| Home | Forums | Reviews | Articles | Register |
 |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Core2Duo hands down. But, I'm a gamer, so I'd go for the one with the better
gaming benchmarks. Other than that, they are almost neck and neck. Both are fast, but the Core2Duo beats the X2 by a decent margin on the things I need (or want) it too. However, when I do upgrade, I'd be replacing the CPU, motherboard, video card and RAM. The X2 would use the same DDR RAM that I already have. But, since I'm still on AGP, and need a whole system replacement anyway, I'd go with the Core2Duo replacement!  Coming April 22nd, there are some Intel price breaks coming, and I may be picking up a quad core Intel for under $300. -- Dustin Harper (E-Mail Removed) http://www.vistarip.com -- "Jerry Wong" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)... > Which one will you choose? AMD64 or Core2Duo? > > -- > Jerry Wong > > http://www.geocities.com/jerrywong.geo > 但我*抪茈L的應許、 盼望新天新地，有義居在其中。(彼後3:13) > But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to > new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness. (2 Peter 3:13) > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
The E6300 is about $15-20 more than the 4300, and just as good as an
overclocker. Of course, not many people consider overclocking an option. I consider it art, though (even my wireless router is overclocked!!). -- Dustin Harper (E-Mail Removed) http://www.vistarip.com -- "George" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)... > If you are an over-clocker consider the 1.8 GHz E4300 for under $200. > Mine is running stable at 2.8 GHz at stock voltage for over two > months. I problably could run it faster. There are reports people > running E4300s at 3.6GHz. > > George > > On Mar 20, 10:40 am, "Steve Thackery" <t...@nowhere.net> wrote: >> Currently it's no contest: Core 2 Duo. The only time to buy an AMD at >> the >> moment is if price is very important (e.g. you're an OEM and buying 'em >> by >> the thousand). >> >> In terms of performance for the money, the Intel is way ahead. Currently >> the E6600 looks like the 'sweet spot', being in the corner of the curve >> before the price goes up disproportionately. >> >> Thack > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
CNET has a very good comparative test review of the two dual core processors,
with 2 models from each make. Cheers "Dustin Harper" wrote: > The E6300 is about $15-20 more than the 4300, and just as good as an > overclocker. Of course, not many people consider overclocking an option. I > consider it art, though (even my wireless router is overclocked!!). > > -- > Dustin Harper > (E-Mail Removed) > http://www.vistarip.com > > -- > "George" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message > news:(E-Mail Removed)... > > If you are an over-clocker consider the 1.8 GHz E4300 for under $200. > > Mine is running stable at 2.8 GHz at stock voltage for over two > > months. I problably could run it faster. There are reports people > > running E4300s at 3.6GHz. > > > > George > > > > On Mar 20, 10:40 am, "Steve Thackery" <t...@nowhere.net> wrote: > >> Currently it's no contest: Core 2 Duo. The only time to buy an AMD at > >> the > >> moment is if price is very important (e.g. you're an OEM and buying 'em > >> by > >> the thousand). > >> > >> In terms of performance for the money, the Intel is way ahead. Currently > >> the E6600 looks like the 'sweet spot', being in the corner of the curve > >> before the price goes up disproportionately. > >> > >> Thack > > > > > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
The advantage of the E4300 is that it is for an 800MHz FSB and
consequently has a high multiplier (9x). This allows the use of less expensive DDR2 800 memory for over-clocking instead more expensive faster memory (e.g. DDR2 1066). Currently, I run my E4300 at 2.88 GHz with 320 MHz FSB. The memory multiplier is set to 2.5 which results in a memory speed of 800 MHz. The smallest memory multiplier is 2x which would allow a 400 MHz FSB and a 3.6 GHz CPU clock without over clocking the memory. George On Mar 20, 11:12 am, "Dustin Harper" <dhar...@vistarip.com> wrote: > The E6300 is about $15-20 more than the 4300, and just as good as an > overclocker. Of course, not many people consider overclocking an option. I > consider it art, though (even my wireless router is overclocked!!). > > -- > Dustin Harper > dhar...@vistarip.comhttp://www.vistarip.com > > --"George" <agloz...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:(E-Mail Removed)... > > > > > If you are an over-clocker consider the 1.8 GHz E4300 for under $200. > > Mine is running stable at 2.8 GHz at stock voltage for over two > > months. I problably could run it faster. There are reports people > > running E4300s at 3.6GHz. > > > George > > > On Mar 20, 10:40 am, "Steve Thackery" <t...@nowhere.net> wrote: > >> Currently it's no contest: Core 2 Duo. The only time to buy an AMD at > >> the > >> moment is if price is very important (e.g. you're an OEM and buying 'em > >> by > >> the thousand). > > >> In terms of performance for the money, the Intel is way ahead. Currently > >> the E6600 looks like the 'sweet spot', being in the corner of the curve > >> before the price goes up disproportionately. > > >> Thack- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Are you running that on air cooling?
-- Dustin Harper (E-Mail Removed) http://www.vistarip.com -- "George" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)... > The advantage of the E4300 is that it is for an 800MHz FSB and > consequently has a high multiplier (9x). This allows the use of less > expensive DDR2 800 memory for over-clocking instead more expensive > faster memory (e.g. DDR2 1066). Currently, I run my E4300 at 2.88 GHz > with 320 MHz FSB. The memory multiplier is set to 2.5 which results > in a memory speed of 800 MHz. The smallest memory multiplier is 2x > which would allow a 400 MHz FSB and a 3.6 GHz CPU clock without over > clocking the memory. > > George > > On Mar 20, 11:12 am, "Dustin Harper" <dhar...@vistarip.com> wrote: >> The E6300 is about $15-20 more than the 4300, and just as good as an >> overclocker. Of course, not many people consider overclocking an option. >> I >> consider it art, though (even my wireless router is overclocked!!). >> >> -- >> Dustin Harper >> dhar...@vistarip.comhttp://www.vistarip.com >> >> --"George" <agloz...@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> >> news:(E-Mail Removed)... >> >> >> >> > If you are an over-clocker consider the 1.8 GHz E4300 for under $200. >> > Mine is running stable at 2.8 GHz at stock voltage for over two >> > months. I problably could run it faster. There are reports people >> > running E4300s at 3.6GHz. >> >> > George >> >> > On Mar 20, 10:40 am, "Steve Thackery" <t...@nowhere.net> wrote: >> >> Currently it's no contest: Core 2 Duo. The only time to buy an AMD at >> >> the >> >> moment is if price is very important (e.g. you're an OEM and buying >> >> 'em >> >> by >> >> the thousand). >> >> >> In terms of performance for the money, the Intel is way ahead. >> >> Currently >> >> the E6600 looks like the 'sweet spot', being in the corner of the >> >> curve >> >> before the price goes up disproportionately. >> >> >> Thack- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Rate This Thread | |
|
|
