Lost in the cpu world

[totalwindup]

So here is my issue. But first of if i make any spelling or grammar mistakes i am very sorry.

I am building a new computer right now my computer is a 939 3800x2 3gb rm ati 2600xt 512 ram and i have lots of drive space. The computer runs and does basic things but the gaming world and hd world and everything super nice about have a good computer is starting to slip away and i have had the thing for almost 3 years now. And i will just move it over and use it as a small linux server.

But what i am looking at is new cpus. I know the setup for what ever i pick but as always its starts off amd or intel. Now i have had many amds and love them and the last one i got is the 939 one. But what i herd is the new ones just dont keep up with most of the intel stuff. I been looking at 4 cpus 2 from each of them.

AMD:
Athlon 6000+ x2, 2 cores @ 3.0ghz
Phenom 9850 BLACK EDITION, 4 cores @ 2.5ghz

Intel:
Core 2 Dup e8400, 2 cores @ 3.0ghz
Core 2 Quad Q6600, 4 cores @ 2.4ghz

I did not add the amd tri-cores not because there a bad idea but because some of them are the same priced as a amd quad core. but if someone has a good reason that i should go for one of those don't worry about speaking up.

All these cpus are about the same price. The issue i have with getting a quad core go as follows. Unless i am doing some sort of workstation or server that uses software that can take advantage of the 4 cores then it would not be worth it. The next issue is that quad cores are some what new still so if i get one now. By the time i get it there will be some super cool new updated quad core that would spank mine around. And could be on a new socket and everything.

There is is no issue with the dual cores as much they wont be making any more dual cores once they have a perfect quad core version just how there are almost any single cores anymore. In the long run any of these would be a HUGE upgrade for my desktop. And i dont do anything super on my laptop. So i am fine with that. So even if i take what i say about quad cores and go to duals then its which is better amd or intel. I been a long term amd person i have had my bad lots with both but when it came to amd it still was better it did its job and did not give me any lip.

With all the recent things that people say about amd it is kinda pushing me away. And the whole idea of a 45nm chip sounds super nice. And wold be really cool to have from what the performance boast is said to be. So if i am going to do that why not put 20$ more down on the intel side and get a quad core thats not 45nm but still a qaud core. Because people seem to have SO many issues with the amd quad core. So its never ending and i have been on this topic for about a month now. Just trying to pick which one i want to get. Because i know i am going to crossfire. 2 4850s which should also be a very nice upgrade but i just have no idea on which of the 4 cpus to even pick everything else has been picked even if i get amd or intel have the boards picked and its perfect but cant choose between them so any help any one could give on helping me with this would be great.

 

[totalwindup]

Well just to add i did some reading on over clocking the intel quad core is said to be amazing at overclocking but my quad core feear. The amd dual and amd quad were not so hot in the overclocking them. But the tri core was about to get up there to 3.0ghz so it would not be so bad because its made to run to but small things in the back ground and the bigger things like games in the dual cores. So in the long run the OS will seem like its off and i will have full dual core power for gaming or what ever.

So this leaves how the intel dual is also known as a fair over clocked as i read that it can get to . 3.6 on stock cooler and everything. So some upgrade and you can get it 2 4ghz. The thing is 3 cores at 3.0ghz sounds just a bit better then 2 cores at 4.0ghz. So really its down to is that extra 1.ghz worth it or not. I think about a little minor feature not to long ago i was randomly given a 900mhz celorn loaded linux but some web server stuff and it worked fine. Was able to handle websites and some basic stuff. So if i can run a computer on 900mhz i am sure one ghz is nice that is the speed of my moms old mac laptop which i see her using when i stop by. So i am not sure if intel has something special that i should look out for or the tri core is the thing.

 

[sorce7200]

Proud owner of a q6600 kentsfield running on a p35 ds3l w/ 4 gigs
6400 800 mhz ram, dual 250 gb hd's internal, 8800 gts(g92) 512
nvidia
Cpu O.C. to 3.6 stable (air cooled)
Gpu O.C. to 725 core, 2250 mem (stable)
I do video/audio editing, and some hard-core gaming also (crysis,cod4..etc..)
I am also retired, and do this for a vocation as well as avocation
for about 16 to 18 hours a day....still no overheating probs.
The quad core cpu is a very quick processor that even under the most
intense calcs thrown at it(raytracing, video conversion h-264 1080i)
output to an a/b roll station post prod record studio, I am still able to
launch and run several other progs simultaneously...office progs,
paint progs, Oblivion (24 fps exterior, 60 fps interior), even while
doing video conversions AND 3D Studio....whew.....and still have
never seen all four cores maxed... I use Everest to monitor the
cpu core temps and activity level....the temps remain stable at or
about 27 to 33 at idle, and have never been caught above 45
under load...with no single core ever reaching more than 45%
load.
Needless to say, I am sold on this quad setup.....
I do have several other much older system also(286,386,486,P,P2,
P3, and P4's) all currently working and running and they dont even
come close to the class of this quad.
From an Intel owners perspective that is.

