Intel vs. AMD

Not really, but then it was only 10%, I should imagine a 50% OC on a Conroe would be quite effectual.

 

o ok thanks sammorris

 

I need some advice. I bought a Gateway a few hours ago, because, Gateway gave me a better deal, as opposed to Dell, and I didn't want to waste time with building my own. My question is, would you all agree that the following specs are respectable for an 1900.00 computer (including tax and shipping)?

AND

Would it have been better if I went with an AMD instead of a Pentium for this computer? Can I overclock the CPU in a Gateway, or is it locked like a Dell? I think I might have saved a few hundred dollars if I went ahead and did it myself, but I just don't have the time since I am in a Masters Program in College. Any valid advice would be great.

Thanks,
Thor



Item Unit Price
Gateway FX510X $1,804.99

Operating System:
```````MS Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005 (Update Rollup 2)
Operating System Backup Media:
MS Windows XP Media Center Backup Media

Application Software:
MS Works 8.5

Security Software:
None

Processor:
Intel® Core"2 Duo E6600 (2.40GHz,1066MHz FSB, 4MB cache, non-HT) $171.20

Memory:
2048MB 667MHz PC5300 Dual-Channel DDR2 SDRAM (2-1024MB modules)
Motherboard:
Intel® 975X Chipset with DDR2 and Intel® Core Duo support
Hard Drive:
500GB 7200rpm Serial ATA II/300 HD w/ 8MB cache (2-250GB hard drives) $68.48

Media Card Reader:
9-in-1 Memory Card Reader

Optical Drive:
48x/32x/48x CD-RW Drive

Optical Drive:
16x Double-Layer Multi-Format DVD Writer (DVD±R/±RW/CD-R/RW)
Backup Media: Cyberlink CDRW and PowerDVD Solution (6-Channel)
Chassis:
Gateway 7-Bay Tower Case

Monitor:
Gateway 21" Widescreen HD Performance LCD Display
Video:
NVIDIA® GeForce 7600GS 256MB Dual DVI - Dual Link w/ HDCP & TV-Out

Keyboard:
Gateway® Elite Multimedia Keyboard

Mouse:
Soft-touch USB Optical Wheel Mouse

Sound:
Sound Blaster® Audigy® 4 Sound Card

Speakers:
Logitech X-230 2.1 32 watt Speakers

Modem:
56K PCI data/fax modem

Additional Software:
Intel® Viiv® Technology

Channel:
Direct

Chipset:
Intel® 975X Chipset with DDR2 Support

Expansion Slots:
(3) PCI Expansion Slots (Filled),
(1) PCI-E x1

Expansion Slot
(available). (1) PCI-E x16 Expansion Slot (available)

External Ports:
(6) USB 2.0 (2 in front and 4 in back),
(3) IEEE 1394

Firewire
(2 in front and 1 in back),
(1) Serial,
(1) Parallel,
(2) PS/2,
(1) RJ-45 Integrated LAN,
(1) VGA, (1) Microphone, front audio ports

Certification:
Energy Star Compliant

Network:
Integrated Intel® 10/100/1000 (Gigabit) Ethernet

 

looks like you did ok , you could probably have built that for for a little less yes.

i wouldn't bother OC(ing) it you should be fine at stock (OCing box systems isn't a good idea anyway)

what power supply does it have? and what are the brand names of the optical drives?

for a virse scan go with either "Trend Micro" "NOD32" or "Kaspersky"

 

You didn't think to ask us before you bought it?
It's not too bad a system, but as with all prebuilds, has a slow graphics card, that'll struggle with higher end games. There are far worse cards out there, but bear in mind the 7600GT, 7900GS, 7900GT, 7950GT, 7900GTX and 7950GX2 are all above that card in the range...
Overclocking is probably not worth it with a stock system, the components won't be up to it even if it's allowed.

 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814143049

Estuansis save your money and get a way better vid card.

 

Actually a stock conroe e6300-e6400 will at least match the x64. that's the 2mb cash.oc these and amd has a hard time with 80% of benches. Then you go to the stock e-6600 intel core 2 duo.. amd has nothing to touch it + 4mb cash. Then you go into oc'ing this chip with a PREMIUM mobo.. not MID RANGE, and you can unlock the multiplyer, which gives you more varaince in oc'ing options.

Now while the build for this is not cheap.. it give you unmatched perfomance. period! Now as far as oc'ing 50%. If that could happen who would want that. chip life would most certainly be reduced even with the absolute best cooling. and at 20% to 30%oc'ing nothing can touch this on air.
Now while it is said I am an Intel fanboy, I will say that the best value and performance for your buck(until you cross over to the conroe) are the p-d's and better are the AMD x64's. Period!!! lol
With the right combination of mobo memory and chip you are well on your way.
One note: while some are getting good results with cheaper boards, think long term... Get the best MOBO and MEMORY for your chip. This will get you the better results in the short and long term.

As far as vid cards this months monsters are next months baby's.

 

The 7600GT is a bit better, but now he's already bought it it's a pointless upgrade. I'd just settle for the 7600GS (assuming you've already ordered it), it's not terrible, just not fast, and then when you can, get a card that's significantly better, like a 7900 or X1900 series.

