Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

E7200 or Amd 5400 black edition

Last response: in CPUs
Share

Should i get a e7200 core 2 duo or a Amd 5400+BE

Total: 18 votes (2 blank votes)

  • AMD Athlon X2 5400+ (Black Edition)
  • 13 %
  • Intel Core 2 Duo E7200
  • 88 %
August 13, 2008 5:38:06 PM

Should I get a e7200 with a 60 dollar motherboard or a Amd 5400+BE with an 80 motherboard. With the AMD i would overclock it and the Intel will probably stay at stock or small overclock. or is there another possibility for the same price?
August 13, 2008 5:39:57 PM

blessthefall said:
Should I get a e7200 with a 60 dollar motherboard or a Amd 5400+BE with an 80 motherboard. With the AMD i would overclock it and the Intel will probably stay at stock or small overclock. or is there another possibility for the same price?




Unless you have a preference fo rone vendor or another and to keept eh flames down, I'd say toss a coin. Either way you'll get a capable system.
Related resources
August 13, 2008 6:13:06 PM

An OC'd 5400+ would likely beat an Non-OC'd E7200.

But why you would not want to OC a Chip that can hit 4.0Ghz Fairly easily from 2.5Ghz boggles my mind..............
August 13, 2008 6:29:16 PM

zenmaster said:
An OC'd 5400+ would likely beat an Non-OC'd E7200.

But why you would not want to OC a Chip that can hit 4.0Ghz Fairly easily from 2.5Ghz boggles my mind..............

That's exactly what I was thinking.
August 13, 2008 6:30:07 PM

of course get the AMD.

Easy overclock. You will probably reach 3.1-3.3 GHz if using aftermarket cooling. Get the 780G motherboard so you can get the SB700 southbridge so later if you decide to swap to phenom to be able to overclock more.

Intel CPU with $60 motherboard will be just extremely inappropriate.
August 13, 2008 6:52:01 PM

e7200 in my opinion would be better. lower temps and much more headroom for overclock. Both cpus are good at there respected prices.
Good luck.
=]
August 13, 2008 6:56:27 PM

he won;t be able to OC the e7200 with a cheap motherboard, it won't let him

maybe if you can get a p43? i wouldn;t know if that is a good OC'ing motherboard
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
August 13, 2008 7:06:32 PM

Get the Intel and a cheap P35 board. You should easily get it up to 3.2GHz even on a cheap board, and likely significantly higher.
August 13, 2008 7:07:51 PM

the reason why i wont be able to OC the e7200 is because i don't have the money to get a expensive motherboard and a high end aftermarket heat sink.however in the future i might get a better aftermarket heat sink and then try OCing it .
August 13, 2008 7:22:29 PM

Go for the e7200. No need for more performance at the moment, in the future get the new heatsink and overclock, it's a fair bit better than the 5400.
August 13, 2008 7:37:46 PM

Overclock it too 3 ghz with stock heatsink. Just don't bump the v core.

AMD is woefully deficent at overclocking compared to any of intels chips, at any price level.

A biostar t force for 79.99 is both reliable and a good overclocker. P43 chipset with DDR2 1066 and PCI E 2.0 support. The ASRock twin board at the same price looks good but only has a few reviews and those are some what mixed.
August 13, 2008 7:41:43 PM

if you buy the 5400+ BE you HAVE to buy an aftermarket heat sink/cooler

so add at least $30 to the cost of the 5400+

but with the e7200 you can overclock with the stock cooler and reach the same speeds that you would with the amd with the aftermarket solution

so if you get the e7200 you're already saving $30 by not getting the heatsink/cooler
you can use that $30 to buy a better motherboard
then 2 or 3 months from now when you have extra cash you can buy a cooler and really crank up the e7200 way past anything the 5400+ could reach

you should get 3.4 on the e7200 pretty easily with just the stock cooler

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=558023

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=570897&highlig...

a c 142 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
a b À AMD
a c 148 V Motherboard
August 13, 2008 7:58:22 PM

What is the purpose of this build? The GPU may end up making a bigger final difference in performance, in which case get whichever is cheaper. If there will be little to no gaming, the AMD on a 780G board is awfully tempting for cheap, but if you will get a discrete GPU anyway, may as well go for the Intel on a P43 or P35.
August 13, 2008 7:59:39 PM

DEFINITELY E7200!

it's MUCH better for OC! I can run my E7200 at 3.3ghz at stock voltage (55 degrees full load with stock cooler) . and I've only got a $95 gigabyte p35 mobo

the E7200 has a FSB of 1066 (266mhz) with a 9.5x multiplier, but almost all intel motherboards today that supports 45nm processors supports fsb 1333 (333mhz), which means by simply setting the fsb to 333mhz in the bios, you achieve a clock speed of 3.16ghz!

the amd is unlocked but it has a higher TDP and it's much more difficult to achieve high overclocks.

I'm currently running my e7200 at 3.6ghz with a thermaltake hyper tx 2, and the temperatures do not exceed 63 degrees under full load even on a really hot day!

