Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intell or AMD X2 for $130 budget

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 15, 2007 5:19:44 PM

hi,
I want to pay $130 to buy CPU. I would like to know which one to buy,

1- Intel Core 2 Duo E4400 - 2.0GHz
2- AM2 - ATHLON 64 Bit X2 Dual Core 5200+
thanks,

More about : intell amd 130 budget

October 15, 2007 5:35:13 PM

If you plan on OC'ing.. I'd choose E4400

If no OC'ing is intended, 5200+

:D 
October 15, 2007 7:00:07 PM

i would get the core 2 duo. over the amd any day of the week. amd is ok. but intel own's everything right now on cpu's the core 2 duo is better then amd x2 by far. no am not a fan boy. i know because my buddy has a amd athlon 4200+ and i builit other computer from e4400 and it runs around the 4200+ like no tomorrow. so core 2 duo plus if you get a p35 chipset you can put a quad-core in it. if you need plus the p35 chipset support 1333 and 45nm intel quad core's with amd you got to use ddr2 800 with intel core 2 duo you only need ddr2 667. ddr2 800 if you are o/cing
Related resources
October 15, 2007 7:26:30 PM

My personal recommendation is for the X2 5200+, mainly because the Core 2 processors really shine when overclocked, and a good OC'ers motherboard for a Core 2 proc... well, let's just say there's not much "budget" about them. Not to mention that, once they come out, you can drop a quad-core Phenom processor into any Socket AM2 motherboard, so it renders the whole "do I have the right chipset in my mobo" argument moot.

killz86: Not quite sure what you're getting at there, but normally Intel's processors are far more sensitive to memory bandwidth available than their AMD counterparts.
October 15, 2007 8:55:12 PM

thanks for replies,
I don't Need OC. What I really need is Windows Common tasks. I need to use it for Server 2003 Services Tasks.
While It's usage is for file sharig(While Raid Enabled) and domain controller. (10 Workstations enviroment)
Which Cpu is stable and proper for this purpose?
Do you have any suggestion about Lower CPU which can do the same tasks ?

thanks

October 15, 2007 9:31:24 PM

s2002 said:
thanks for replies,
I don't Need OC. What I really need is Windows Common tasks. I need to use it for Server 2003 Services Tasks.
While It's usage is for file sharig(While Raid Enabled) and domain controller. (10 Workstations enviroment)
Which Cpu is stable and proper for this purpose?
Do you have any suggestion about Lower CPU which can do the same tasks ?

thanks

You can get a nforce 570 am2 board with tcp/ip off load for under $100 and that will help with network loads and software raid is not that good but you can use a pci-e hardware raid card.
October 15, 2007 9:48:54 PM

Buy AMD and you will be sorry for the rest of that cpu life.
October 15, 2007 10:07:31 PM

tik,
Would you please tell your statement reason.
I hope you could tell me your suggestion.
October 15, 2007 10:07:51 PM

s2002 said:
thanks for replies,
I don't Need OC. What I really need is Windows Common tasks. I need to use it for Server 2003 Services Tasks.
While It's usage is for file sharig(While Raid Enabled) and domain controller. (10 Workstations enviroment)
Which Cpu is stable and proper for this purpose?
Do you have any suggestion about Lower CPU which can do the same tasks ?

thanks





Either chip will do fine - AMD & Intel both have excellent quailty control. Just make sure whatever motherboard you buy is from a vendor you've heard of (e.g. Asus, nVidia, Intel, ATI/AMD).

As JOE_THE_DRAGON indicates, use a hardware RAID card.










killer_roach wrote :[/b said:



Not quite sure what you're getting at there, but normally Intel's processors are far more sensitive to memory bandwidth available than their AMD counterparts.
]

killer_roach wrote :
said:



Not quite sure what you're getting at there, but normally Intel's processors are far more sensitive to memory bandwidth available than their AMD counterparts.


Just to clarify this - the AM2 chips from AMD are very sensitive to RAM speed. You take quite a measurable hit in performance by using RAM slower than DDR2-800, whereas a non-overclocked C2D runs quite happily with even DDR2-533. This made a difference in system cost when the AM2 systems were first released, but now RAM prices have fallen so much that there is no reason to even consider RAM slower than DDR2-800.
October 15, 2007 10:13:25 PM

tik said:
Buy AMD and you will be sorry for the rest of that cpu life.

:sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic: 

That was very constructive....
October 15, 2007 10:16:36 PM

s2002 said:
tik,
Would you please tell your statement reason.
I hope you could tell me your suggestion.


With your budget, I suggest AMD X2 5200. On stock, it should outperform E4400, although both of them are exceptionally well processors.
October 15, 2007 10:42:10 PM

Yep the 5200+ would beat a similarly priced Intel anyday...without overclocking. But if you plan to upgrade a year from now, I think Intel would be better because Peryn is a socket 775 and all you have to do is replace the cpu. I believe that the AM2 socket won't last much longer, but this is just my guess.

Either way, I don't think you can go wrong.
a b à CPUs
October 15, 2007 10:42:40 PM

Since you're not OC'ing, the 5200+ is a better choice because AM2 mobos are cheaper than Intel mobos. The only "downside" to AMD is what exit2DOS pointed out about RAM.
October 15, 2007 10:57:49 PM

pfft.... damn fanboy's. On a budget with NO overclock, go with the 5200, otherwise go with Intel. Most of the people in here have been on point, don't listen to the few idiots that have no common sense.
October 15, 2007 11:30:37 PM

X2 2.3GHz BE-2400 AM2 AMD @ 45 watts will do just fine. $109 boxed. Put your money in drive and LAN throughput.
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2007 12:19:41 AM

Newf has a really good suggestion. The BE series will run a lot cooler and save you money on energy bills in the long run.
October 16, 2007 12:21:22 AM

The BE-2400 is a sweet chip! Combined with a 790G board, in my case Asus M2A-VM HDMI, it's a low-wattage wonder. I'm running 25% overclock at stock voltage. The Asus Quiet Fan slows the CPU fan from 3000 RPM stock, to 2000 RPM under load and 1600 RPM idle. Very nice. 790G boards should be good for the next generation of AMD chips if that is an issue.

Quiet, Low-power, inexpensive, not slow. What more could you ask?
October 16, 2007 1:07:06 AM

If the OP is on such a strict budget, I guess it'd be a good idea to take into consideration the price of a new mobo for both the Intel and AMD platforms. Odds are slim he has either a 775 or an AM2 motherboard presently, so that would suggest he might be better off going down the AMD road.
October 16, 2007 1:09:29 AM

Actually, AMD cpu buyers make me more happy because they help AMD get cash so they can survive. Otherwise I will have to buy a lot more expensive Intel cpu. So go ahead pay AMD even we get a poorer product but it will help us in the future. Without AMD we would have to pay $500 for Q6600.
October 16, 2007 1:44:58 AM

WOAH, Newf is totally right.

Man, that system would be quiet too. I am running @ 2.25 Opty 165 and it is great for this current gen of games.

45 Watts that is just crazy, you could leave that thing on all the time for recording TV and stuff and it would be cheap on electricity.

Is the stock HSF nice that it comes with Newf?? I love the HSF that came with my Opteron 165, heatpipes and everything.
October 16, 2007 1:58:46 AM

The X2 5200+ can be overclocked a bit despite what others are saying. You'll need good cooling if you persue a large overclock though.

October 16, 2007 2:14:05 AM

bitrate said:
The X2 5200+ can be overclocked a bit despite what others are saying.


Yes, that a bit is 10% maximum with a huge temperature increase. That means very shorter life span.
October 16, 2007 2:20:06 AM

cool n quiet is buggy on amd systems (riddled with system lockups). I cant comment on eist since I dont have a core2
October 16, 2007 2:34:25 AM

i got my x2 4000 from 2.1 too 3.2ghz 1.5v on stock cooler, why say amd cant overclock... amds do overclock well and they cost nothing compared to intels... im not a fanboy...
October 16, 2007 3:00:25 AM

Quote:
cool n quiet is buggy on amd systems (riddled with system lockups).


Out of curiousity I did a search for "cool n quiet buggy". The posts I found were from 2004-2005. Not current by any means.

Cool n quiet CPU's respond to requests from the Operating System to change speed. Those posts that seem to blame CNQ for the system not "spooling up" when there's work to be done should probably be directed at the OS (Windows) not the CPU or CNQ specifically. Certainly there is room for buggy drivers to cause lockups. If the CPU isn't stepped through it's voltages/frequencies in a proper order it can lock.

