Intel vs. AMD

theonejrs,

The 7600GT I linked to is actually a little better deal. $89.99 for the BFG with 580mhz core clock and 1450mhz memory clock vs. $109.99 for the eVGA with 560mhz core clock and 1400mhz memory clock. Both have 12 pipelines and lifetime warranty.

I don't see any reason why the Asus P5B wouldn't be a good mobo. Haven't heard much about it other than it has the Intel 965 northbridge vs the 975 northbridge on the P5W DH Deluxe.

I know you like G.Skill memory. I on the other hand am a Corsair XMS/XMS2 fanboy. Both have lifetime warrantys. The Corsair is just a little more for comparable timings.

 

I've heard some in the past. LOL

gina4xoxo
It's a good idea to ask questions about what you want with a PC. I'll go along with Mort81 on Asus boards. They're performance oriented to where experienced builders like them and they're user friendly for the beginner. Since you said you're not into gaming, you wouldn't need the dual GPUs unless you're using some high powered graphics programs. You can save money on a board, but don't write off a board just because it has SLI. I have an SLI board for its other features and only use one card on it. Pick out an Asus for the Core 2 Duo with the features you want and toss it out to us for opinions, if you're unsure.

On the matter of cache, I'd say you'd be better off with more. If you're not using any highly memory intensive programs, you may not use the extra cache at this point. But if the extra cache isn't there and you could use it later... Well, you get the picture. We're not talking much over $100 to move on up to an E6600 now. You know your budget though. If not OCing, you'd be better off starting with the faster processor. Your budget though.

 

Yay! Closure!*gets forgiven*

Take it from someone who has used Asus boards for some nice overclocks and heavy benchmarking and gaming. They're good boards. I have yet to find an Asus board that was of poor quality. Even MSI, DFI, and Abit have made some pretty poor products but Asus has shone through with a nearly flawless record.

I have used 3 Asus boards in all price categories. All prices at the time of purchase.

For the mid-low end, there's the Asus A8N5X. $78.00

For the Mid range, there's the Asus A8N-E $85.00

Both were used to push an X2 3800+ to 2.6-2.8GHz very easily.

And for the Highend there's the Asus M2N/A8N-SLI Deluxe. $135.00

Virtually both the same board except one for AM2 and one for 939.

I used the M2N(AM2) model to take my 4400+ to 2.6GHz and effectively match the performance of an FX-60.

All are great and all have been used to to do 400-800MHz overclocks and stayed absolutely rock solid stable. You can definitely push higher but that's all the higher I felt to go.

They offer decent tech support and nicely detailed manuals. Great for beginners and enthusiasts.

Now I can't vouch for 775/Conroe but I can expect that Asus has held their track record very nicely and you won't go wrong with an Asus board.

And for high quality memory I very highly recommend Crucial Ballistix. Any other brand name memory will do fine but Crucial Ballistix is my personal favorite. Held overclocks and voltage rises quite well without a single memoery error even after 24 hours of Sandra burn-in.

 

For RAM I prefer OCZ and Corsair. For my personal builds I usually go with Corsair performance series.

 

Take Note:
Now that's a pair of Gentlemen

Thanks guys!

Very Happy Computering,
theone

 

russ thats a nice cheap(in price not quality) setup and it winds me up how cheap prices are in the states

i memeroy serves me gina is after somthing for photo editing. this is somthing that will eat all and any resources you can throw at it, for me the 4mb cache in the 6600 or the 63/6420 would be ideal and possibly 2gb of ram so it can hold more images at once. in combination these would help improve the produtivity of the machine.

in the past(with the amd cpus, i no apples and oranges but) the 512 cache modle performed the same as the 256 cache cpus with 200mhz more speed. so a 1.8ghz(512mb cache) would perform around the same as a 2.0ghz with 256 mb cache. i know they aren't the same but i would guess that the extra cache in the conroes over the allendales is giving them about the same kind of boost.i would guess it will be the same of the 6320/6420 over the 6300/6400 where the 6320 will give around the same performance as the 6400 and the 6420 will be somwere in between the 6400 and the 6600. this line of thought is what promted my earier question to wether or not the 6600 will remain the best bang for buck cpu.

 

Mort81,

BFG has had quality issues from time to time. The EVGA is the better quality card. I would definately spend the extra $20 for it!

It's not so much that I am a G-Skill fan but that I've noted that folks have had less problems with using it in the Conroes. I use 2 GB of Corsair XMS cas2 DDR400 in my Presler. Right now I'm testing some Corsair Value select cas2.5 DDR400 in it just to see how well it performs. I also like PNY Optima.

I'm going to have to look into whether the Asus P5N-E can run an E4300 as it doesn't have an 800Mhz FSB. That would be my MB of choice for an E6400 or an E6600. It's supposed to be a great overclocking MB. It only has the 1333/1066 FSB and the E4300 requires the 800. Asus doesn't list it as a compatible MB for the E4300. I don't plan on running it slower than 1066 anyway, but it may not work at all without having a base starting point of 800MHz.

Happy Computering,
theone

 

Russ,

The P5W DH Deluxe supports both 1066 fsb and 800 fsb. It may be a little more than you want to spend though. Excellent OC capabilities.

