4p

[Big.Wayne]

I like the middle-ground

Hey krooton,

The power provided by the "middle-ground" in 2010 is certainly impressive!

Off-Topic:

If I may make a polite request, would it be possible not to quote anyone who makes a fallacious post for the following reasons

• I can't filter out your quotes so am forced to read it
• Your doubling up the fallacious comment by quoting it
• I get an email to my home containing said fallacious comments
• The logical flow of the thread is disrupted
• It's harder for a Don to delete/prune a thread of unneeded posts
• This thread is not about one single individual wants or needs

I hope that comes across in the right way and I am always keen to indulge in any logical, calm, debate even if I don't see things that way myself!

 

[easyrider]

What if you want the best bang for buck.

I know i7 is uber powerful, but it's more power than I need at more money than I want to spend.

I like the middle-ground, hence the 2500XPM @ 3200 speeds, the A64 4000+ @ 3Ghz and such.

I prefer to get a cheaper cpu, and overclock it to the performance of an expensive one, rather than buying an expensive one and clocking it to massive levels.

Core 2 Duo whipped AMD at the time, hence me switching to them, but as I haven't kept up on current trends, which has the mid to mid-highs that clock to the levels of the highs?

i3 will clock to 4ghz and it beats the Q6600 in many benchies.

There is no doubt that AMD offer bang for buck.

But intel offer it to.

Thats the point.

This thread is comparing top end parts with mid range.

It would have been a better thread had it compared Intel mid range and AMD midrange at similar pricing.

Fact is AMD is not as fast hence its price in the market.

I don't really get this thread in all honesty...What is behind it exactly?

That a top end is more expensive that mid range?

No **** sherlock

We all knew that.

Try comapring and Intel rig with a similar priced AMD rig and see which in essence will get you more for your money.

Its all out there for people to see

 

[Big.Wayne]

It's that [fair] competition is good, it bring out the best in both.

100% agree!

Although there are some who would not want this?

 

[Collider]

I've found the thread really interesting and informative (and its only being turned into AMD vs Intel by those who want it to be, I don't understand that sort of brand loyalty, just what's good for me at the best price. I have had AMD and intel (currently 775) and they have been great).

I am not sure that Phenom II 4 vs I7 is the sort of comparison many users will make however...in terms of approximate cost and performance its more Phenom vs I5, otherwise its a bit apples and oranges in a sense as the CPUs are not really for the same purpose (leaving out the 'I have the biggest CPU' argument).

In the choices I am making its 955 vs I5, or, if I want to go lower down the scale, AMDs equivalent to / or I3. I am still contemplating which to go with, this thread is a useful pointer (as is the other one titled system builders).

I7 is the next step up, what with triple channel DDR3 etc and price. I consider that the 'deluxe' option as, in real world terms, I doubt I'd see the difference (and I code as well as game etc).

Competition is great, I do sometimes wish speed revisions were not all so similarly named as sometimes its like playing with the 8800 9800 thing from Nvidia..but more choice is, in the case of CPUs', turning out to be better choice.

I don't understand the need to 'defend' I7 and bang on about how elite it is. If people want to spend that sort of money, well power to them. Not everyone does though and threads like this open up choices many people wouldn't make from reading reviews and benchmarks on other sites.

You have to be a little off kilter not to welcome that.

 

[easyrider]

I love competition its good for the market.

But I want the best for my money. If that means Intel then so be it.

If that means AMD then so be it.

I love AMD but I want the fastest PC that my budget allows.

 

[moremoney]

But I want the best for my money.

I want the fastest PC that my budget allows.

Is that not an Oxymoron.

Please make up you're mind, the best is not the same as the fastest, the best for what, or fast enough for what?

 

[moremoney]

You have certainly opened a can of worms with your chips Big.Wayne.

And good on you, more informed choice is what i want.

 

[easyrider]

Is that not an Oxymoron.

Please make up you're mind, the best is not the same as the fastest, the best for what, or fast enough for what?

Is the winner of the 100 metre dash not the fastest and best sprinter in the world?

Is the best F1 driver not the driver that finishes the race first?

In most things in life the fastest is the best.

This is not a hard concept to grasp.

 

[moremoney]

Is the winner of the 100 metre dash not the fastest and best sprinter in the world?

Is the best F1 driver not the driver that finishes the race first?

In most things in life the fastest is the best.

This is not a hard concept to grasp.

No. All of these examples are wrong for one reason.

Conditions.

F1, wet or dry race= different winner.

100m dash, depends on the start.

Daved Beckham, One of the slowest, but the best at what he does.

Tortoise and the hare, need i go on.

OK one more, Nick Faldo, so slow he was boring, but ON his DAY he was the best.


And of course there is a better and cheaper upgrade path for AMD, and it looks simpler not the same with the Intel is?

 

[reiyushin]

Is the winner of the 100 metre dash not the fastest and best sprinter in the world?

Yes

Is the best F1 driver not the driver that finishes the race first?

Yes



You've pointed out that being fast in a race is a good thing.
Not everything in computing comes down to speed; Cost, heat, power usage, noise are all important factors to be considered when selecting your CPU.

I think that a lot of users will often over estimate the amount of power they need.