Lucky for me I'm using Linux and I can view the code in powernow-k8.c to see the how the magic works. Within the last week or so AMD programmer's have submitted some changes to powernow-k8.c going from ver 2.00 to ver 2.20 that is intended to work more effectively with the newer generation processors.

I've been running stresscpu2 (particularly good for K8 thrashing) nonstop for 24 hours with no sign of problems.

Windows users might want to look for newer powernow drivers for K8 if they still have problems. I guess if Microsoft hasn't figured it out by now, they never will.
October 16, 2007 3:35:12 AM

smelly_feet said:
cool n quiet is buggy on amd systems (riddled with system lockups). I cant comment on eist since I dont have a core2


You might want to provide a link to support that. The last time I heard, AMD's superior power consumption in idle is mainly due to Cool n Quiet, and it is actually a great technology.
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2007 4:21:42 AM

Okay to sum things up a bit. Here's what I would see for a price difference in general between Intel and AMD builds. Performance pretty close at stock speeds.

AMD Build
CPU - $120 x5200+
AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Windsor 2.6GHz 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket AM2 Processor - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Mobo - $71 shipped Asus 690G chipset w/DVI output
ASUS M2A-VM AM2 AMD 690G Micro ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

If you do the special combo above you pay $185 shipped, saving $6 on combo!
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductCombos.aspx?Item=N...

Memory - $90 shipped - $35 MIR = $55!! CAS 4 and good OC'ing RAM, if needed later.
GeIL 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

AMD build total ~$240 after MIR's

Intel build
CPU - $134
Intel Core 2 Duo E4400 Allendale 2.0GHz 2M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Mobo - $131 Cheapest Comparable mobo w/similar features of the AMD mobo. Especially w/onboard video and RAID.
Intel BOXDG33TLM LGA 775 Intel G33 Micro ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Use the same RAM

Intel Total ~$320 after MIR's, so you can see where your initial savings are.

The AMD build compared to a comparable Intel chip and mobo combo would have a difference of about $80. Now that is pretty impressive in the budget build arena. Obviously you could get a cheaper mobo w/o video, but the same could be said for the AMD build. The biggest difference between the two builds is the mobo prices. Intel mobo's are more expensive than the AMD ones, so you can decide what works for you, but I would recommend the AMD build, if your not OC'ing any.

My 2cp's
October 16, 2007 1:29:01 PM

Heh... well, I must have been a picky shopper.

I only spent:

$126 - E4400
$79.99 - MSI 650i Platinum OEM (just MB barebone)
$90.99 - A-DATA Extreme DDR2 800 2gb 4CL (30 Rebate)

$266

I'd say as long as you know what to shop for on decent prices, either system should do the job with no problems at stock.
October 16, 2007 6:19:46 PM

s2002 said:
I wonder why don't you trust these charts

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html


Why are you saying we don't trust those charts?

If your going to OC, you will see better results with the E4400 or E4300. But at stock, 5200 wins.

And besides that, the 5200 is clock at 2.6ghz while the E4400 is at 2ghz. You might as well compare it to the E6700 for the same speed (which E4300 or E4400 will easily over clock to), to see the true beauty and meaning behind over clocking.

But since your using for just common tasks, I'd even agree BE-2400 would meet your needs with added benefits. The 5200 is definately overkill as well as E4400.
October 16, 2007 6:20:01 PM

Off topic, I thought Skulltrail was socket 775.... didn't know it was a new socket.
October 16, 2007 6:21:30 PM

I've used AMDs for anything post pentium. I never liked the P2, P3, or the p4. (my previous setup with a slower AMD and the same amount of memory was a lot better and a lot faster than my P4 at work)
October 16, 2007 6:23:09 PM

:lol:  . o O (oh.. are we talking about the Pentium family now?)
October 16, 2007 7:20:22 PM

savery said:
I've used AMDs for anything post pentium. I never liked the P2, P3, or the p4. (my previous setup with a slower AMD and the same amount of memory was a lot better and a lot faster than my P4 at work)



Actually, I forgot to add that a friend has a conroe and likes it. He got it for a halfway decent price, too. My biggest complaint is/was that Intel tends to be quite a bit more expensive. My next build will likely be an intel just cuz.
October 17, 2007 9:18:50 PM

evongugg said:
Here is a comparative chart of speeds between AMD and Intel at stock:

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


Old Refrence for Price.Currently AMD Cpu are much lower.


Grimmy said:
Why are you saying we don't trust those charts?