 

[Wisecracker]

Your X2 3800 at 2.6GHz with 3Gb of RAMs is not holding you back a great deal.

As far as a new rig at this time you are pretty much in a 'dead zone' for cpu hardware and should wait until this Fall for the AMD 45nm and Intel i7.

The best $$ you can spend now is replacing the HD2600XT (as the new vid card can be moved to your new rig) and maybe purchasing a new monitor.

Depending upon your budget your best move may well be to an HD4850 for $160-$170. If you are feeling frisky you can add a 22-inch LCD for $200 (or a 24-inch for as low as $300).

And then wait a few months and see what AMD and Intel bring to the table.

 

[Zenthar]

For general use and/or people who do not upgrade often, I think the Q6600 is best. Quad-core will make every-day software run smoother because there are plenty of core to balance the load. Moreover, the industry seems to go toward more cores so software development will probably user multi-threading more and more to take benefit of it. Therefore the quad might have a longer life.

For gaming, I still think the E8400/E8500 would give a bit more bang-for-the-buck right now because of the higher clock speed and higher FSB. This will change as games are optimized for multi-core, but my guess is that it will take at least 1-2 years. If you are a gamer and don't mind upgrading once in a while, I think the E8400/E8500 is a good choice.

AMD isn't bad, but it could be better. IMO it's a good choice for low-budget gaming rigs because the CPU don't cost much (6000+ ~115$). A good 790GX MB cost about the same as a good P45 MB (~150$), but you get on-board GPU (which happens to be very decent for non-gamers) and Hybrid CrossFire if you add a dedicated graphic card. Might not be much, but still a "free boost".

Anyone found any benches of hybrid crossfire for 4850/4870, I can only find some for old 3850 (but the boost was 10-25%)?

 

[cmichael138]

You could also pick up an AMD 64 x 2 5000 Black Edition for about $70 and
then set the multiplier up to 15 to increase it to 3.01 Ghz.

 

[Grimmy]

Anyone found any benches of hybrid crossfire for 4850/4870, I can only find some for old 3850 (but the boost was 10-25%)?

I guess its hard to find because of driver support?

I only found one that was interesting, but they didn't run 2 4850's since the drivers they had were beta:

Radeon HD 4850 benchmarks

Dat's all I could find atm.

 

[Zenthar]

I meant hybrid between a 4850 or a 4870 and the 790GX on-board GPU.

 

[Zenthar]

You could also pick up an AMD 64 x 2 5000 Black Edition for about $70 and
then set the multiplier up to 15 to increase it to 3.01 Ghz.

Good cheap option, the AMD 64 X2 5400+ (2.8GHz) is 77$ on NewEgg.

 

[Grimmy]

Doh...

 

[Wisecracker]

I meant hybrid between a 4850 or a 4870 and the 790GX on-board GPU.

I think the 'hybrid CrossFire' with the IGP and a discreet card is limited to a Radeon HD 3650.

You can do a 'conventional' CrossFire on the 790GX.

I'm also a litle confused about some of the 'hybrid' talk - Does nVidia use the term to define 'powering down' the discreet card? AMD is trying the same thing but I can't recall their name for it or even if the drivers are past beta ...


As far as the CPU goes the OP should buy now for what he needs now. Future CPUs will always be faster, cheaper and more capable than immediate offerings.

If his software is not capable of running parallel threads across a quad he is better off investing the $$ in more ram, a raptor HD, better monitor or GPU, etc. ...

 

[totalwindup]

Now this is all very intresting. About what everyone has to say. Its nice to hear about the quad core and how how its super fast. and never gets over 45% on a single core. So that is super sweet. And if the thing about the E8400 is only better at it because of gamming just because of its clock speed i can always over clock the quad core to be 3.0ghz. It was also really cool to hear about the amd dual core. And just over clocking it to get the same speed as a 6000+. But no one relyed about my tri-core idea if anyone has any thoughts about that. That would help but all your feed back is helping.

