Athlon x2 6000+ vs. Core 2 Duo E6600

mathiasschnell

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2007
406
0
18,780
Hey guys, I'm new to the forumz, but I'm a long-time reader, so I know a thing or two about what's going on lately with Intel and AMD and the rest of them.

Anyways, that's not the point. Point is, right now, I have a job and will soon have buying power and that means it'll soon be time to upgrade. I'm trying to go from a Dell Dimension 840 (or something like that) system to a custom built one that is a mid-to-high range gaming system. I'm looking to spend around 800 to 1200 USD, maybe a little more, and I've already gotten a pretty good setup idea from some people over at http://opentechsupport.net, but I also want to hear what you guys think.

For now, I'm basically set on the video card. I'm going for a GeForce 8800GTS 320MB, though the question is WHO to get it from, as I'm trying to get a lot of bang for buck here. Also trying not to spend more than 300 dollars on any one system part.

Also, I'm a bit torn right now in what processor I should get

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103773

or

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115003

So, what does TG think?
 

haywood

Distinguished
Sep 5, 2006
297
0
18,780
Core 2 Duo's rule the performance roost right now. E6600 is the sweet spot in the price/performance matrix.

Other sites to price in no particular order that I have used besides newegg

www.ewiz.com
www.zipzoomfly.com
www.case-mod.com

Might want to post a list of all the parts for a critique.
 

rugrat2553

Distinguished
May 2, 2007
5
0
18,510
If you look around there is a comparison involving these two and stock for stock the 6000+ is on the same level as the 6600 but the 6600 runs cooler and has much more overclocking headroom.

If I can find the link before someone else, I will post it.


Here, try this one:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

It lets you choose the benchmark, and the processors.
 

torcida_kutina

Distinguished
Dec 3, 2006
139
0
18,680
if you ask me (and you're not), i would allways take AMD 6000+ rather then E6600. I trust AMD more than INTEL. 6000+ with ABIT fatality AN9 32x is very, very "nice" combination. And you can OC that system well if you wish.
 

accord99

Distinguished
Jan 31, 2004
325
0
18,780
if you ask me (and you're not), i would allways take AMD 6000+ rather then E6600. I trust AMD more than INTEL. 6000+ with ABIT fatality AN9 32x is very, very "nice" combination. And you can OC that system well if you wish.
You "trust" AMD to do what more than Intel?
 

jjnguy13

Distinguished
May 3, 2007
119
0
18,680
M 2 cents...

Go for a SATA DVD burner.

Less IDE cables in the way is always better. And I don't think it costs much/any more than IDE.
 

turpit

Splendid
Feb 12, 2006
6,373
0
25,780
In the X2 6000 vs the E6600 comparison, the X2 6000 has a very, slight edge in price/performance, making it a slightly better purchase value. That said, it is a 90nm K8, meaning it runs hotter and consumes more power, and has very little overclockability. Future upgradability is also questionable. While AMD will produce new "drop in" chips for socket AM2, to access all features of those future CPUs, you will need to upgrade the motherboard as well. With Intel, most current socket 775 mobos, 965/975/680i/comparible chipset and up, there will remain viable upgrades for somewhile including the C2Q quad cores, though rumors of Intels 45nm Penryn compatabilty vary, so for the time being I would not consider Penryns a reliabe upgrade path.
 

torcida_kutina

Distinguished
Dec 3, 2006
139
0
18,680
I don't remember asking you a thing (acord99). Man (Mathias) asks for an opinion, and i wrote mine. So, if you don't like it, don't ask me that kind of question - i like more AMD than intel, you like intel more than AMD, and thats the way it is. If you want, we can start another topic about this, but don't ever put anybody's, not only mine opinion, on question in this kind of topic.
Thanks
 

speedbird

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2007
547
0
18,990
Look at it this way they will both be great at stock speeds, but the E6600 has more headroom for overclocking :) Even with no overclocking the E6600 pulls a head in most benchmarks. I doubt you would be disappointed with either though.
 

turpit

Splendid
Feb 12, 2006
6,373
0
25,780
Look at it this way they will both be great at stock speeds, but the E6600 has more headroom for overclocking :) Even with no overclocking the E6600 pulls a head in most benchmarks. I doubt you would be disappointed with either though.

Correct on the overclocking. The benchmarking varies, with some sites (obscure) giving a very slight advantage to the 6000, however, if you wish to discount those sites and rely on mainstream sites such as THG and Anand, then yes. I have no problem discounting Billy Bob Chens Kraplanistan Overclocking Paradice benchmarks :wink: , and agree, though overall the 2 are very, very close, in fact perhaps the closest we've seen from AMD and Intel in price/performance in quite some time.

On the price however, my earlier post was incorrect. Having checked prices just now, ZZZ has the E6600 @ $221 US, while the cheapest 6000+ I could find was $223 again, from ZZZ, giving the value advantage to the E6600, but only by a tiny margin.
 

epsilon84

Distinguished
Oct 24, 2006
1,689
0
19,780
In the X2 6000 vs the E6600 comparison, the X2 6000 has a very, slight edge in price/performance, making it a slightly better purchase value.

Not entirely true, the E6600 is the faster CPU overall, and costs slightly less as well so it definitely holds the edge in price/performance. From Xbitlabs:
http://xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/dualcore-roundup_8.html

average.png


Tallying up Anandtech's review also shows the E6600 winning the majority of tests.

The X2 6000+ loses to the E6600 in almost every way, except perhaps total cost of ownership as AM2 mobos can be had for very cheap nowadays.