AMD ATHLON X2 6000+ or INTEL CORE 2 DUO

[EtherRealRyan]

Help anyone,I want to upgrade but don't know what chipset to bye....AM2+ AMD ATHLON 64 X2 6000+ or INTEL 775 Core 2 duo ,as PC FORMAT mention that you don't need a Quad Core and that Dual core is still the best upgrade.I don't want to OVERCLOCKED the computer and i Found on some Games that the INTEL E7200 not supported. The AMD 6000+ is 3.0GHz and the Intel E8200 is 2.55GHz,I'm afraid that some games in the future may even not sopport the E8200,Intel is making a lot of cpu's and discontinue the old one's and Socket 775 is on his way out,I can get a AMD 6000+ cpu for R900 and Intel E8200 for R2300. I am also not worried that the Intel CPU is 45nm and the AMD 6000+ 90nm. what CPU coul'd i bye for my upgrade,Is the AMD 6000+ the one for gaming and multi tasking or is the Intel Core to Duo E8200 the cpu for upgrade...... THANKS

[Jaywalker86]

AMD's are awesome for budget all round PC's. And they do an allright enough job for a cash strapped gamer, if you pair it with a decent mobo (such as the AMD 780 or the 790 series).
But Intel Core 2's are the better chips at the moment and definately for the foreseeable future. Great overclockers! But you are going to pay a considerable premium for the setup.

Im assuming that you want this system to play games and your budget is moderate (R 5000 to R 7000 for the PC excluding monitor, keyboard, etc).

An intel system would seem to be the better option if you want the system to last for a couple of years (you can easily overclock it once more speed is needed). Also, once your graphics card is outdated, you could always just pop in a new one without having to worry too much about having to upgrade the rest of the system.
But with a moderate budget, your going to have to spend more on the CPU, mobo and maybe RAM (if you go DDR3, which you don't have to at the moment.) now, leaving less money for a decent graphics card.

With an AMD system (and i would strongly recommend going for an AM2+ socket rather than an AM2), you can buy a high-spec CPU (relatively measured agains current AMD offerings. Even go quad core if you want), a very good mobo chipset and still have cash to spend on a more-than-decent graphics card of your choice.
But once the system starts to show it's age, you might have to upgrade both the CPU and the graphics card in the future (whiich could be the near future ). This is because of AMD's beeing somewhat lacking in processing power of late.

Lastly, you must keep in mind that CPU's are no longer only measured on their rated frequency (the GHz'). I strongly recommend reading online reviews comparing those CPU's or similiar CPU's. There is a reason why the Intel's carry a premium...
Oh and this comes from the mouth of a serious AMD Fanboi.

Hope that helps!

[justinufo]

Intel core 2.No question about that.AMD cpus suck compared to intel.

[pienkie]

I know Intel is so much better atm, and in the foreseeable future it seems that it will stay that way, but is it worth paying in the difference between, let's say, R900 6000+ and a R2300 E8200?

Although I suppose you should compare with a more budget Intel offering, but you get the idea of what I'm getting at.

[Mow]

This is the last time im going to answer one of these threads.

IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO OVERCLOCK BUY AMD ITS GOOD ENOUGH FOR ANY GAMER. I WOULD HOWEVER CONSIDER THE 3x OR QUAD CORE PHENOMS AND A NICE AM2+ chipset 780/90 BOARD . IF YOU GET THE MENTIONED BOARD YOU WILL BE READY TO UPGRADE TO FUSION (yes fusion is a very big deal).

If however you intend to oc go intel .

[chowzen]

its not as simple as that....intel is not only for oc... a cpu's speed is measured by its fsb, iis core speed and how far its gates are from each other ( nm) ...so, if you get a wolfdale--E8200..u will be looking at the top end c2d chips around, 1333fsb, descent ghz, and importantly..45nm...that refers to the distance of the gates inside the cpu, that is where speed really matters, the closer they are, the faster it is...amd is ok..descent for a budget system, but as all things go, you get what you pay for...quad core is on its way out imo...but c2d, will hang around for quite some time still....

so i rate, go intel, go wolfdale...thats my 2c

[Stuart]

I don't want to OVERCLOCKED the computer

But Intel Core 2's are the better chips at the moment and definately for the foreseeable future. Great overclockers!

(you can easily overclock it once more speed is needed)

Lol, don't you just love it how people read a thread title, don't bother to read the actual post, and then offer their opinion. Is it really that inconceivable that the guy doesn't want to overclock?

@EtherRealRyan, where did you read about certain games not supporting the E7200 CPU?

[Frozenfireside]

I would say wait for the new AMD 45nm CPUs if you are on a budget.

Yeah the 'games not supporting that CPU' comment confused me as well.
I think he means required specs to play the game but I'm not sure.

[WiK1d]

its not as simple as that....intel is not only for oc... a cpu's speed is measured by its fsb, iis core speed and how far its gates are from each other ( nm) ...so, if you get a wolfdale--E8200..u will be looking at the top end c2d chips around, 1333fsb, descent ghz, and importantly..45nm...that refers to the distance of the gates inside the cpu, that is where speed really matters, the closer they are, the faster it is...amd is ok..descent for a budget system, but as all things go, you get what you pay for...quad core is on its way out imo...but c2d, will hang around for quite some time still....

so i rate, go intel, go wolfdale...thats my 2c

[Frozenfireside]

I'm with that facepalm. It was a terrible post.

[chowzen]

nooooooo!!!!!!ridicule **shame** why guys , why .....

[StarBound]

Intel is the better cpu at this time. So if you want the better you should go intel. If your on a tight budget then go AMD. Which ever you choose though make sure your graphics card is decent since it is 75% of the deciding factor of how you want to run your games.

If your going to overclock and you might screw it up go AMD. Cheaper cpu to replace

[Stuart]

If your going to overclock

*sigh* Why do I even try?

[GDI_Lord]

*sigh* Why do I even try?

Try what? To overclock? *duck*

[Stuart]

*sigh* Why do I even try?

Try what? To overclock? *duck*

[Jaywalker86]

@ Stuart: I defended myself against someone else as well before the PCFormat meltdown, but it seems that post got lost.
I did read the post and i did see that he didn't want to overclock, i was just telling him so that he knows what he could do, should he change my mind.

I know that from experience, cause i bought my current setup, thinking that once it was outdated, i would just replace it, not overclock it. But the volatile economy, my lack of a proper income and maybe a bit more confidence led to me dabbling in overclocking.
So i now regret not spending a little extra, so that i could reap better rewards now.
That's what i was trying to get at.

But anyways...

[Mow]

Dude , bottom line is that intel make better chips. But when it comes down to price vs performance on stock clocks the AMD still competes very well. Mid-high range quads from AMD can be had for like R1750. The three year old q6600 still retails for R2200 +. Rand for rand on stock clocks amd is a better buy ( in a pure gamers case ). Once you throw oc into the mix youd be stupid to buy amd.

edit.

Dude please show me the game that needs a 3.6GHz C2D

[IcePick88]

@EtherRealRyan: The way I read your post, I think that you just want a good CPU without the high costs. Enough CPU power to make the recommended requirements for games. So here goes:

You don't want to overclock, yet you need a CPU that has enough juice to run your games. It also looks like you don't want to dig in your wallet to deep.

So when you look at the above, AMD is they way YOU may want to go. And I say YOU, cuz it looks like that is what you are after. AMD offers good processing power coupled with low prices.

I think where the other guys gets confused is, they tell you what THEY would get, and it's not necessarily what YOU want.
I am running a 6000+ and it's perfect. I play all the latest games on it with no problems. As someone else said, also make sure you graphics card is up to spec, as that also plays a BIG role in how your pc performs in games. But for the CPU, if you are after cheap good CPU's then AMD is the one.

Let's say my CPU fries.

1. I have an Intel E8200 - Have fork out R2000+ for a new one.
2. I have an AMD 6000+ - Only need to spend less than half for a new one.

YET, I can still do everything on my AMD, than what someone else will be able to do on their intel.

It also sometimes boils down to preference. Some people swear by Intel, others dig AMD. I for one is a AMD fan, and will always run AMD CPU's in my machine. Just becase of what they offer. Cheap, yet powerful for my needs.

[Frozenfireside]

Dude please show me the game that needs a 3.6GHz C2D

Crysis on high?

[Mow]

Dude please show me the game that needs a 3.6GHz C2D

Crysis on high?

Dude up your gfx and a 2.4C2D can run crysis on high. What rez ? My 8800gts runs crysis on full detail(dx9) at 1280x1024 . My cpu run perfectly fine anywhere from 2 to 4Ghz without a hitch and a 4850 to my rig and dx10 at my rez is no problems.

My mate has the exact same rig with a 4850. He also run a 1680x1050 rez and has no problems with crysis dx10 all high.