Have i mentioned the bigger cache on the e7200?
August 13, 2008 8:03:35 PM

If it were me, I'd pick an E7200 over AMD 5400 Black Edition.
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
August 13, 2008 8:11:04 PM

The stock cooler with the intel should easily be adequate for 3-3.2GHz.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
a b V Motherboard
August 13, 2008 8:13:08 PM

intel+45nm=4ghz oc amd+oc=3.2-3.3ghz max

intel=more cashe and runs cooler
amd=less pricey, can upgrade to am3 cpus when they come out since they will be backwards compatible as long you take am2+ mobo not the am2
August 13, 2008 8:20:05 PM

What's the point of this topic? It's pretty obvious,E7200.

....Overclock the E7200 to say,3.2ghz and you'll be fine in any gaming.

Or,if you're like me,don't overclock at all,just to save your warranty.

How much in total do you have to spend on this build?
August 13, 2008 8:30:15 PM

+1 E7200

I am hitting 3.8G with a cheap Golden Orb 2 HS&F. If you had a good cooler, you could easily hit 4.0. Mine at 3.8 is a work horse.

I am scoring 16800 on 3dmark06. I get a consistant 120FPS on COD4 @1680x1050, 4xAA, 8xAF, max settings. TF2, CSS and other games are 200FPS+.

My cpu temps never exceeds 55c.

August 13, 2008 9:13:08 PM

blessthefall said:
the reason why i wont be able to OC the e7200 is because i don't have the money to get a expensive motherboard and a high end aftermarket heat sink.however in the future i might get a better aftermarket heat sink and then try OCing it .

the 7200 will go far on the stock cooler and a p45(or35). and if you need aadditonal cooling the coolermaster hyper TX is dirt cheap.
August 13, 2008 10:15:46 PM

Alright Im going to get a e7200
August 13, 2008 10:28:41 PM

Onus said:
What is the purpose of this build? The GPU may end up making a bigger final difference in performance, in which case get whichever is cheaper. If there will be little to no gaming, the AMD on a 780G board is awfully tempting for cheap, but if you will get a discrete GPU anyway, may as well go for the Intel on a P43 or P35.


Depending on the usage (No-gaming, Etc..) the 780G board could be nice. Especially if you toss in the
"AMD Athlon X2 BE-2400 2.3Ghz 45W Dual Core Socket AM2 OEM Processor for $50 - $10 Code: AMD81210"
From New Egg.

Nice Cheap Quiet HDMI build.
August 13, 2008 11:52:39 PM

blessthefall said:
Alright Im going to get a e7200

Yea, definitely the e7200. I'm about to make a $500 computer with the e7200, with a $20 cooler 4.0ghz is possible. 3.0 to 3.2 on stock vcore.
August 14, 2008 12:08:59 AM

I can't believe I'm saying this, but get the AMD. Only because the motherboard is that much better, the E7200 is no doubt the better processor.
August 14, 2008 4:50:10 PM

themyrmidon said:
I can't believe I'm saying this, but get the AMD. Only because the motherboard is that much better, the E7200 is no doubt the better processor.


Actually i went on new egg and found a p43 board for about 70 bucks so i think ill get this motherboard http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
August 14, 2008 5:24:20 PM

E3210 said:
Overclock it too 3 ghz with stock heatsink. Just don't bump the v core.

AMD is woefully deficent at overclocking compared to any of intels chips, at any price level.

A biostar t force for 79.99 is both reliable and a good overclocker. P43 chipset with DDR2 1066 and PCI E 2.0 support. The ASRock twin board at the same price looks good but only has a few reviews and those are some what mixed.




You guys are amazing. Brisbane is regularly hitting 3.2-3.3GHz with close to stock. They are all 65W chips so the power is not much different. A 790GX board will perhaps allow even higher (FSB based, Brisbane isn't ACC-enabled). But if you are looking to OC you shouldn't be looking for cheap parts - especially the mobo. You get what you pay for.
August 14, 2008 6:19:51 PM

BaronMatrix said:
You guys are amazing. Brisbane is regularly hitting 3.2-3.3GHz with close to stock. They are all 65W chips so the power is not much different. A 790GX board will perhaps allow even higher (FSB based, Brisbane isn't ACC-enabled). But if you are looking to OC you shouldn't be looking for cheap parts - especially the mobo. You get what you pay for.


An E7200 can hit 3.5GHz with ease too, 3.8GHz is possible with a decent HSF, and has a 35 - 40% IPC advantage over Brisbane. You do the maths.

You don't need a high end mobo to overclock an E7200 anyway. It's a stock 1066FSB / 9.5x multi chip, so a simple bump to 1333FSB brings it to 3.16GHz, which is equivalent to an X2 @ 4.3GHz. I can virtually guarantee such an overclock is attainable at stock volts, using the stock HSF.

So unless you are suggesting all $60 S775 mobos will blow up running a 1333FSB C2D (which they are designed to run in the first place), I really don't see what the problem is. The issue shouldn't even be whether a low end mobo can overclock an E7200 to reasonable levels - as I pointed out any mobo can do the 1066 -> 1333FSB overclock. It should be whether the cheap $60 S775 mobos have the feature set the OP desires, as they are quite light on features. Generally they lack RAID, extra USB ports, Firewire, Gigabit Ethernet etc, but if the OP is happy with that then he will have a much faster platform overall.