 

Mort81,

My motherboard of choice would be the P5N-E. Problem is, no one can tell me if the E4300 will work in it because it lacks the 800MHz fsb. I wouldn't plan on running it slower than 1066 anyway, so until someone tries it I'm in the dark. If it would work, it would make an awsome combination as the P5N-E is one of the best overclockers. I'm going to call Intel and ask them!

I would prefer the E4300 over the E6300/E6400 because it overclocks better and doesn't consume as much power doing it thanks to the better multiplier. You can OC to right around 3.3GHz with a stock Intel cooler, something I wouldn't recomend doing with the E6300! The FSB would be around 1464MHz as opposed to 1884MHz for the E6300. I like that! Same performance with less stress on the motherboard and memory with far less heat.

Happy Computering,
theone

 

If you weren't going to OC the E4300, would that be better than the E6400 still because of the 2mb cache?
One more question -- and I know this is going to sound stupid so excuse me -- if you have a computer running at, say, 3.2 ghz and then get a dual that says it's, say, only 1.6, is it actually going to only seem as fast as 1.6 or since it's "dual" does it run at ~3.2? And the multi-threading or whatever that you see listed with AMD, does that apply to Intel as well?
So NOT overclocking, which is faster, the 4300 or the 6300/6400?

Thanks!
Gina

 

the 6300 is faster than the 4300, as will be the 6400 over the 4400 i asume.

this article will tell you all about it, page 3 is the one with all the charts.

 

I would have thought it'd be worse to OC the 4300 since it's slower to start with...

 

Thanks! That's so funny.... I'm the one who originally posted a link to that article a few days ago when I began on my quest for info on a new system :O)
Thanks for your help! I really appreciate all of it from every single one of you. You've all been very nice and kind and not too annoyed with some of my stupid questions!!

xoxo
Gina

 

does anyone know if an athlon/turion mobile will work in a normal 754 desktop mobo?

 

gina4xoxo,

Sounds like the E6400 is right up your alley since you don't intend on OC'ing (drastically anyway) and the E6600 might be a little over your budget.

It would be nice to know when Intel is going to release the E6420 for sure and what it will cost.

BTW, I'm by no means making your decission for you.

 

This is way off topic and I apologize but there are some brilliant minds here. I am looking to buy a new notebook pc and I'm not up on notebooks. I've read reviews comparing the Intel core duo to the core 2 duo of equvalent speeds and although the core 2 duo is faster it is not by a significant margin. Would a core duo 1.73ghz be faster than a core 2 duo 1.66ghz or about the same? Older technology verses new technology.

Also, I can get one model with a 128mb video card but it will cost about $100 more than what I can get one of another make with only onboard graphics. I know that in regards to desktop pc's, a video card (even a bottom end card) will tear up onboard graphics in all respects. I don't do any gaming but will use it to watch a lot of dvd's/video's. Will there be a significant difference in video quality on a laptop? Any help or opinions will be appreciated. Thanks.

 

Sam,

You have it exactly backwards! Because of the higher (9x) multiplier the fsb runs slower for the given speed of the processor. Remember Anandteck only tested it with the stock Intel cooler. My gut feeling is that with a good quality cooler it will overclock better than the 6300 and equal to the 6400, because for any given speed the fsb will always be slower for the E4300. For any given processor speed the E4300 will always run cooler overall. The chipset and memory will also run cooler as well as the demands on the power supply. The heat generated by the CPU would be about the same but the environment around it would be much cooler to start with as the computer is a lot less stressed at 1464MHz than it would be at 1884MHz for the same 3.375 with the 6300 that those figures work out to! There's no way you can hit 3.375 on a 6300 with a stock Intel cooler! It just can't disapate that much heat!

Happy Computering,
theone

 

Theone: Ah yes, of course, lower mhz, but significantly lower FSB. My apologies.
Mort81: The Core 2 Duos from what I've seen are quite significantly faster, somewhere of the region that a 2.16Ghz Core Duo would be about comparable to a 1.86Ghz Core 2 Duo, therefore for the speeds you listed, the Core 2 would win. With regard to the video card, depends what 128MB card it is. If it's an X300 or something, then no, but if it's , for example a Go7600GT it's definitely worth it.

 

The E4300 seems to be the best budget CPU to overclock at the present time.
It is capable of 3.4GHz + which is outstanding for a £110 CPU.

The lower FSB combined with the higher multiplier make it an ideal budget overclocker, as you can get away with cheaper DDR800 memory and the mobo doesn't have to reach extra high FSB speeds.

I'm thinking of getting one of these and putting it in my P5WDH board for the kids, as I'm now awaiting delivery of the Gigabyte DQ6 R2 board.

Nothing wrong with the P5 but I need more SATA ports and want to start playing with the extra FSB capabilities of DQ6.

I wouldn't recommend the E4300 over the E6300 or even the equivalently priced AMD CPU, unless you do intend to overclock, then it would easily be my choice of CPU.

P.S. I’m still waiting for the AMD’s to catch up, has anyone got any updated predictions as to when this is likely to happen?