Weird. No x3 720BE nor x2 550BE.

Never thought I'd see this, as GPU's tend to change much more often than CPU's do. Still, great idea and I hope it stays a monthly thing for us to look forward to.

Best CPU for the money? Good idea, imo. The end chart is rather clunky though :\

I thought the fsb for the pentium 6300 was 1066mhz. Intel chose to give it the 6xxx series name as to differentiate the fsb from the 5xxx series which are 800mhz.

This is a good idea, but we all know that this will not go over well with some folks. All in all I think the choices were solid, and could be defended with logic. But as was said in the article there are just too many variables. Kudos for taking the chance and writing this up, I'm sure it will help someone.

Formatting suggestion Put the series name and then just note the units from said line that share said tier. ex Phenom II 940, 920. or Core 2 Duo E6000, E6001.

I would have thought that the Athlon II would have pulled higher with such a massive clockspeed.

Hooray

There are so many factors in a gaming CPU decision that I think this creates more confusion than anything. Now, I'll have to talk people out of getting a Q9550 because they can build for less with an AMD board, for instance.
From what I have seen of the Athlon X2s, framerates are seriously impaired by these CPUs compared to more expensive CPUs. At some point, it has to make sense to spend money on CPU over GPU... I'm not sure where that point is right off, but it has to be considered.
Finally, I'm fairly certain the X2 6000+ was significantly stronger than the Kuma 7750. Are you sure the 7850 is better than the 6000+? The 6000+ actually costs less.

Good decision to add this to the GPU charts. I can't say i agree with everything in all the tiers (E6550 at 2.3GHz = phenomII x2 550 at 3.0GHz?), but then i've never agreed about everything with anyone..... ever. Good work Cleeve, i'm sure over time things will be adjusted and credit for great overclocking will be given and other changes will be made. A good addition to TomsHW

About time, I have wanted one of these guides for a while.

Its been a long time since I have considered AMD CPUs and its good to now see where they fit in.

Keep up the good work

It's good to know that my current CPU is not in the chart, so which ever I pick next will guarantee a performance boost (currently still with my ancient P4 HT 2.6GHz )

I really like the hierarchy chart (both CPU & GPU). With the ever dropping prices, I rely partly on the chart to know if it's worth it at that particular time. Even when I know by waiting for 2~4 weeks, there will be a faster CPU/GPU or rather the price dropped dramatically

Chowmanga is right - the Pentium Dual Core E6300 does sport a 1066 MHz FSB... must be a typo in the article, but weird since the article states how it's based on the C2D architecture (which have a minimum 1066 FSB). *shrug* All I know is them Pentium Dual cores rock. I built a cheap-o gaming rig with the "older" E5200 - stock 2.5 GHz OC'd to 3.5 (10.5x333) on air with the stock cooler (!)... HD4850 GPU ... and the 3DMark06 scores were actually a tad higher than the HD4850 paired with a Core 2 Duo E8400 at the same clock speed. Stable as a rock too. Signed, Pentium Dual core Fanboy

a very nice intel ad

Great idea.

Though I might suggest a couple changes:

First off, I own both an E8500 running at 3.8GHz and a Phenom II 940BE running at 3.6GHz, and I gotta say, with both running $190 at Newegg the Phenom II is clearly the better value. Even if it gives up a few percentage points on a clock/clock/core basis, the Phenom's four cores just hum along in any and all games while the E8500, much as I like it, does occasionally stutter. Crysis for example I can run all settings on Very High with the Phenom II, while the E8500 stutters on a few levels, which only clears up after I lower the Physics setting down to High. The Phenom II will also scale better with multi-gpu setups in much the same manner that the Core i7 did against the Phenom II in your recent test. I still like my E8500 but I bought it for $160 a year ago and especially with AMD's dual- and triple-core Phenom II BEs it's kind of overpriced. Although for non-gaming personal computing use it's still fantastic, and I can see why you make mention of the low power consumption.

Second, the E5200 should probably be co-listed as a tie with AMD's 7850. It's a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison, but the E5200 does have a higher ultimate overclocking potential. The drawback being that OCing success requires a reasonably educated overclocker and capable motherboard, the additional cost of which can negate some of the E5200's superb value. The 7850BE is still great though, especially for true budget builders who may not be as experienced with overclocking. The unlocked multiplier makes OCing completely brainless, and doesn't require any expensive motherboard to be stable and reliable over the long-term.

I might niggle with a couple other things but overall I think this is a great idea and not bad for the first stab.

The Phenom II x3 720 should probably replace the 710 and e8500 on this list. In several benchmarks (mainly gaming) the e8500 and 720 are about even, the e8500 pulls ahead in AVG, winzip, and a couple video encoding benches.

The 720 is currently priced at $119 on newegg.com

The biggest problem I have is with the hierarchy chart. This is only for gaming right? So all the encoding and synthetics are thrown out. From what I've seen, the Phenom IIs are on the same level of the Core 2 Quads, especially with the new AM3 DDR3. Motherboard and RAM prices are not factored in right? Yet only one PhenII is included with the top Intel Quads? The 945 needs to be moved up at least, and/or some Quads need to be moved down. Seems as though some non-gaming benchmarks have subconsciously influenced the hierarchy, or else unrealistic settings are being applied. 1650x1080 should be the minimum resolution considered, otherwise the best suggestion is to go buy a new monitor as a bigger monitor will produce the best bang for the buck.

nice idea,but incomplete without platform costs and platform upgradability,OCing is another consideration

@ da bahstid, it was quite clearly mentioned that OC'ing would not be a factor here. There are already too many variables to throw something as unpredictable as OC'ing into the mix

Great guide so far Cleeve! This guide makes decent reccommendations. Phenom II X4's are too close in price to core i7 920 to make this list, so their absence makes sense to me. The only surprise I had, was that the legendary PII X3 720 was MIA, but I think that the reason was hinted at in the intro, since the PII x3 720 is loved for overclocking.