Intel vs AMD!!!

[whiteshadow_22]

I was looking at mid range CPU's from both Intel and AMD.

I checked out the CPU performance charts on this site to get a good idea of what I want to go for.

The AMD X2 6000+ or 6400+ = £70 + £80 respectively.

A slightly better but still comparable Intel E6750 costs £170.

Wtf?

Am I missing something really stupid here?

Why is there such a huge difference in price while a lack of great difference in performance.

Going by the stats on the site it would seem the AMD mid range CPU's are much better VFM than any of the Intels.

Advice, opinions?

Thanks.

 

[spuddyt]

look at the more recent 45nm products, the e5200 and e7300 - the old stuff that has been discontinued tends to increase in price as demand for people to upgrade to it increases

 

[papalarge123]

The E6750 is a far more superior chip in performance and thech than the 6000 or 6400+ AMD chips.

the price is mainly because apart from the x3 phenoms, there is no real competition in the dual core sector for Intel, so the prices are remaining the same,

also the Conroe chips are overpriced as they were maid almost obsolete when the Penryn chips were released.

have u also looked at the Phenom x3 chips, as they are around the same price as the 6000+ chips and with a marginal difference in performance.

 

[whiteshadow_22]

Thanks for your replies.

The main thing that was gearing me more towards the AMD's is that on performance charts they are competing with Intels that are much more expensive.

I'll check out those other CPU's you've both mentioned.

I'm looking at building a mid range desktop that'll do me for playing most games for a while.

I also record music so I'll get a Mobo which can take alot of RAM.

I know Intel are the "best" CPU makers but would you agree that in my price range AMD may be the best price\performance option?

Thanks again. Appreciated.

 

[xx12amanxx]

If your building from the ground up go Intel if have have an existing am2 or am2+ go phenom2..

 

[zenmaster]

look at the more recent 45nm products, the e5200 and e7300 - the old stuff that has been discontinued tends to increase in price as demand for people to upgrade to it increases

Both the E5200 and e7300 should both be easily configurable to outperform any AMD x2 CPU.

 

[whiteshadow_22]

Thanks for the replies.

Hmmm. I've got more possible CPU options than when I started now. lol

I've got an old AMD Sempron 2600 atm with 1GB ram and a 6600GT Geforce so that rules out upgrading on the same board.

Has anyone got any of the processors mentioned and how well do they cope with DirectX10 games etc?

Thanks for all your help.

 

[jamesgoddard]

Personally I would skip intel S775 chips - the platform is at the end of the road - no more CPU's on this socket coming...

That leaves you with AM2+ or i7 based systems - both with a good few years of upgrades possible...

 

[whiteshadow_22]

Thanks.

I was hoping to get one with a view to a possible CPU upgrade at a later point in time so I'll go for one or the other of those boards.

 

[nerdnic]

I'd say go with a new x2 7750 ($79). Guru3d shows it just a bit slower than the E8200 ($160) http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-athlon-x2-7750-be-review/1

 

[4745454b]

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/AMD-X2-6400,review-29612.html

As this review shows, the 6400 does compare well against the E6750. It comes out on top a few times, and isn't that much slower when it loses. If the price difference is small, its not a bad choice. The E6750 is still better overall as it outputs much less heat, and can overclock better. As already mentioned however, there are other current Intel CPUs that are a better choice.

 

[whiteshadow_22]

What does the nm stand for?

I guess this processor is more energy efficient and as it can be overclocked better due to that I guess it could possibly outperform a 6400?

The 65nm does have 1mb less cache compared to 2mb's for the 6400. Would that make much difference?

 

[xx12amanxx]

What does the nm stand for?

I guess this processor is more energy efficient and as it can be overclocked better due to that I guess it could possibly outperform a 6400?

The 65nm does have 1mb less cache compared to 2mb's for the 6400. Would that make much difference?

It's basically the size of the cpu a 90nm cpu will eat more power output more heat and overclock less than the same cpu built on say a 65nm process.

I think the 65nm 6400 would be a good cpu but i would rather you go for the zx 7750 instead as it is faster clock for clock and is much newer.