Lol Baltekmi, Fanboy is as fanboy does. From a value standpoint, in the medium to low price sector, Intel and AMD are about even. The E6300 and 4200+ are similarly priced and powered, and as you said, what's the point of extreme overclocking? Only when you get to the 6600 does Intel have no competition, and that's a bit expensive when you factor in a decent 775 board and some high quality DDR2. A 939 build is still IMO the best for your buck at the present time, because such bargains as the A8N-SLI SE can be had.

 

sammorris
exactly what I said... you get what you pay for. by the way the I was talking about the e-6300 not oc'ed. When oc'ed there is no amd that can touch it. There are 3 boards that can acomplish this.

For budget concerns the Gigabyte Ga-965P-DS3 which is the board that Donald used to overclock his E6300 with but if you're into gaming then one of the next two boards should do well. The premium boards of choice is the Asus P5W DH Deluxe and the Abit AWD9 Max. But if you're into using only single graphics card then the Gigabyte board is $100 less than the other 2 and it will over clock higher. For memory you can use any several makes but here is where you might need to spend some money to get to the high speeds. I tend to recommend 2 gigs but you can use the same specs for 1 gig setups. Memory makes that are doing well include G-Skill and Corsair DDR2 800 PC 6400C4. The timings to look for are 4-4-4-12 because that gets you modules with the micron chips that have been so successful overclocking Conroe. The vary price often because of the heat spreaders used to cool them but if you get them at those speeds and timings they are made with the same chips regardless of the manufacturers name on them.
hope this helps you.lol

 

Strange post for someone who said there wasn't much point in overclocking!

 

[bold]thor9978[/bold]

i would upgrade the videocard to a 7800-GTX or 7900-GTX or GT

also make sure you have a good power supply (at least 480watt) i would go with a 550watt if it were me.

and i am pretty sure gateway uses NEC optical drives which are pretty good

 

I'd recommend this X1900GT and Hiper, dirt cheap power performance. For $300+shipping, you can make that PC a monster.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814142075
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16817128001

 

sammorris

I must be getting old because there is nowhere I said that. And to ALL the amd fanboys on here I also said AMD and intel were better buys for a good high speed computers without spending the money to go core 2 dou. You need to get all your facts straight and be a lil less defensive. I think I have been straight forward and fair. It's not my fault that after so many years of being 2nd dog that Intel now has a better product. Yes it is expencive to do a new build with core 2 duo. But compare apples to apples. An amd2 build is right up there without near the performance. It is good for all of us when they compete closly. I am sure it is a heartbreak for those who in the last 6 months spent all that money(intel too) for prosessors just to see the bottom drop out! I don't even know why I bothered to post here again. It is the same childish, misinformation and non informed wnat to be's. To that I say good day to you sir!lol

 

And good day to you, because as I keep repeating, a 4200+ AMD gives the same sort of performance in a majority of applications as the E6300, and they're about the same price. it's done on purpose, baltekmi.

 

If you are building anew system, then going down the AMD route is not a wise move.
Cost wise there is no benefit in choosing AMD systems over Intel.

If you are looking at top performance board then they cost pretty much the same for the Intel and AMD support.

When you start paying £120+ for a board then an extra £20-40 or so is not much difference, especially in the whole system cost.
Considering they both use DDR2 memory, and all other parts except the CPU can be used on either board, then it does just come down to the board and the CPU.

An E6600 2.4 GHz Intel core 2 will cost £205, an AMD 4600+ 2.4 will cost slightly less.
As far as performance goes, there is no comparison; the Intel’s now wipe the floor in every way with the AMDs.

Having used a 939 FX60 before using an E6600, I can see a major difference in all performance indicators.

Someone mentioned that overclocking a CPU by 50% is not a wise thing to do due to life shortening.
Firstly having the option to do it is at least an advantage, and providing heat is kept down, then lifespan is unlikely to be shortened in any measurable term.
Considering the useful life of any high end CPU is only going to be 2 years before it is worthless anyway, then it will easily last that long.
The basic facts at this time in PC production, is that the AMD chips are good, but the Intel chips are better (much better) in performance, heat output and power consumption.

 

