Jump to content
Posted 01 August 2006 - 04:47 PM
Posted 01 August 2006 - 05:06 PM
Posted 01 August 2006 - 05:41 PM
Posted 01 August 2006 - 05:45 PM
Posted 01 August 2006 - 07:57 PM
Posted 02 August 2006 - 07:15 AM
nVidia support isn't going anywhere. Even if it will disappear it won't happen for a few years. I also like ASUS motherboards.
1) AMD is buying/just bought ATi so who knows if their NVidea support will continue (from the rumors I here Intel has already dropped ATi Crossfire support
2) I Like ASUS mobos they seem very stable
Since AM2 prices dropped as well I would recommend going for a AM2 motherboard and CPU instead. It will give you more more upgrade possibilities in the future.
Well, AMD is dropping prices like mad... You can get a 939 AMD xp 64 3500+ for under 100 USD shipped, and a 3800+ for just a bit over 100 shipped.
Uhh... Don't say that name. You bring up a lot of awful memories.
AMD Thunderbird processor.
Posted 02 August 2006 - 05:39 PM
Posted 02 August 2006 - 11:58 PM
I would go with AMD. When it comes to gaming, the Core 2 Duo doesn't outperform AMD's FX line very much. So AMD is the better value for now.
Edited by protozero, 03 August 2006 - 12:01 AM.
Posted 03 August 2006 - 01:03 PM
Posted 03 August 2006 - 01:28 PM
Are you sure you're not mixing Core 2 Duo/Extreme and Pentium 4/D/EE. Different variations of the Pentium 4's Netburts architecture has been Intel's main processor for the last 5 years. But last month Intel released a completely new architecture which changed everyting. So any benchmarks pre-dating July 14th 2006 are obsolete. For the new situation you can look at the this Core 2 review, aptly named The Empire Strikes Back, for example. Nowadays, from a strict performance point of view, Intel is better. Period.
what were they variables in that benchmark test? All of the ones I've looked at have pointed to AMD, especially with multitasking.
As you will soon see, Intel's new Core 2 lineup has basically made all previous Intel processors worthless. The performance of the new Core 2 CPUs is so much greater, with much lower power consumption, that owners of NetBurst based processors may want to dust off the old drill bits and make some neat looking keychains.
The 2.4GHz E6600 turned out to be quite an overclocker in our tests. Even though it was hard-locked at a 9 multiplier it reached an amazing 4GHz in the overclocking tests. That represents a 67% overclock.
Intel's Core 2 Extreme X6800 didn't lose a single benchmark in our comparison; not a single one. In many cases, the $183 Core 2 Duo E6300 actually outperformed Intel's previous champ: the Pentium Extreme Edition 965. In one day, Intel has made its entire Pentium D lineup of processors obsolete. Intel's Core 2 processors offer the sort of next-generation micro-architecture performance leap that we honestly haven't seen from Intel since the introduction of the P6.
Compared to AMD's Athlon 64 X2 the situation gets a lot more competitive, but AMD still doesn't stand a chance. The Core 2 Extreme X6800, Core 2 Duo E6700 and E6600 were pretty consistently in the top 3 or 4 spots in each benchmark, with the E6600 offering better performance than AMD's FX-62 flagship in the vast majority of benchmarks. Another way of looking at it is that Intel's Core 2 Duo E6600 is effectively a $316 FX-62, which doesn't sound bad at all.
Posted 03 August 2006 - 04:15 PM
Edited by DJBPace07, 03 August 2006 - 04:20 PM.
Posted 03 August 2006 - 04:54 PM
Posted 03 August 2006 - 10:36 PM
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users