AMD or Intel

hey, big question.

On a computer mainly built for gaming/internet surfing (i do not do any video encoding or whatever).
Would i benefit more from a intel quad core or a amd quad core?

Don't know if theres a obvious answer, and it is kind of hard to believe benchmarks now a days since i have seen people shave off points here and there to make the other look better.

So if all i do is play video games and surf the web, occasional photoshop (just like to mess around)
Think AMD might be better? or Intel?

Most important thing to me is the Price:Performance ratio =]
25 answers Last reply
More about intel
  1. Intel q6600, enuf said.
  2. that is what i was first planning on getting, thought it was a worthy question to ask. lol
  3. I would have to disagree amd phenom 2 would be your best bet. only problem is they have only been out for a week and prices are still a bit high $300 to be exact. but if you overclock then its worth it.
  4. im tryin to stick to a budget, somethin like that would be.. pushin it close?

    I want somethin achievable, i know that i can save up as much as i want but then whats the point. i would end up spendin more and havin less for bills and stuff.

    My current build is 775 dollars.
    SO.. im gonna stick wit that. lol
  5. The new Phenom II beats the Q6600 in just about everything and if you are looking at $300 for a Phenom II, that is overpriced. I am still waiting for mine to arrive. I bought it off newegg for $235 (920). Plus, most AM2/AM2+ mobos will have BIOS upgrades so you can run the new Phenom AM3 when that comes out so you will have future upgrade options that you will not have by going with the Q6600 on the 775 socket. You can get mobo and Phenom 920 for a little over $300. Memory you can get for ~30 (4 GB) with mail in rebates. You mentioned nothing about video card but if you just call that $175, then that still leaves you with close to 300 for a PSU, case, HD, and optical drive which is manageable.
  6. PsyKhiqZero said:
    Intel q6600, enuf said.



    The q6600 is not a quad core processor. It is a multi-chip module.

    "The question still lingers “but this isn’t a true quad core CPU right?”, and as with the QX6700 the Q6600 is basically two Core 2 Duo processors built into a single multi chip module."

    http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/Q6600/index.php

    Native Quad Core (AMD) VS Intel's Multi-Chip Module
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ivx0XYMCZJw

    AMD wins by %20

    And don't forget about value:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwcKyrHHQac

    enuf said.
  7. i am not looking for upgrade ability really though, im lookin for a bang for my buck essentially. A system that will lost a few years with the exception of upgrading a video card. By then, the new sockets or whatever will not be a hole in my wallet and i will just get that later on
  8. Well then the Phenom II would still be the better processor
  9. So a phenom II is better than the q6600? by alot? and i mean in terms of gaming, no video editing whatever stuff =p
  10. Vos17 said:
    So a phenom II is better than the q6600? by alot? and i mean in terms of gaming, no video editing whatever stuff =p


    While I don't usually use the Inquirer as a source, they did put together a nice list of review sites for the Phenom II.
    Check out some of the sites that compare the Phenom II 920/940 vs. Q6600. While the Q6600 is not victorious in the benchmark results, you'll also notice that it does a good job holding it's own.

    So, check out the different reviews. I am not sure if there is a comparable Q9xx CPU, that is similar to the Q6600, since some of the reviews did not include the Q6600 in their comparisons.

    Judge whether the Q6600 is a good deal for your type of gaming.

    The Inquirer's Links to Phenom II reviews
  11. For general gaming nothing in that budget range is much better than an overclockable q6600, so I recommend to get that. The primary speed setter is your video card. The q6600 is cheap, so you can spend more on the graphics. Two years down the line, the q6600 may be an obstacle, but so would the Phenom II, as it seems only mildly faster. I think $300 is overpaying for it, but $235 seems reasonable.
  12. Great advice by NMDante ^ So much depends on what games you're going to play, what motherboard, what RAM, what GPU, what resolution etc. In some of the reviews they have core2 quads with DDR3 on X48 motherboards against Phenom2 920s on DDR2 790GXs, others show overclocked Phenom 940s against stock clocked Q9950s. Do more research, particularly with what you want to do with the system.
  13. price performance ratio. you can get a intel q6600 for 180, and a half decent mobo for about 90 bucks.
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131329

    now this is the first bench i've looked at for the phenom
    http://hothardware.com/Articles/Enter-The-Dragon-AMD-Phenom-II-X4-940/?page=8
    it doesn't seem to edge out the q9400 by much. The q6600 OC easy to 3.0 should easily match the phenom II.