Anyhow this discussion is now purely academic since the OP has already made his/her decision...
August 14, 2008 7:11:56 PM

is a triple core phenom 2.1 better than a e7200?
August 14, 2008 7:46:31 PM

BaronMatrix said:
You guys are amazing. Brisbane is regularly hitting 3.2-3.3GHz with close to stock. They are all 65W chips so the power is not much different. A 790GX board will perhaps allow even higher (FSB based, Brisbane isn't ACC-enabled). But if you are looking to OC you shouldn't be looking for cheap parts - especially the mobo. You get what you pay for.


You do realize that the e7200 has a 3x larger cache then this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

And can hit the same speeds with only 65 watts?
August 14, 2008 7:47:29 PM

blessthefall said:
is a triple core phenom 2.1 better than a e7200?


No, not for gaming.
August 14, 2008 8:58:43 PM

E3210 said:
You do realize that the e7200 has a 3x larger cache then this
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

And can hit the same speeds with only 65 watts?



yes, I realize that. The point is that if you clock them both as high as they go, the GPU will determine the gaming experience, so IT DOESN'T MATTER. And, there probably would be an imperceptible difference in perf with the same GPU above around 2.8GHz.
August 14, 2008 10:17:41 PM

The benchmarks I've seen say otherwise. The cache does matter (to a point). And by that logic the E7200 can hit higher speeds anyway, so it's still a better processor.
August 15, 2008 1:14:16 AM

E3210 said:
The benchmarks I've seen say otherwise. The cache does matter (to a point). And by that logic the E7200 can hit higher speeds anyway, so it's still a better processor.



You're talking about bragging rights. I'm talking about the experience. I never recommended AMD over Intel in a situation where the person has no brand preference. Though I admittedly wonder why threads like these pop up, I can't say that it's all just trolling. Intel has the faster arch right now but all you can get from it is unnoticeable everyday perf because X2 set the benchmark for Windows gaming and is still churning the frames.

If you get 120fps with an OCd 5400+, what more could you want? 140fps? Why do you think sites use min fps? SO you can see if those hardcore monster-filled scenes will be fluid. I haven't seen X2 no tbe fluid, though sites aren't really OCing Phenom or X2 and recording scores, so it's really difficult to say if Phenom at 3.3 (SB750 makes it easy) will run 2560 Crysis with a couple of 4870 X2s.
a b à CPUs
August 15, 2008 1:34:54 AM

Where did the OP say anything about gaming? Where did he say anything at all about what he intends to do with his system? Did I miss something?

August 26, 2008 11:46:50 AM

What most of these guys are not telling you is that Intel is having hudge probelms with warrenty returns on the E chips. Everyone forgets the voltage multiplier for these chips makes them bad OCers. In turn they can go faster but they melt 2 times as easy because the shear multiplier for power added is much worse returns then the older C2s. My point is that you are not going to break the 3.4 barrier for long. What you very likely will be doing is replacing your CPU before the end of the year if you try to keep it clocked that high. On the other hand the Intel will be faster over all but the X2 will and has proven itself to hit 3.2-3.4 and last for years to come.
a b à CPUs
August 26, 2008 12:22:14 PM

Will you just stop spreading crap. Almost everything in that post is pure BS. And another troll that cant or doesnt even bother to read the OP's post. Just comes in post pure BS. Even if all that junk you said was valid, which it is not. He said he was looking for a slight overclock on the Intel.

And if you go for a high overclock with a 45nm intel c2d and give it the same voltage you would give a high OC on a 65nm than you deserve to burn up your chip.
a b à CPUs
August 26, 2008 9:52:30 PM

jerseygamer said:
What most of these guys are not telling you is that Intel is having hudge probelms with warrenty returns on the E chips. Everyone forgets the voltage multiplier for these chips makes them bad OCers. In turn they can go faster but they melt 2 times as easy because the shear multiplier for power added is much worse returns then the older C2s. My point is that you are not going to break the 3.4 barrier for long. What you very likely will be doing is replacing your CPU before the end of the year if you try to keep it clocked that high. On the other hand the Intel will be faster over all but the X2 will and has proven itself to hit 3.2-3.4 and last for years to come.


so 5400BE has been out for years and years to prove its reliability. Dude you are as bad as the great baron of BS.
August 27, 2008 3:51:04 AM

uh, i have a 5400+ be on teh way, just bought it last night, be here tomorrow. but really, its cheap! i already had an am2 board, cant really help there, but this thing is nice. and its not "old" even tho the tech might be. it was just released in what, july? this august? who cares, get what you want, that is all!!!
August 27, 2008 7:24:20 AM

you bought a cpu fan/heatsink to go with it , right?
cause the BE doesn't come with one
August 30, 2008 4:07:01 AM

no i didnt...i have watercoolin out in the garage...anyone have thermal paste? i think packers in hawaii pitched my tube of as5...or its lost somewhere in a box that got tossed...this sucks!!
!