the best CPU without going overboard?

USweapon · Post by **USweapon** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:27 pm

Im building a new comp with about 900-1000$ buget. got mostly everything picked out but im having second thoughts bout my CPU i want. i cant spend more than 300$ on a CPU but want the fastest one i can. I have 2 in mind now:

Core 2 Quad at 2.4ghz 279$ http://www.newegg.com/product/product.a ... 6819115017

Core 2 Duo at 3.0ghz 279$ http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819115028

which do you think is best?
also is there an advantage of having 2 extra cores in gaming?
is there another good CPU for the price?

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:32 pm

www.techbargains.com

This is the tool I've been using to shave off the prices of parts. I had a budget of 600 bucks and using this site, I cut expenditures down to $465.

Try it. You might get better prices on the hardware you're getting.

shadowkhas · Post by **shadowkhas** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:43 pm

I love my 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo. It's relatively cheap everywhere, and it's just right. A quad core really isn't necessary unless you're going to be multitasking with a lot of intensive programs, or running single programs built to take advantage of multiple cores. With gaming, 2 cores is plenty, in my opinion. RAM and graphics will be bigger bottlenecks than a processor.

metkillerjoe · Post by **metkillerjoe** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 6:58 pm

Intel Kentsfield Q6600 2.4 Ghz (Quad Core)

If you can squeeze it into your budget, it is well worth the money.

HPDarkness · Post by **HPDarkness** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 8:01 pm

I'm never going back to Intel after this: AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Windsor 3.2GHz 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket AM2
$179.99
Runs my games excellent. Computer runs so fast. Cheap price for such a powerful processor.

metkillerjoe · Post by **metkillerjoe** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 8:25 pm

When AMD bought ATI, they both clang onto each other hoping that one of them would keep the other from falling into a pit.

Just my opinion. I had an AMD processor before my Intel. It was horrible.

Its really just a balance game. Intel is awesome is now the preferred by the high performance community. In a few years, AMD will.

shadowkhas · Post by **shadowkhas** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 8:55 pm

Agreed. I felt Intel coming back after a couple years of everyone loving AMD, so I went with it, and it's decent and it does what I want. I can't say what AMD does, I haven't had experience with their equivalent products at all.

Evan · Post by **Evan** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 9:00 pm

In the last year I think AMD has already caught back up to Intel and passed them IMO. Mostly because of the faster processors for a lot less. As AMD's will run faster at much lower speeds (i.e. Intel 3.0GHz != AMD 3.0GHz). Thats why AMD created the 6000+, 5000+, ect... to help you compare speed equivalents with their Intel rivals.

Also AMD doesn't always go hand and hand with ATI. There are lots of AMD boards with Nvidia, and lots of Intel boards with ATI. Btw, most gamers prefer AMD over Intel anyways.

metkillerjoe · Post by **metkillerjoe** » Fri Jan 04, 2008 9:14 pm

Evan wrote:In the last year I think AMD has already caught back up to Intel and passed them IMO. Mostly because of the faster processors for a lot less. As AMD's will run faster at much lower speeds (i.e. Intel 3.0GHz != AMD 3.0GHz). Thats why AMD created the 6000+, 5000+, ect... to help you compare speed equivalents with their Intel rivals.

Also AMD doesn't always go hand and hand with ATI. There are lots of AMD boards with Nvidia, and lots of Intel boards with ATI. Btw, most gamers prefer AMD over Intel anyways.

They don't always go hand in hand, but they are the same company, which means that they, at least the top execs, would like to stay together.

Patrickssj6 · Post by **Patrickssj6** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:09 am

This is not the good time for buying a new computer right now...9-series coming out from Nvidia and AMD may release their new processor series (65nm and/or Quad).

For custom computers, I always went with AMD. Right now I'm running on an X2 Manchester 3800+ at 2.0Ghz. Until now, it has never failed me.

Either you get a decent quad core or a high dual core. The advantages of a quad core are not really being used right now.

0m3g4Muff1n987 · Post by **0m3g4Muff1n987** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:03 am

Patrick's partially right, but if you're going to wait for the AMD quad cores and 9000 series from Nvidia, you should prepare to spend a lot of money, because of course if you do wait but still want a decent price, you'll have to wait even more till the prices drop enough. I'd rather buy a product that's good enough right now and will still be good a while from now for a decent price rather than an awesome one that I probably won't even use the power of until a year from now that will burn a giant hole in my wallet.

USweapon · Post by **USweapon** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:00 am

k so ur all basicly saying to not get the quad core cause it will not use much of the extra 2 cores, right?. I dont really want to wait cause ive been waiting for a while now and anyway i dont wanna spend more that 270$ on one. I have no experience of AMD but only little of Intel. i do want to stay with Newegg.com cause i like there customer service and i always use them.

i guess now i need to decde on the Core 2 Duo or an AMD. whats is the best AMD out now for my bugget?

just to narrow it down, i want speeds above 3.0ghz, fsb 1066+, and overclockability and for it to be retail, not OEM and price ~270 and lower.

Patrickssj6 · Post by **Patrickssj6** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 10:20 am

AMD X2 are excellent overclockers and those are the standart dual cores from AMD.

I just checked prices...the most expensive X2 is way under your budget:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi ... hlon+64+X2

I guess you can go with the FX series..those are the elites of AMD dual core:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi ... hlon+64+FX

You have to decide...my 3800+ cost 350$ 1 1/2 years ago...now the best X2 costs 190$ and has almost double the frequency. xD

But you may want to go with Intel...since they have the upper hand right now on the market.

Evan · Post by **Evan** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 11:40 am

AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ Windsor 3.0GHz 2 x 1MB L2 Cache
Socket AM2 125W Dual-Core Processor- Retail

Link: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819103773

Price: 169.99

OR

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ Windsor 2.8GHz 2 x 1MB L2 Cache
Socket AM2 89W Dual-Core Processor - Retail

Link: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6819103771

Price: 139.99

I'm getting one of those very soon.

USweapon · Post by **USweapon** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:05 pm

well i got 2 wishlists completed. 1 is for the AMD X2 and the other is the Intel Core 2 Duo. Right now the AMD looks best being 300$ less however the AMD motherboards cant support much RAM at all. Here are my options:

A: Core 2 Duo @ 3.0ghz
6GB RAM (2x 1GB DDR3 1333 and 4X 1GB DDR2 1066)
total system cost $1094

B: AMD 64 X2 @ 3.2ghz
4GB RAM (4x 1GB DDR2 1066)
total system cost $806

which 1 is more worth it?
P.S. yes the Intel motherboard supports all that RAM

GametagAeonFlux · Post by **GametagAeonFlux** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:08 pm

4GB is way more than enough RAM...go with the AMD/cheaper setup.

Cryticfarm · Post by **Cryticfarm** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:15 pm

RAM (with xp)
512-Kinda sluggish
1 GB-Ok...
2 GB-Good
3 GB-Very good
4 GB-More then enough

shadowkhas · Post by **shadowkhas** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:17 pm

Are you going to be doing SLI/Crossfire with your setup?

Evan · Post by **Evan** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:17 pm

Your not looking very hard, all of these support at least 8gigs of RAM

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductLi ... And&Page=2

Patrickssj6 · Post by **Patrickssj6** » Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:24 pm

You can't run Vista/XP-32bit with more than 2.75-3.25GB of RAM....when the *** will you people learn

HaloMods "Classic" Read-only Archive

the best CPU without going overboard?

Which CPU is best?

the best CPU without going overboard?