amd gaming cpu

[i sea]

im pretty well set on the type of cpu, amd 64 X2 5600+(2.9Ghz), or possibly a slower one in the same group. What would some advantages be of having a quad/tri core in a game like Crysis over the dual? I realize games dont really take advantage of them well, but i also saw something where a mobo might run faster with the X2+ processor. Am i interpreting this correctly at all or would the dual core be all i need?

**Note: i haven't purchased any parts yet.

 

[amdfangirl]

^ Is this an upgrade? What is your graphics card?

 

[cjl]

If you don't already have a motherboard, the best current gaming CPU would be an Intel E8xxx series (or a Q9xxx series if you want quad, which will be faster in some games and slower in others).

 

[i sea]

sorry for not posting the whole system.**none of this has been purchased yet

Amd 64 X2 5600+ Brisbane (2.9GHz)
DFI LANPARTY DK 790FX-M2RS 790FX ATX AMD mobo
Corsair (2 X 2Gb) 240 pin 800 DDR2
Seagate Barracuda 250Gb 7200 rpm 3Gb/s SATA
Pioneer 20X DVD+-R DVD Burner
2 X Ati Radeon 4850 Pci ex 2.0X16
COOLER MASTER Centurion 5
CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX 750W Power Supply

I'm pretty well set on going with AMD. I pretty much started the research with the graphics cards, then went from there. I noticed less arguing over which mobo's were best for crossfire with amd, and the amd 64 X2's seem to do pretty well with games, and with them i can get a pretty solid, low power card for $100. Im just having second thoughts as to whether using a phenom with AM2+ makes a difference since the 64 X2's only use AM2. I have a feeling the difference doesn't affect the performance, but that's what im here to find out.

 

[cjl]

If you haven't bought it yet, go for an Intel P45 based system (make sure the PCIE slots are PCIE 2.0 8x/8x when used for multiple cards if you want crossfire), or an X48. Trust me, there is nothing AMD has out right now that's even close to an E8400 in gaming, especially if you overclock the 8400 (3.6 is almost effortless, 4.0 should be quite achievable).

Here's a decent motherboard for crossfire for example - 2 PCIE 2.0 slots, both at X16 at all times: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813136047

Add an E8400 to that, and you will have an amazing gaming system with the crossfired 4850's.

 

[rwayne]

I am in total agreement with the last poster.

I wanted to support AMD/ATI 21 months ago and I severely regret not getting an Intel Core2Duo.

I have a 5000 Black Edition clocked to 2.9 GHz which is basically a 5600. The performance is nothing to get excited about.

You would be much better off getting an e8400 or some other type of Core2Duo.

 

[th_username]

go with 5000+ black edition and 4850

overclock it

 

[royalcrown]

phenoms stink !

 

[Sharft6]

i own a 5600+ with a radeon 3850 and i agree with every thing cjl says.

i would recommend something like an e8400. i think you will feel the 5600+ to be quite underpowered compared to your gfx solution even when gaming.

if it REALLY must be amd then i'd head for a high end phenom or athlon

p.s. ocing my 5600+ to just 3.1Ghz shows quite an increase in fps with some games such as supreme commander forged alliance and all source games (and probably alot more games if i had a better gfx card or 2).

 

[jeb1517]

"amd gaming cpu"

title made me lol

 

[jimmysmitty]

where does phenom come into this? oh wait it doesn't.

Actually the OP did ask about a quad/tri core. Only quad/tri core I know of from AMD is Phenom.

To the OP, a quad/tri core will not do you much better in a game like Crysis. It would help as there would be 1 or 2 more free threads for other apps to use and Crysis is more dual core optimized than tri/quad. But since dual cores can OC to higher speeds a dual is a better option.

And what you have is at the high end of the spectrum really. Only thing you could do to go higher is get a Intel mobo and a E8400 since those can OC to 4GHz on air.

But as it is if you want to keep your current setup then what you have is one of your best options.

 

[galta]

+1 for jeb1517

 

[draxssab]

I think your CPU will be a bottleneck soon, you should go for a 6000+ Black Edition, with unlocked multiplier you can overclock it pretty well and this is probably the best AMD you can have for gaming. I personally have a 5000+ BE and pushed to 3.5GHz it can run everything pretty well, so i supose that the 6000+BE can make it better.
Don't forget to get a CPU cooler, as they are not supplied with BE CPU!

 

[compy386]

Newegg has a good deal right now on Phenom 9600 with a 4850 combo. I just picked it up and installed it. Comes to under $300 for both after rebate. I was going to go with an E7200 but decided this was a better deal. Plus I got a 780g board so when I'm done with it as a gaming computer, I can convert it to a HTPC.

 

[50bmg]

intel board with C2D e7200. OC.