    From the look at this benchmark from Hardocp
    http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTYwNywzLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
    It looks as if the core 2 is still better clock for clock then the new phenom II.
  14. I'll lay down what i got so far.

    I have a 24" 1920 x 1200 monitor
    Radeon HD4870 1gb
    4gb of ddr2 800 ram
    Asus P5Q-E

    i plan on playing call of duty world at war, Fall out 3, dead space.
    And then on games like star craft II, diablo III, and Elder scrolls V (2010 release).

    ideas?
  15. Well if you already have the motherboard, then a core 2 quad is a no brainer. Either a q6600 for the price/performance or a q9550 for the sheer performance.
  16. is the q9550 worth the extra hundred dollars tho?

    Thats not what i already have, its what i am getting.

    From what i have heard from other people that, this config, could last well into 2010 with the exception of upgrading video cards now and then
  17. heck if you already got the board, then why was the p2 brought up or did you just order it?
  18. its easy to spend other peoples money but my mentality when i build a computer is the hope of not having to upgrade until i feel like it, not out of requirement. using my insanity, i would get the q9550 if you are dead set on your parts selection you mention above.
  19. -Just to clarify once again-
    I never SAID i had those parts, it is what i am going to ORDER
    so i don't have a p5, it is just what i had in mind.

    So like i said, i mainly wanna use the computer for games, and really don't want to upgrade it for awhile (not many years of course, but at most 2-3)

    i was here askin for suggestions, based on price verses performance. If i can get a q6600 to 1333fsb and be close to the higher model ones, that why would i spend the extra 150-200 for it.
  20. I personally don't think the q9550 is worth the extra dough. But when add OC into the equation it is noticably faster then a q6600. The q6600 is tops out close to 3.6 Ghz at 1600mhz FSB. While the q9550 easily hits 3.4 ghz with a 1600mhz FSB.

    Only you can decide if you wanna spend the money.
  21. i know its a higher number if anyone wants to be funny about that, but is there really a huge difference between 1333fsb and 1600fsb?

    i am saying noticeable difference.
  22. probably nothing you will notice. may improve some benchmark cores.
  23. i ain't trying to say the extra money couldn't help.
    i just want to build a computer, and give myself a budget doing so.

    To be honest, if i didn't give myself a budget, i would probably
    end up spending more than i could afford in the long run.

    I am just fed up with my laptop, 8600m gt, 2.5ghz dual core, 4gbs ram, and it can't do much at all.. -.-

    I have always wanted to build a computer, but when i first was researching and new a TON about all this, it was the Pentium 4 and Radeon 9800 gt that was at the top of the mountain.

    Now technology is a lot different, that is why im on these forums, so i can get re-acquainted with everything and know im getting a good pc for the price (so far 775 is what i have shown u)
  24. The Q9550 is a good CPU, but if the $320 price is too much, then why not look at the Q9400 ($269@newegg), or if you can find one cheap, the Q9450. Both of the Q9400 and Q9450 showed improvement in gaming over the Q6600, and the Q9400 was in line with the Phenom II 940, while the Q9450 was a bit ahead of both.

    Just remember that socket 775 is near it's end of life. Same with AM2+ Phenom II, although you can use AM3 Phenom II with AM2+, if BIOS update is available. Add to that the upcoming AM3 lineup and Core i5.

    Either the Q9xxx CPU or Phenom II 940, not so much the Phenom II 920, would be your best bet for a gaming system. Again, with the Phenom II setup, you might be able to use AM3 Phenom II CPUs with existing motherboard(s), and with the Q9xxx, you can easily do a drop in upgrade of a cheaper Q95xx or Q96xx when prices drop.

    I don't think you will go wrong with either choice.
  25. FSB speed = max memory performance. since you ram is ddr2 800 *in dual channel it's speed is 1600mhz* Ideally you want to be able to run the ram as fast as you can. But your not likely to see a difference between 1333 and 1600mhz FSB.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Intel AMD Product