Browsing, music, word docs etc - Low end dual core - A2
Gaming single card - High end dual/mid range quad - A2 P2/E6/8 Q6 i3
Gaming multi card - High end quad - P2 Q9 i5
Encoding and other CPU intensive tasks - i7

 

[easyrider]

No. All of these examples are wrong for one reason.

Conditions.

F1, wet or dry race= different winner.

100m dash, depends on the start.

Eh?

The F1 driver that finishes first is the best regardless...who cares who wins...Its the first over the line.

Sprinters all start the race at the same time. If you don't have a good start then you are not the fastest and therefore not the best.

Its the complete race from the moment the gun fires.

Is the Fastest GFX card not the best?

Its main purpose is push pixels. The fastest is the best.

This then leads to a premium in price. If you want a mid range card then you pay less and get slower benchmarks, slower FPS in games and you have to lower the eye candy.

Its that simple.

 

[easyrider]

Yes

I think that a lot of users will often over estimate the amount of power they need.

Browsing, music, word docs etc - Low end dual core - A2
Gaming single card - High end dual/mid range quad - A2 P2/E6/8 Q6 i3
Gaming multi card - High end quad - P2 Q9 i5
Encoding and other CPU intensive tasks - i7

And whats wrong with having more power than you need?

This allows you to grow with the system.

It will last longer and run games longer...One does not need to upgrade.

Having Computing power in reserve is fine and smart if budget allows.

 

[moremoney]

Sprinters all start the race at the same time. If you don't have a good start then you are not the fastest

So if i raced Carl Lewis, and he fell over, that makes me faster if i cross the line first?

I always knew i was fast.

 

[Marine Iguana]

And whats wrong with having more power than you need?

Indeed, but i will almost certainly buy the hex core i7 when released even though i don't need that much power and i have only just built my system

 

[easyrider]

So if i raced Carl Lewis, and he fell over, that makes me faster if i cross the line first?

I always knew i was fast.

Yes because he fell over.

 

[moremoney]

All joking aside, i am going to buy an AMD setup for a gaming computer, from (ocuk), in a month or two, because i have seen some good looking results from Big.Wayne.

But also because i think it will be cheaper to upgrade my chip in the future, without getting new memory and m/board with every upgrade.

This is where i think AMD will be winners for the majority.

 

[arknor]

I love competition its good for the market.

But I want the best for my money. If that means Intel then so be it.

If that means AMD then so be it.

I love AMD but I want the fastest PC that my budget allows.

i cry everytime they advise someone to go for a phenom II, they pick a mobo that costs over 100 quid.

you could grab an i5 750 for that money FFS!

 

[Big.Wayne]

Off Topic:

Please Take Note! - Thread Trashing In Progress!

Gentleman,

I know your intentions are good but if you step back you will see that you are being drawn into a debate that is not based on any logic. Everyone is entitled to use whatever hardware they please (or want/need) and there is scope for everyone to co-exist side by side without treading on each others toes . . .

I cannot tell you what you should or should not do but if I could please ask that you step back and see you are being drawn into a discussion based specifically around what one single individual thinks is right or wrong, it may well be an attempted hijack and possible derailing. Please resist the bait as nothing good or meaningful will come from it but the thread is harmed and could be deleted . . .

You guys are quite able to make decisions for yourself, computing isn't about being a winner unless your a competitive benchmarker or gamer etc, as long as we each know we are getting a suitable piece of kit for out needs/budget then everyone is sweet!

Being a winner in these forums is about sharing your wealth of experience, helping others who may be having problems and contributing your unique and sacred viewpoint and generally just having a nice chatter etc!

Thank you!

 

[easyrider]

All joking aside, i am going to buy an AMD setup for a gaming computer, from (ocuk), in a month or two, because i have seen some good looking results from Big.Wayne.

But also because i think it will be cheaper to upgrade my chip in the future, without getting new memory and m/board with every upgrade.

This is where i think AMD will be winners for the majority.

TBH thats one of the reasons I went 1336 and i7

920, Asus P6T and 6GB patriot triple channel ram.

The cost was only 300 though after doing some deals. You have to agree thats bang for buck.

I will probably keep this for sometime.

 

[moremoney]

Off Topic:

Please Take Note! - Thread Trashing In Progress!

Gentleman,

I know your intentions are good but if you step back you will see that you are being drawn into a debate that is not based on any logic. Everyone is entitled to use whatever hardware they please (or want/need) and there is scope for everyone to co-exist side by side without treading on each others toes . . .

I cannot tell you what you should or should not do but if I could please ask that you step back and see you are being drawn into a discussion based specifically around what one single individual thinks is right or wrong, it may well be an attempted hijack and possible derailing. Please resist the bait as nothing good or meaningful will come from it but the thread is harmed and could be deleted . . .

You guys are quite able to make decisions for yourself, computing isn't about being a winner unless your a competitive benchmarker or gamer etc, as long as we each know we are getting a suitable piece of kit for out needs/budget then everyone is sweet!

Being a winner in these forums is about sharing your wealth of experience, helping others who may be having problems and contributing your unique and sacred viewpoint and generally just having a nice chatter etc!

Thank you!

Bows head in shame, and apologises profusly.