AMD or INTEL?

Forum Homebuilt Systems : General Homebuilt - AMD or INTEL?

Tom's Hardware: Over 1.4 million members in 6 different countries available to answer all your high-tech questions. Sign up now! Its free!
Word :    Username :           
 

I know Intel is raping AMD right now but I'm looking to upgrade my pc. Is quad core really for gaming? I do not use multiple applications and I'm never going to go SLI only single gpu's. So i'm wondering should I stick with an Intel Quad Core Q6600 and overclock it from 2.4 to 3.2 on all 4 cores for $279? Or just save cash and go with AMD 6400+ 3.2 GHZ dual core w/o overclocking for about $180? (Which is half the price).

Another question as well...For just a gamer who plays games 99% of the time does quad core even help?

Right now I have a 7800GTX still using DX9 with 1 gig of ram on a Amd 64 4200+ dual core 939 set up and playing Hellgate London on high settings pretty well on 1280x1024 resolution. I just think my processor is a bit slow and I need more ram so im looking for a motherboard deal too cuz my 939 is outdated. I would appreciate your help i was planning on getting this combo for my pc upgrade and go quad:

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applica [...] ILT-Q6600B

I would appreciate anyones advice...thanks!



Message edited by balearic on 02-23-2008 at 01:59:29 AM
Sponsored Links
Register or log in to remove.

Intel>AMD

You don't NEED a quad-core for gaming but I love mine. You'd be fine with a C2D.

------------------------------ Asus Maximus Extreme : 2x Sapphire HD 3870 in Crossfire 850/1126 : QX9650@4.2Ghz : 2GB OCZ Platinum DDR3-1600 : PC Power and Cooling Silencer 750w : Samsung 22" 226BW 1680x1050 : Thermaltake ArmorPlus : WD 150GB Raptor : 2x Custom Watercooling Loops
Reply to hawkspur

I'm in the same boat with a 939 board and I have decided that I would feel much better spending more on an Intel chipset because I would likely notice much more of an improvement than if I built an AM2 rig. I like to say "wow" when i build a new system.

Reply to lonelypauly

Quad doesn't help a TON... but it is NICE....

I'd recommend the Q6600 if you can afford it. Especially since more and more games are being designed to use multiple cores, it's a good future-proofing step.

As for AMD... I wouldn't really recommend it unless you just plain don't like Intel.

If you wanted a cheaper solution to start up with Intel you could look at: GA-P35 DS3L ($80 now on newegg) and the E2160 1.6 stock OC's to 3.0 with a good HSF is now $72 on newegg.

Other than that not sure what to advise, with that same motherboard you can still use 4gb ram if you want, and upgrade to a quad later, or right off the bat. You can get a 4GB kit of G.skill ddr 2 800 on Newegg right now for $90.

------------------------------ I has compyoutorz
Reply to pous

Thanks great suggestions guys thank you

Reply to balearic

Multi core one way or the other is the way of the future. Games have talked about using it for a long time, and I would be surprised if it doesn't hit mainstream use for games soon.

Ever since I got my Q6600, I've never had any intention of going less than quad. So, now I have a qx9650, and I can't say I regret it.

------------------------------ Intel qx9650 @3.81GHz (10x multi) + EVGA 780i SLI mobo @381MHz FSB
2x EVGA 8800GT 512mb OC'd, OCZ DDR2 1066MHz 4gb
OCZ 850W PSU, Seagate 750GB HDD SATA 32mb cache CM Stacker 830 SE
Sound setup: FireFace 800, JBL 4328 speakers
Reply to resonance451

the E8400 is under $200 in alot of brick and morter stores
and compare that to the A2 6400 you will see a big gap in bang for buck

Reply to houston1264

yeh... in this circumstance both the E8400 and the Q6600 will throw the AMDs into the water and eat them....

sad, but true...

bring back the days of the FX-55!

Reply to amd_fanboi

Future proofing? no such thing in tech. Since only like two games right now use multiple cores i would suggest getting a C2D. Lets say you have a e8400@3.0 and running a single threaded program or game means you only have 1.5ghz speed compared to the 3.0 now imagine if you had quad divide your cumulative core speed by 4 and thats what speed you get in lets say COD2

------------------------------ a man a plan a canal panama - Backwards
Reply to Mugen

Mugen wrote :

Future proofing? no such thing in tech. Since only like two games right now use multiple cores i would suggest getting a C2D. Lets say you have a e8400@3.0 and running a single threaded program or game means you only have 1.5ghz speed compared to the 3.0 now imagine if you had quad divide your cumulative core speed by 4 and thats what speed you get in lets say COD2




that just sounds totally wrong lol the speed of the processor doesnt get cut in half just because its a dual core and it doesnt get divided by 4 when its a quad core.

Reply to mpavao81

I think your current system still has a bit of life left in it. I read on Toms that AMD is coming out with a completely new processor architecture. I think with your system, you can wait to see how AMD's new processor performs. Unless you've got that itch to build a new system - I'm guilty of that myself :P

Reply to smelly_feet
Tom's Hardware > Forum > Homebuilt Systems > General Homebuilt > AMD or INTEL?
Go to:

There are 639 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.

Please mind

You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.

Add a reply Cancel
Sponsored links
  • Ask the community now
  • Publish
Ad
They won a badge
Join us in greeting them