And just to let you know the reason i cant really update my video card is because of my agp slot. I would if i could. But the new one i want to build is going to crossfire 2 4850s which should be fine. or if the 4850x2 is out then i will get one of those and then another and crossfire like that. Even tho the 4870s and 4870x2 are out. There a bit more high end then i want to go. When you buy the best thing out there. And then it gets lower and lower so fast you can feel the money leaving your pants.

So thank you very much i wish i could have some more feed back from alot of you guys.

Edit:

Its not that i have a money issue that i should wait till the fall for the new ones which i have been reading wont be out till second half of next year even if the amd ones are out in the fall. I wont get them till the intel ones come out so i can compare them. And just to let you know its 939 so the 3800+ is only 2.0ghz. And "trying" to play pc games is not very fun right now i can do the older games but none of the super nice one. I can just get a bioshock to run. So anything else after that and i cant run it. So best of all its not a matter of money but what to get now and upgrade as the mix goes on like i should have a while ago.

 

[Zenthar]

To me the Phenom X3 would have been a great idea but AMD's offering and pricing doesn't make it an attractive option IMO. You can get an Athlon64 X2 6000+ (3.0 GHz) for 112$ pleasing the low-budget crowd, their top-of-the-line in Phenom X4 9950 2.6GHz is 215$ and the Phenom X3 top at 2.4 GHz with the 8750 for 175$. If you do some "quick and crappy math" you get:■Athlon64 X2 6000+: 112$/(2*3GHz) = ~18.67$/GHz
■Phenom X4 9950: 215$/(4*2.6GHz) = ~20.67$/GHz
■Phenom X3 8750: 175$/(3*2.4GHz) = ~24.31$/GHz
You would need something like a Phenom X3 3GHz at 175$ to have a really good price/performance offrering.


As for overclocking the Q6600 to E8400 speed, you could also OC the E8400 to over 3.6 GHz ...

 

[totalwindup]

Yeah i kknow that people over clock those really well. My idea was to over clock the Phenome x3 to 3gz which i read about on a site last night. Which would be just as your saying and then the e8400 goess up to about 4.ghz and if you do the math its 9ghz total on the x3 and 8ghz on the e8400. But if i was to get the q6600 and clock it to about 3ghz which i have seen also. You would have a huge 12ghz of power. So let me do your crappy math now on the overclocked cpus

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600: 190$/(4*3.0GHz) = ~ 15.83$/ghz
Phenom x3 8750: 175$/(3*3.0GHz) = ~ 19.44$/GHz
Intel Core to Dual E8400: 170$/(2*4Ghz) = ~ 21.25$/ghz

So right now it looks like i will be getting a lot more bang for my for my $$ if i get the quad core and overclock it. i have seen them overclock the Phenom to 3ghz also but people just seem to not like it just because of the limited bandwidth on the boards. And also its a true quad core and nothing uses it on like the intels 2 duals one on top of the other.

Edit:

I the other thing is for all the intels i have had they cant take a beating like the amds i have had. I can but my amds through the UFC and they wont get mad at me. I never have overheating issues or anything. Nothing to do with i kept it at a high usage and it shut off the only thing was my x2 need more juice then my single core. So i had to upgrade the power. So that is another issue for me. Is even if i am getting a lot from the quad core. Can it take a good beating. But then again one poser said his has never gone past 45%.

 

[jj463rd]

I just noticed today that the AMD Phenom X4 9850 BE just had another price drop at newegg.It's now $184.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103249

Match that up with a nice 790GX motherboard and you will have a nice inexpensive system.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010200022+107191003+1071942103&name=AMD+790GX

 

[totalwindup]

Thank you but you guys are not making this any easyer for me to pick just as i thought i would drop the quad core you put one right in my lap that would be so nice to have right now. Which is temping me so much because i dont want intel right now no matter how much they seem to be doing over amd i just know amd just last longer then the intel ones. What seems to have happened is amd was doing better then intel but intel was making really long lasting cheaps but they realized that people will buy new ones. Before so amd still makes long lasting cpus so i am going to stick with that. So now just to push it down the line.

x4, x3, 6000+, or 5400+ oc @ 3.0ghz

 

[Zenthar]

If you insist on staying AMD, I say the cheaper the better, get the 5400+ Black Edition. The 6000+ wouldn't be bad either, but maybe less OCable since not a Black Edition.

 

[totalwindup]

The thing is they dont make it so easy like i dont mind some intel but its just iffy just bad past with them. The 6000+ has more chache then the 5400+ So i would go with the 6000+ before the 5400. And i would still have no issue having something like tri or quad core. Because the quad is just 9$ more then then the tri. So if i was to get a tri i would just get a quad. And its not price which is much of an issue i not stressing over the cost of 50$ extra.