sammorris

Please! Same sort of.? OC BOTH (which the lowly e-6300 can easily go to 3.2 on air with the gigabyte setup I mentioned on a prior post.)
and the 4200+ doesen't have a chance. But what are we talking about.. do you read any of the post fully??? I am in agreement that you can now build a great system using both intel and amd "older tech". Heck, I have a asus budget board with a d-805 oc'd to 3.4 on air with budget ram using onboard vidio that runs circles around my p-4 setup. Which is really old tech now. Like BIGDK said/If you are building a new system, then going down the AMD route is not a wise move.
Cost wise there is no benefit in choosing AMD systems over Intel. I further that a bit by saying both MIGHT BE EQUAL. Yes, I am an intel fanboy. But give credit where credit is deserved. I have both Intel and Amd builds. Both serve me well. You need to do more research on your info and back up your statments with facts.
FACT: I do not need to do a build with a core 2 duo (e-6600) to beat any Amd processor out there. Check out Tom's hardware guide and other's to get some real info.

 

Interesting reading here:
http://www.mikeshardware.co.uk/RoadmapQ307.htm#AMD Altair

 

Interesting link.
I knew that AMD were finally going to get the 65nm technology off the ground, but they are unfortunately playing catch-up.
It doesn't look as though they are making any real design changes in their CPUs, so although they will be cheaper to produce and be less power hungry, I don't see any major improvements in performance.
It is likely that they will overclock slightly better, as the power consumption should mean less heat to start with.

Also quoted in that article:
Intel Core 2 Quad (Yorkfield) CPU is expected to be released in Q3 and is expected to be based on a 45nm process and feature two 6MB L2 caches (one cache for two cores), making a total of 12MB L2 (2x6MB). Yorkfield is also expected to feature the 50 additional Penryn New Instructions (SSE4) and feature a clock speed of 3.46 to 3.73Ghz. Yorkfield will be paired with the Bearlake chipset family and will feature a 1333Mhz or 1066Mhz FSB speed.

Intel Core 2 Duo (Wolfdale) desktop CPU is expected to be released in Q3. Wolfdale is the Dual Core version of Yorkfield based on the Penryn core and featuring 6MB of shared L2 cache running on a 45nm process. Wolfdale is expected to feature clock speeds of up to 4Ghz and can run on a 1333Mhz or 1066Mhz FSB speed. The TDP of Wolfdale is expected to be 57W.

Basically you'll get an even more efficient CPU that has massive advantages in cache, and far higher clock speeds.

I'm not an Intel fan boy in any way, as this is my first primary system based on Intel for quite a few years.
I also long for a day when AMD release a product which blows the Core 2 etc... out the water, because that means a faster PC for me.
But realistically the day when AMD becomes the first choice CPU again for any top end machine is quite some way off in the future, if at all.

 

wow , how much faster can theses cores get. theres no end to it huh guys

 

BigDk,
This is the one that interested me:
AMD Athlon 64 X4 / FX (Altair) is expected to be released in Q3 on a 65nm process. Altair is expected to be the first K8L based CPU, featuring 4 cores. Each core will feature 64KB - 32KB Instruction, 32KB Data - of L1 (down from 128KB in the K8 architecture), 512KB of L2 cache per core and - in it's Opteron form, 2MB of shared L3 cache. K8L will also feature AMD's DICE (Dynamic Independent Core Engagement) power saving technology which enables each core to alter it's own p-state (Power state) right down to putting a core in a full Halt condition and will introduce HyperTransport 3. Hypertransport 3 will introduce a number of improvements. Firstly, the HT speed will be increased to 2.6Ghz, which will allow for 5.2GT/s, compared with a maximum of 1.4Ghz in HT2 (1Ghz in the K8 architecture). Secondly HT3 will introduce 'Un Ganging', which will allow either one 16-bit link or two 8-bit links to be created on the fly. This will be particularly useful with multi-socket Opteron servers as it can allow for single memory hop access to memory which would previously have taken two hops. Additionally the K8L core will have an enhanced instruction set, Indirect branch prediction, 32-byte prefetch (compared with 16 in the K8 architecture), 48-bit addressing with 1GB pages, better cache coherency, I/O virtualisation, Memory mirroring, data poisoning and HT retry protocol support, and 2x128-bit SSE units (compared with 2x64-bit units in K8) featuring support for single cycle 128-bit instructions. Altair will interface to DDR2 memory, with the K8L core featuring support for FBD and, in a future memory controller revision, DDR3 and FBD2 support.

The clock speed of Altair is expected to be between 2.7 and 2.9Ghz.