- Nov 19, 2006
- 268
- 0
- 18,780
For most people's general purpose builds, I would go with a cheaper Intel dual and overclock the snot out of it for them, but this guy I'm about to build for is doing it almost completely for Nero 7 transcoding of AVIs to DVD.
I'm either getting him a $120 E7300, and hopefully clocking it into the 3.5Ghz range, or a $148 Phenom 9850 BE and crossing my fingers for 3Ghz.
Basing it off Tom's Nero Recode 8 benchmarks, I'm looking at numbers something like this:
Going from dual to quad nets about 50% improvement clock to clock (Q6600 = 500, E6600 =750, 75/50 = 1.5 = 50%) and I can attest to this as switching from my E6400 to Q6600 at the same clock reduced typical times from 30 minutes to 20 minute.
This would almost scream to go with the Phenom, if only it's single core performance wasn't so paltry (9750 = 650, Q6600 = 500, 65/50 = 1.3 = 30% slower clock for clock).
Assuming an overclocked E7300 can make up the cache difference and match an E8600 (500), and roughly extrapolating each Phenom 100Ghz as 25 seconds, we're looking at Phenom 9850 2.5Ghz = 625 - (5x25) = 500 seconds.
That's pretty much the same, so cost would have me lean toward the E7300 except I consider this guy will sooner or later appreciate having HDMI out integrated on the motherboard. I like the 790GX as a solid integrated GPU and overclocking platform, but am wary of the G45's lackluster video performance, and unsure of the Nvidia 9300 overclocking performance.
After typing all of this out, I think I may just stick with the E7300 and do a little more research on the G45 and 9300. If the thirst for quad ever arises, Yorkfields should be cheap and bountiful at the time, and still be plenty competitive with Phenom IIs....
Thoughts and suggestions are greatly appreciated. Especially on the 9300's overclocking ability vs. the G45 for hi-def playback, though I assume the E7300 would just bare most of the load and not be too much of an issue.
I'm either getting him a $120 E7300, and hopefully clocking it into the 3.5Ghz range, or a $148 Phenom 9850 BE and crossing my fingers for 3Ghz.
Basing it off Tom's Nero Recode 8 benchmarks, I'm looking at numbers something like this:
Going from dual to quad nets about 50% improvement clock to clock (Q6600 = 500, E6600 =750, 75/50 = 1.5 = 50%) and I can attest to this as switching from my E6400 to Q6600 at the same clock reduced typical times from 30 minutes to 20 minute.
This would almost scream to go with the Phenom, if only it's single core performance wasn't so paltry (9750 = 650, Q6600 = 500, 65/50 = 1.3 = 30% slower clock for clock).
Assuming an overclocked E7300 can make up the cache difference and match an E8600 (500), and roughly extrapolating each Phenom 100Ghz as 25 seconds, we're looking at Phenom 9850 2.5Ghz = 625 - (5x25) = 500 seconds.
That's pretty much the same, so cost would have me lean toward the E7300 except I consider this guy will sooner or later appreciate having HDMI out integrated on the motherboard. I like the 790GX as a solid integrated GPU and overclocking platform, but am wary of the G45's lackluster video performance, and unsure of the Nvidia 9300 overclocking performance.
After typing all of this out, I think I may just stick with the E7300 and do a little more research on the G45 and 9300. If the thirst for quad ever arises, Yorkfields should be cheap and bountiful at the time, and still be plenty competitive with Phenom IIs....
Thoughts and suggestions are greatly appreciated. Especially on the 9300's overclocking ability vs. the G45 for hi-def playback, though I assume the E7300 would just bare most of the load and not be too much of an issue.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram