking. Just the way tests should be.

Yes because a well budgeted pc always puts the cpu at 10% of the total cost :roll:

The memory they use s ums it up. Low latencies to favour amd There is no reason to use such expensive memory gfx etc when soley testing cpu's

 

[corvetteguy]

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

Found this a little earlier and thought it was interesting. AMD right now for the money seems to cream the pants off the Cores. Let me say that again: FOR THE MONEY...
Also, before you Intel Fanboys start the crap: it's a straight comparison, no overclocking. Just the way tests should be.

Yes because a well budgeted pc always puts the cpu at 10% of the total cost :roll:

Mine was 7%

 

[djgandy]

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

Found this a little earlier and thought it was interesting. AMD right now for the money seems to cream the pants off the Cores. Let me say that again: FOR THE MONEY...
Also, before you Intel Fanboys start the crap: it's a straight comparison, no overclocking. Just the way tests should be.

Yes because a well budgeted pc always puts the cpu at 10% of the total cost :roll:

Mine was 7%

How much was your EE and why did you buy a diamond encrusted case?

 

[RichPLS]

I agree with others who brought to light since this was a budget gaming system where pennies count, the Intel system does not require expensive memory like AMD does to game or even to overclock.
Using cheaper 533MHz DDR2 alone would have saved about $70 or so, making the Intel system cheaper...
That is the main complaint I see with the article, lastly it would be that you did not include temps or power draw measurements from each system.
Good job, and I hope your still open for comments...
Rich...

 

[djgandy]

I agree with others who brought to light since this was a budget gaming system where pennies count, the Intel system does not require expensive memory like AMD does to game or even to overclock.
Using cheaper 533MHz DDR2 alone would have saved about $70 or so, making the Intel system cheaper...
That is the main complaint I see with the article, lastly it would be that you did not include temps or power draw measurements from each system.
Good job, and I hope your still open for comments...
Rich...

We are talking DDR533mhz vs DDR1250mhz and 4GB of it at that. That's a lot more thatn $70. Running it slower = lower latencies. I'll let you make your own conclusions.

 

[corvetteguy]

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

Found this a little earlier and thought it was interesting. AMD right now for the money seems to cream the pants off the Cores. Let me say that again: FOR THE MONEY...
Also, before you Intel Fanboys start the crap: it's a straight comparison, no overclocking. Just the way tests should be.

Yes because a well budgeted pc always puts the cpu at 10% of the total cost :roll:

Mine was 7%

How much was your EE and why did you buy a diamond encrusted case?

My EE was $150 CAD and my whole system, excluding monitor was $2000 CAD

 

[djgandy]

My EE was $150 CAD and my whole system, excluding monitor was $2000 CAD

150 that's very cheap!

You cheated anyway. You overclocked. Your cpu would suck balls in comparison to the rest of your system without the overclock .


BTW: Nice choice on the cpu x2 3800 has been my recommendation of AMD cpu for the past 18 months. It's still the best bang for buck and still oc's well i see

 

[dragonsprayer]

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/Long-Time-Intel-user-switches-AMD-ftopict232263.html

i think i covered this last week even an ifb is tempted by such low prices

 

[Robteam70]

I personally dont overclock my CPU because I: A) Dont have the time to screw with everything for 2 days just to find my "stable" configuration

Just because you overclock does not mean you have to mess with your system to get it stable. I built my first computer last November with a 6300 and had no experience overclocking. Within the first day I had my chip running at 2.9 Ghz on stock voltage, and that was my first attempt, straight to 2.9. That is what it runs at now and my computer has never crashed, has never been unable to complete a benchmark and the proc is always under 50C.