Budget gaming system - AMD or Intel?

Overslop said:
Providing that it provides a higher clock, it doesn't really matter if it's 65nm does it?
Click to expand...

The 45nm CPUs have other Core 2 improvements, run cooler and have more cache than the 65nm CPUs, so they will run faster at the same clock and due to the lower temperatures, will generally overclock higher.
 
Ok, so after some more research, this is what i'm thinking:



I would like to be able to use this system to introduce me to overclocking, so i probably won't push it too hard (although i'm not exactly sure whats acheivable), as i'm inexperienced, and i want it to last 2 - 3 years.

- Gone for a P5Q-E as i dont really understand what benefits the P5Q would actually give me other than features i probably wont use.

- Chose 1066MHz RAM, it's C6 rather than C5, i dont think it will make too much difference.

- I think the 650W power supply is probably a bit more powerful than i need, (i'm running the 4850 on a 500W supply atm) but i'd like enough headroom to be able to upgrade to another single card solution in future (at least a year from now, assuming PCI-E is still a viable platform)

So, the things i'm still debating are:

If I assume I won't want to upgrade for say 18 months - 2 years, should i take the gaming performance hit of the quad now, in the hope games make more use of them in future?
- I can't really afford a Q9XXX Quad at the moment, so my only option would be the Q6600, which has a much lower clock.

Can i get away with a lower wattage PSU and still be able to upgrade the graphics card in future?

Is it worth getting faster (C5) RAM?

Is the performance boost from RAID 0 worth the cost of the second hard drive? (i only really need 1, but 500Gb seems like a good price per unit storage atm)


Sorry if this all seems a bit trivial, it's just that most of the info i've read on these boards seems very short-term focused, whereas i'm not planning on doing a complete system overhaul for another couple of years
 
If you're absolutely sure that you won't be upgrading for 2 years then, yes, I would probably buy a quad-core now.
The RAM is fine - 1066 is useful when overclocking past 400Mhz FSB (assuming 1:1) and you can always tighten the timings.
The power supply should be fine even if you decide to upgrade your graphics card in the future.
As for RAID 0 - I wouldn't bother.
 
Ultimate you should reduce your sig size before a Mod sees it. 4 lines max or the equivalent in image size.

Personally I see quad core as useful only for encoding or heavy graphics editing. It's really not used in games. 2 cores are all you need for games. Rendering for the foreseeable future is done on a single core, there are talks of moving the rendering process to multicore with windows 7 or DX11 but that'll be a while away still and require another upgrade just to get that then anyway. So for any game out now or in the next year or two you're looking at one core for rendering and then physics/background loading/sound etc on the other core. A dual core over 3Ghz can handle that without a problem. That 8500 should easily reach 4Ghz under decent cooling so you'll be flying.
 
archer_dan said:
- Gone for a P5Q-E as i dont really understand what benefits the P5Q would actually give me other than features i probably wont use.
Click to expand...

See here to compare most of the main P5Q boards.

The straight P5Q suits many and is cheaper than the Pro, E etc. But they have extra feature. I have the E, mainly for the eSATA.
 
Last edited:
They should both overclock alright, in all tests I've seen the Q6600 blows away the 9950 though so I'd go with that. If you were buying a budget motherboard you might see some difference in price between the AMD and Intel setups but in this case you won't really. If you don't intend to overclock then the best route to go is dual-core for instance a E8500 or X2 6000, again in this case I'd side with Intel but I'm sure the AMd would make an adequate system on a budget.
 
archer_dan said:
- I'm surprised that the Phenom won't match a Q6600, given that its the very top of AMD's line and the Q6600 is quite old now. I had thought the Phenom might be easier to overclock, due to its unlocked multiplier? (As i said, i have no overclocking experience)
Click to expand...

It's true, don't know what AMD was playing at with Phenom .__.
 
Intel's E5200, or E8400/E8500 are probably the best choices for budget. If your not planning to overclock then go for the E8xxx series. AMD are ok for budget, but Intels generally outperform them at the moment.
 
Dan, if you want to, you can use my X2 6000 and M3A mobo for a while, all they're doing is taking up space at mine.

That way you can delay outlay on a processor for a little while at least.
 
Last edited:
If I were you I would wait and see what AMD offers with Debeb..

If you must buy now then Intel is your best option... 2 or 4 cores is an argument thats been had for months :)
 
go for AMD , the 9950 performances similar to the q6600 and the 9950 oc very well with a 750sb motherboard like DFI Lan Party DK 790FXB-M2RSH .
 
Deimos said:
Q6600 will clock to 3.2Ghz no problem, even the crappy overclockers. The phenom won't match that, performance per clock is also worse.
Click to expand...

:mad:

Helps if you know what you are talking about. Lots of Phenoms go to 3.0Ghz on air, and with a good clocker and a 750SB chip then some people have go to 3.2Ghz+.

The clockspeed issue is wrong too, a Q6600 at 2.6 would be marginally faster, and as the Phenom is clocked higher, it is in fact level and in some aspects faster clock per clock.

Either would be a good system.

gareth170 said:
go for AMD , the 9950 performances similar to the q6600 and the 9950 oc very well with a 750sb motherboard like DFI Lan Party DK 790FXB-M2RSH .
Click to expand...

Excellent advice from a "Phenom owner"
 
Last edited:
Deimos said:
Q6600 will clock to 3.2Ghz no problem, even the crappy overclockers. The phenom won't match that, performance per clock is also worse.
Click to expand...
sorry but your wrong. the 9850/9950 clocks about the same as a q6600 with a 750sb motherboard, some clock higher than the q6600.

also clocking a phenom and q6600 to 3.2ghz the phenom will beat it..
 
Happy said:
:mad:

Helps if you know what you are talking about. Lots of Phenoms go to 3.0Ghz on air, and with a good clocker and a 750SB chip then some people have go to 3.2Ghz+.

The clockspeed issue is wrong too, a Q6600 at 2.6 would be marginally faster, and as the Phenom is clocked higher, it is in fact level and in some aspects faster clock per clock.

Either would be a good system.



Excellent advice from a "Phenom owner"
Click to expand...

Said by a "Q6600 owner" :D
 
all these people who pipe up bullcrap about dual cores are better for gaming are nieve.
The fact is when benchmarks are run the pc's are using streamlined os's not a bulky full install like real world people have with all there stuff on there, anti virus ect ect so the quad cores are a far better buy for gamers. also adding to this most new games use all cores anyway
 
Personally I would go for an SB750/9950be over the intel equivalent, Easily clocks to 3.2ghz newer tech than a q6600 & the 9950be is faster clock for clock when pushed & has a better upgrade path.

a lot of people have absolutely no idea whats going on in the amd camp these days and oppinions are horribly biased.

And im running an 45nm Core 2 Quad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom