Ok, i am shopping for anew computer on a small budget and i wanted to find a good cpu. I am running a Intel core 2 Q6600, and i am looking at the AMD 9950. for the most part the benchmarks are the same except "Sandra 2008 - Processor Multimedia" the AMD was about 10k and the Intel (Q6600) was 260k BIG difference but i don't know what this mean. I really just game on my computer (and amateur drafting) so should i worry about this or what?
also i have about $450 for the CPU, Mobo , RAM,( DDR2 800 2gb minimum) and Video card (and i have my eye on the Geforce 9800 GT 1GB got some decent scores on Crysis)
Nah don't worry. The Q6600 is a great and trustwortyh CPu that will serve you good. I know as I have one and have never loved a CPU more than it. Maybe its the 4 cores, maybe its the ability to OC to 3GHz. I don't know. All I know is its very fast and will last for at least another 1-2 years.
Actually some of the tests in Sandra is unfair to certain processors, especially older ones because it will use EVERY available optimization possible. Like SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3. Those stuff.
This means a processor (Like your Phenom 9950) that don't have the same extensions will look very slow compared to the processor that supports it but in normal gaming the performance should be a lot closer because not every game can be simplified to number crunching.
stridervm: Sandra is unfair to certain processors. That is a fact, but the Phenom's support all of these instructions: MMX(+), 3DNow(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4A, x86-64. So the Phenom's have the same extensions as the Core2.
tvsocks: Why upgrade if your running a Q6600? If you are please with it, overclock it a little. Or take the money for your new cpu to build a raid.
I am selling my computer to my parents as a casual gamer/office multitasking computer so i can upgrade a bit
Motherboard: ECS GF7100PVT-M3
Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 3.00GHz
Memory: DDR2 800 2048MB RAM (single stick)
Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 3650 DDR3 725 core 1.6mhz memory
And after stay up to 2am this is the best combo of what i can afford to upgrade to (if you can do better let me know)
Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300 2.5GHz LGA 775 Quad-Core (FSB 1333 vs Q6600 1066) and i plan to OC about 22% to 3.0ghz
Motherboard: BIOSTAR TForce TP43D2A7 LGA 775 Intel P43 ATX Intel Motherboard (supports 1600 FSB so OC should not be to hard on it)
Memory: DDR2 1066 2048MB (dual channel 1gb sticks)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce 9800 GTX (G92) 512MB 256-bit GDDR3 PCI Express 2.0 x16
^You could drop to a Q6600 and save $. I heard BIOSTAR TForce boards are good at OCing, but I have had a few dead BIOSTAR boards, so I personally prefer Gigabyte and ASUS. You could also save $ by getting DDR2 800 RAM. Try going 2*2GB.
yeah that would be good but then where would that extra $50-$70 go to? because after carefully looking at benchmarks only thing better then a 9800GTX is the new GTX 260 (a big reason is cause it has more on-board ram) but the price is $100 more. I will think about what your saying but if i bought this stuff would i be dissappointed? I want to play crysis and other new games that are coming out (Fall out 3, Fable 2. and Star Craft 2) and other stuff at high settings or near high.
I am waiting for this round of top processors to drive prices down, and for AMD mobo manufacturers to get DDR3, as well as all the old 65nm chips to clear the channel. What you have should be plenty good as a processor for now, as games are more video card intensive. I think this is a time to wait on CPU's for about 6 months, then you can get the next gen at an affordable price, with DDR3.