PC Peripherals AMD or C2D

From my experience, it is better to spend a little more money and go for a Core 2 Duo and a good overclockable motherboard.

If you get an X2, you are pretty stuck when you will want to overclock in the future.

Say you get an X2 4200+ which is cheaper than the C2D E4300 and performs around the same. You are happy now.

But if u get C2D E4300 / E6300 now, you can OC to 2.4 / 2.8 Ghz in the future with some good cooling and the performance boost you get would be beneficial with heavy apps / games which could choke / stutter on an X2 which might not reach clocks above 2.9 Ghz even with good cooling.

Just my 2 cents. :)
 
Rio said:
The AMD X2 3600's and 3800's are close in comparison to an E6300
Click to expand...

You cud say tht about 4200+ but the 3600 n 3800 are just lagging in front of the E6300...but yeah, on sheer price:performance ratio, the E6300 is still expensive with a good mobo...but still, using a 3600+ and a E6300 system side by side, i will anyday recommend the E6300...and an MSI 965 P neo is quite a nice mobo to go for, at its price...
 
here is a average rating of the processors............

average.png


you can clearly make out the difference of speed.....as it is a average sum of some good benchmarks....taken from x-bitlabs
 
Eazy said:
A few days back I got the Opteron 175 (Toledo) which is a DUAL 2200mhz ... can anyone please tell what are the differences between this CPU and a X2 4400 Toledo ? Will the speed of these 2 CPUs be the same ? I get pretty low 3dMark06 scores with this CPU and my 8800 GTS - only 7577 marks - the CPU score are 1656. These are quite a bit below the scores of a C2D E6400 in a list from Tom's Hardware :(
Click to expand...

i think u are getting pretty decent scores considering u are running the CPU @ stock ....... X2 4400 and opty 175 are basically same processor ........

i am running my 170 @ 2.8Ghz and i get ~2200 CPU score in 3D marks06 ......
 
RiO said:
It all depends on budget... let me know your budget :) Right off the bat, however, I'd say if you're going C2D get an E6600 or it's not worth it. The AMD X2 3600's and 3800's are close in comparison to an E6300. Another drawback with C2D's is that good motherboards cost about 10k (used for 10k right here).
Click to expand...

Strongly disagree. An E6300 is probably the price catch compared to the price. Even with a half decent board like MSI NeoF you can oc it to 2.2 Ghz with stock cooling. At that speed it will probably kick but of AMD X2 4200+...
If you can find a decent board like Gigabyte DS3, an avg CPU cooler, you can easily oc the hell outta E6300. I have mine running at over 3 Ghz with Super Pi time of under 17 seconds. Now, can AMD X2 4200+ beat that?
 
The C2D will definitely be faster, but it will still cost double ! An E6300 is still retailling for abt 8.5k while the 3600+ and a good overclocking motherboard costs barely 7k. Also the MSI board is about 7k and it is hard to find.

Plus with the 7k you save you can add that to buy a graphics card which will make a hell of a difference. A e6300 with a 7900 GS will be much slower than a 3600+ with a 8800 GTS 320 MB !
 
BF1983 said:
The C2D will definitely be faster, but it will still cost double ! An E6300 is still retailling for abt 8.5k while the 3600+ and a good overclocking motherboard costs barely 7k. Also the MSI board is about 7k and it is hard to find.

Plus with the 7k you save you can add that to buy a graphics card which will make a hell of a difference. A e6300 with a 7900 GS will be much slower than a 3600+ with a 8800 GTS 320 MB !
Click to expand...

^^ Thats not true. It would depend on the application. If you are unrarring files, E6300 would still be faster, if you are playing games, than of course GPU power would play a crucial role.
 
techcheat said:
^^ Thats not true. It would depend on the application. If you are unrarring files, E6300 would still be faster, if you are playing games, than of course GPU power would play a crucial role.
Click to expand...

So what if unrarring takes a few seconds longer ? I would rather have a good graphics card to play games at higher resolutions with better effects than have a 10 secs faster rar unzipping time !

In any case if he wants real performance, and can afford it he would be better off going for a 6600 for the best performance
 
BF1983 said:
So what if unrarring takes a few seconds longer ? I would rather have a good graphics card to play games at higher resolutions with better effects than have a 10 secs faster rar unzipping time !

In any case if he wants real performance, and can afford it he would be better off going for a 6600 for the best performance
Click to expand...
Wow quite a one sided picture you paint!!! We are comparing apples with apples, not apples + oranges vs apples + garbage. Its not a comparo of how 8800 GTS compares to ATI X1900 rather Core 2 Duo to AM2. The guy who can afford C2D would probably in a financially stronger position to have a better graphic card anyways :bleh:
Secondaly C2Ds OC like crazy. I have mine running at 3.2 Ghz and it hardly breaks a sweat. So my $180 C2D coupled with a half way decent board like Gigabyte DS3 with value RAM (that I currently have----high speed memory being shipped from Newegg soon) beats the shit out of Athlon 64 FX - 62. One could argue that you can OC AM2 as well, but show me some numbers of AM2 overclocking higher than C2D.
C2D not just wins from AM2, it wins by rather a large margin. Thus there is a premium associated with the performance. AM2 can do nothing but push prices further down only to keep its sales from biting the dust.
 
^^LOL, it's funny that you say your overclocked E6300 is faster (beats the shit?) than an overclocked FX-62... are you absolutely certain? ;) Afterall, you have to compare apples to apples so no point comparing E6300 overclocked to FX-62 stock, right?
 
Back
Top