no... http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116063 here it is 2.2 ghz and i think i ve seen a 2.4 ghz version to, so which would be better at stock e4400 or e2200
If you're going for an economical but quality build, I'd almost have to recommend my own motherboard. The Gigabyte-P35-DS3. Pretty cheap at newegg and very nice motherboards. sammorris had one too I got a pretty nice OC out of my board. Any of those CPUs mentioned will do 3GHz easily with it. If you had your heart set on AMD, the 5000+ BE is about the best option by far. It has an almost 100% chance of hitting 3GHz on stock voltage. Will hit 3.2GHz on 1.4 volts. My friend did it and it's at least as fast as a stock e6600. Plays all games, even Crysis, and runs programs smoothly. Gets a 10,000 3Dmark06 score with a 9600GT 512MB. So, not a slouch like sammorris seems to claim I'd say get what best fits your budget.
Sorry, I'm being a dumbass, I thought the E2180 was the 1.8Ghz not the 2160. Given this fact the E2200 is in leagues with the E4500, not the 4400, so pick the 2200 out.
so its a good product and when u say as fast as a stock e6600 is that maxing out the be 5000 or with it at stock voltage, cause i don't want to push it to far... and how fast is the stock e6600
The E6600 is relatively fast, but since you can get an E2200 to 3.2Ghz as easily as you can get a 5000+ to 3.0Ghz and have a PC that's good 30+% faster, I don't understand your hesitance towards using an Intel.
the reason why im hesitant cause im a first timer overclocker and i c places like tom's hardware where they say overclocking can seriously damage ur computer since... and even if i don't ever get oc'ing i can have a strong 2.6 ghz stock processor since 5000 be easily outmatches e2200 and stock... i won't be oc'ing all the time and leaving it that way only when i go to play a game or watch a movie so while like surfing the net or doing regular thing a be 5000+ would be better but what if i get a 6000+ or 6400+ or even tri-core phenom 8450 then i won't need to oc and i can out match most processors at stock speeds but then the higher prices come into effect
Actually the E2200 would probably best the 5000+ even at stock, let alone if you overclock it, and overclocking intels is safe and easy. AMD Phenoms are rubbish, and if you're going for a fast AMD like the 6400+ you could afford a superior E6750/6850/8400.
E6750 starts at 2.66Ghz and can make 3.5Ghz+ easily. The E8400 starts at 3.00Ghz and can make 3.3Ghz+, but the 8400 is about 10% faster per clock.
Actually the 5000+ is quite a bit faster than the E2200 AFAIK. I'd have to say the E2200 would be equal to the 4600+ at stock. You can get the 5000+ BE to 3GHz at stock voltage and leave it there. It will not hurt the processor or stress the system in any way because the voltage and FSB stay stock. You just turn the multiplier to 15. 15*200 = 3000MHz. It's that simple. The stock E6600 is more than enough for all games and apps. The BE 5000+ at 3GHz should be fairly even with it and thus fast enough for anything you want. If you want a high OC you might want an E6750. I've had mine to 3.6GHz on this board.
I've had a look around the tomshardware site - it's much too slow now they've gone with the rubbishy site layout to make any useful conclusions but the few tests I was able to dig up before I grew old were mostly of the opinion that the E4300 can keep up with and sometimes best the 5000+. An E4300 is a lot slower than an E2200 stock I can tell you.
so final conclusion and opionins which should i go with 5000+ 6000+ 6400+, e2200, e4400, e4600, e6750, e6600 or another
will be 5000+ oc'ed to like 3.1 ghz be enough with 2 gb ddr2 ram and a 9600 gt or 8800 gs or 8800 gt be enough to play games like crysis, gta 4, halo 3, cod 4, far cry, nfs, f.e.a.r., etc. on 1280 x 1024 on high settings and run a good benchmark score
Yeah, they screwed the site up bad. It runs so slow it's not even funny, and the charts are almost impossible to use. I liked the old layout much better. Short answer, yes. It will run even Crysis well with a fast video card. If you're on a tight budget or currently using a socket AM2 board and looking for a good upgrade, the 5000+ BE will be your best friend. If you have the money though, I would recommend Intel. Maybe the E4x00 series would be your best OCer and performer for the money. As for a video card. The 9600GT might be your best bet for price/performance. The 8800GS is just a semi-crippled filler card and the 8800GT is a bit higher in price still. At such a low resolution as 1280 x 1024 you won't notice much difference between a 9600gt and an 8800gt. Note:Stay away from the 8800GT 256MB. It performs like crap in most games.
I take it you mean a noticable performance difference. In some stuff there will be a big difference between AMD and Intel. But if all you're doing is games then any decent processor will be fine. If you opt for Intel, I'd suggest the E4x00 over the E2x00 series. They seem to be the most OC friendly and are slightly faster.
My CPU (E4300) at stock compares to about an Athlon64 4000+ and it runs games alright, but it feels a bit lacking in performance for the most demanding games. Overclocked to 3Ghz plus it's miles more responsive and can handle Crysis, Assassins Creed and Supreme commander:forged alliance without nasty slowdown - a friend who uses a 4200+ experiences issues in these games, issues related to the performance of the CPU, not anything else.