 

[WR]

nm = nanometer, a microscopic measure of the thickness of the engraving node. Generally, a smaller nanometer figure indicates a finer process. However, when the process is new, the engraving can be rough and not measurably better than a coarser but optimized engraving process.

AMD's 65nm, while not new any more, was never that well optimized. The 65nm "Brisbane" Athlons are slightly slower clock-for-clock than the 90nm "Windsor" Athlons, but the Brisbanes do consume less energy and overclock 100-200MHz more. Close call, if you ask me. From AMD's point of view, they can sell Brisbanes for cheaper because they consume less silicon real estate; therefore, it's usually more cost effective to get the 65nm part.

The Athlon64 x2 7750 is based on a "Kuma" core (really an "Agena" Phenom die with 2 cores deactivated) and is also done on the 65nm node. Overall performance is measurably better clock-for-clock than either Windsor or Brisbane, but power consumption is in between the two, and overclocking seems less stable (it only needs to be validated up to 2.7 GHz, not 3 or 3.2). Power consumption is no surprise, because performance enhancements alone tend to increase power usage, and the 7750 has an additional 2 MB of shared cache not found on the Brisbanes/Windsors.

Considering the list price of a 7750 and the average overclocking headroom, I'd say it's a marginally better value than even the Brisbane.

 

[grieve]

i7 920 ! do it... you know you want it.

 

[megamanx00]

For a midrange build you may want to look at the 5400 Black Edition as it's pretty cheap now and overclocks well enough. The 7750 is better, which is why it costs more, and is about on par with the E5200 in all aspects with the exception of heat. Users often get the E5200 to overclock it to around 3.0GHz, and it will offer simular performance to a 7750 overclocked to around 3.1-3.3GHz. Difference is, the E5200 will be running a bit cooler , while the AMD platform cost is likely to be less and more room for upgrades.

 

[Guest]

i want to build a new CPU but my budget is only $300?? is this enough to build a new cpu for amd??? what is the spec.???

 

[nsimo86]

i want to build a new CPU but my budget is only $300?? is this enough to build a new cpu for amd??? what is the spec.???

Its do-able but it really depends on what you are using it for. At that price you'd be pretty much limited to integrated graphics.

 

[V3NOM]

well AM2+ is at the end of the road too... AM3 coming soon for next gen phenom II's.

 

[nsimo86]

I hate when people say not to go 775 because its a dead platform. If you can only afford or need a core2duo or a Q6600 then go for it. It is still upgradable to a Q9xxx which will probably be in the $150 range in the next year or so. Plus I dont foresee many programs utilizing the full power of an i7 anytime soon that would warrant the need for it over a Q9xxx.

On the other hand, if you have cash to burn and dont want to upgrade for over 2 years then yes i7 is the way to go.

 

[megamanx00]

Athlon 5400 BE. $66
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103289

BIOSTAR A780G M2+ SE $59.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813138134

APEVIA X-Dreamer II 420W PSU Green $59.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811144022

Kingston 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR2 800 $36.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134730

Light on DVD burner, light scribe $24.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827106229

Western Digital Caviar SE WD3200AAJS 320GB $49.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136098

Leaving you with a total of 297.95 before shipping. While most decent 780G based board should support an upgrade to a Phenom II you will have to check the BIOSTAR website to be sure. This price does not include an Operating system and I assume you already have a keyboard, mouse, and monitor.

 

[Guest]

ok... tnx 4 the idea megmanx00..Im not a AMD fanatic i just want to try it so i can compare what is the diff. of the 2. The only thing i'd like in AMD they are cheaper than intel.

 

[Guest]

i want to ask if AMD 64 x2 6000 or AMD 64 x2 5200 is compatible in 790GX chipset???

 

[nsimo86]

any AM2 or AM2+ processor will work in the 790gx

 

[epsilon84]

You're comparing the wrong CPUs...

As been mentioned, the E5200 is probably the closest to being the direct competitor to the X2 6000+, performance is around the same level: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core2duo-e7300-pdc-e5200.html

It costs a little more than the X2 but runs cooler and overclocks better. Of course there is also now the X2 7750 which is in the same pricerange, so theres definitely a lot of choice here, each CPU has its pros and cons in terms of performance, power consumption, price, overclocking, etc.