If your going to OC, you will see better results with the E4400 or E4300. But at stock, 5200 wins.

Do you know any one who use OC for Processors on Server Purpose which need stability and Long Time Functioning.
a c 99 à CPUs
October 17, 2007 9:43:39 PM

smelly_feet said:
cool n quiet is buggy on amd systems (riddled with system lockups). I cant comment on eist since I dont have a core2


Neither EIST nor Cool 'n Quiet is buggy. My X2 4200+ desktop hasn't given me trouble in the year and a half I've had it, neither has my Core 2 Duo U7500 laptop. Both run just fine on either Windows XP or Linux.

@OP: If you just want a basic computer, you should be looking more in the range of an Athlon 64 X2 3600+, Athlon X2 BE-2300, or a Pentium Dual Core CPU. The BE-2300 and X2 3600+ are otherwise identical, except the BE uses less power. The X2 5200+ is quite a bit of overkill for basic tasks and the E4400 is also. You could really do just as well with a socket AM2 Sempron or a Celeron D 400 series, but with the dual-core chips being much smoother to use (especially with Windows) and barely more expensive, I wouldn't suggest a single-core CPU.

If I had to pick, I'd get an Athlon 64 X2 3600+, 2 1 GB sticks of DDR2-800, and a decent micro-ATX motherboard with the AMD 690G chipset. That should be less than $250 and provide an excellent, efficient unit for you to use as an office machine. The Pentium Dual Core E2140, 2 1 GB sticks of DDR2 (can be 533, 667, 800, it does not matter), and a G33 motherboard would work well too, but will cost more. Intel CPUs and motherboards cost quite a bit more than the AMD gear. Plus, the AMD integrated-graphics chipsets are much better IMHO than the Intel units are, not to mention the boards are at least $20 less expensive. The AMD 690G boards start at about $65 and the Intel G33 boards start at a little over $90. The price difference between 2 1 GB sticks of DDR2-800 and DDR2-533 or -667 is about $5-10.
October 17, 2007 10:18:47 PM

Is MU Missouri U? Which one is Mizzou?
a c 99 à CPUs
October 17, 2007 10:41:03 PM

weskurtz81 said:
Is MU Missouri U? Which one is Mizzou?


MU = University of Missouri-Columbia = Mizzou.

At least that's what our name is right now. About every other school in the state has changed their name in the last few years, usually dropping a regional description to gain a statewide description (e.g. Southwest Missouri State changed to Missouri State University) in hopes of gaining more funding from the state legislature. Our administrators don't want to be outdone and some want to change the official name from University of Missouri-Columbia to The University of Missouri. I'll pop some popcorn and sit back while the legislature debates the name change as all state university name changes must be approved by them. The last few have been real flamefests as the local politicians here fought the other universities' name changes tooth and nail and now they want to do the same. It makes the AMD-Intel debates here seem tame by comparison :D 
October 17, 2007 10:41:51 PM

My vote, the 5200. If you are not going to OC then AMD is the way to go. If you are going to OC then you have to go intel as you can OC them really well. But you have said you dont want to OC, so really you should get an AMD.
October 18, 2007 12:17:15 AM

i say go with AMD on this one, escpecially since you dont plan on overclocking
October 18, 2007 1:20:22 PM

s2002 said:
Do you know any one who use OC for Processors on Server Purpose which need stability and Long Time Functioning.


I don't know anyone peronally, but I wouldn't doubt there are people here that do have servers with OC'd CPU.

As a matter of fact, most experienced over clockers put their systems through allot of torture test for many hours/days to make sure it stable, and prolly still have it working, or moved on to something else to OC. :lol: 

I kind of take it that you think I'm pushing you to OC. Well I'm not. Buy your 5200+, or what other recommend. I've already mentioned that what you want is over kill for common tasks.
October 18, 2007 2:48:23 PM

for the stuff u said u'll be using your pc for, i'd say the BE is going to serve you just fine. spend the money on something else more crucial as was earlier suggested :)  though if you really wanted to choose between the 2 u asked about, and you dont plan to overclock, i'd say go for the 5200+.
October 18, 2007 2:53:10 PM

I'd wait until the first week in December. Get the new E2200 when it comes out. 2.4Ghz and looks to be very easy to overclock to 3.2ghz+(3.2 with pretty much stock settings or maybe a tiny voltage increase and nothing else)
!