E7200 $129:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115052

The e7200 can OC to 3.8 on air (see my sig). I dont even have a good cooler. With good cooling 4G+ is reachable. I get 53c at load.

E7200 = cool, fast and CHEAP.

 

[kassler]

If you want to play advanced games or on high res monitors then AMD is better than Intel. It isn't that important how fast the processor is though. phenom 9550, 9750, 9850, 9950 is going to rock.

Intel has problems with advanced graphics because the FSB can't handle the traffic between processor and video card. The performance will be a bit slower because of that

 

[kassler]

(can't edit messages...)

phenom is best because hypertransport 3.0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperTransport

 

[nachowarrior]

790fx is a good chipset. I think i read something about crysis actually scaling pretty decently (for several cores). and don't listen to these people. I have a 5000+ dual core and a gigabyte 3870 and can hit over 10k in 3dmark06 all on standard settings. The down side to buying an amd x2 cpu right now is that newegg is sold out of BOTH black editions. And for all intensive purposes most software doesn't really take full advantage of quad cores yet. and for all practical purposes intel has "quad" but it's not technically quad. The only cpu's i would recommend if you're looking for more high end would be the 6400+ black if you can find it, or either the 9850 black or the 9950 black... seems to be what you're aiming for. Both have been reported to easily hit 3.0ghz... and possibly higher if you do some more intensive mods a little later on. anyway, that's my 2 cents. Not to mention at that price point, it's a quad core and goes neck and neck with the q6600 or whatever that turd is... making it a good buy at 205 9850 and 235 9950 on newegg. (price as of today). If you can find the 6400+dual core black... that will perform just as well until things really kick up with multithreading. oh, and both quad black editions have super fast memory controllers... so that's a plus.

ps: 3850 isn't really that great of a card. and 5000+ brisbane 100 bucks or less and hits 3.2ghz if you want to cheap out on the proc and still get good performance.

 

[nachowarrior]

also, th_username pretty much just mentioned the best bang/buck combo you're going to find.

 

[rodney_ws]

I'd like to know how the OP came to the conclusion that an AMD processor is ideal for his new gaming rig. If it's just some sort of random personal preference... buy it. It's not my money! If you actually care about value and performance, well you should be in the Intel camp. As far as video cards goes... you're definitely on the right track with the new ATI cards.

 

[cjl]

If you want to play advanced games or on high res monitors then AMD is better than Intel. It isn't that important how fast the processor is though. phenom 9550, 9750, 9850, 9950 is going to rock.

Intel has problems with advanced graphics because the FSB can't handle the traffic between processor and video card. The performance will be a bit slower because of that

This is complete garbage. The FSB is not a limiting factor on games, and at high resolutions, the graphics are the limitation. Plus, if you look at any gaming benchmarks out there, the E8400 wipes the floor with most other CPU's (quads included) in most games, aside from the few that are optimized for >2 cores (FSX, Supreme Commander)

 

[zenmaster]

If you want to play advanced games or on high res monitors then AMD is better than Intel. It isn't that important how fast the processor is though. phenom 9550, 9750, 9850, 9950 is going to rock.

Intel has problems with advanced graphics because the FSB can't handle the traffic between processor and video card. The performance will be a bit slower because of that

Can you link some Reviews to show this.

Seems that Reviews at Tomshardware.Com, XBitLabs, AnandTech, and others I have read show the opposite where the AMD chips can't come close to competing.

 

[the last resort]

if you really want the fastest AMD processor, you can wait for the Deneb, which is AMD's 45nm processor. It is rumored that it will have a base clock of 3.0 GHz. The only downfall is that it has a really high voltage (~1.6!). And there will be two kinds released, one has 6MB of L3 cache, the other has none. Eliminating the cache apparently improves thermal, and is compatible with the AM2/+ socket. (Even tho it is AM3)
Right now I'm running an AMD system, and for my next CPU upgrade, I was gonna grab the Deneb, but it appears that the Deneb is slated for a launch around christmas. So that means I may pick up a 9850 for $200 before then.

 

[kassler]

Can you link some Reviews to show this.

Seems that Reviews at Tomshardware.Com, XBitLabs, AnandTech, and others I have read show the opposite where the AMD chips can't come close to competing.

They never test on high res with AMD. What they should test is the most powerfull GPU’s on the most demanding games. And also use one AMD and one Intel. AMD gains some from fast memory also, using slow memory hurts AMD more than intel.
Two reviews here where slower AMD processors win over Intel on high res
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_q9450/
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2320536,00.asp

 

[uguv]

At stock speeds the low to mid price intel and amd offerings are pretty close in performance on games and desktop applications, and you probably will not notice much of a difference either way.

If you overclock then the intel chips will be quite a bit faster because they have more overclocking headroom.

If you go for a high end chip then intel is really your only choice because amd doesn't really have a high end chip.