Stock system, what platform

player

player

player

Associate
Joined
18 Sep 2003
Posts
2,368
Hi all, that's right the next PC I will be building will be running at STOCK SPEEDS! What platform should I go for? I will spend around £400 on a base unit, using a basic mobo and generic ram. For future usability should I plum for the X2 AMD system, or go for a conroe based system? There doesn't seem to a huge gulf in performance between the chips below (at stock), and I will be using them in a office environment.

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 4600+ 2.20GHz (Socket AM2)

Intel Core 2 DUO E4300 "LGA775 Allendale" 1.80GHz (800FSB)


There seems to be a lot of interest in favour of the current intel crop, if I want to say drop a faster chip, maybe more ram in the pc in 18months time should I be swayed by one platform over the other? Thanks
 
Last edited:
Might as well go for C2D IMO, could be useful for the future

plus it should outperform the X2 at stock AFAIK
 
Overall the 4600 will be faster than the e4300 at stock speeds. With the continuing price drops on AM2, anything below the e6600 NEEDS to be over-clocked to beat it's equivalently priced AMD counterpart.
AM2 has likely the longer upgrade life, with their next major CPU update slated to be backwards compatible with AM2. Skt 775 is less sure. This is partially speculation at this stage though.
Power consumption will be the same on both systems.
 
Quixote said:
Overall the 4600 will be faster than the e4300 at stock speeds. With the continuing price drops on AM2, anything below the e6600 NEEDS to be over-clocked to beat it's equivalently priced AMD counterpart.
AM2 has likely the longer upgrade life, with their next major CPU update slated to be backwards compatible with AM2. Skt 775 is less sure. This is partially speculation at this stage though.
Power consumption will be the same on both systems.
Click to expand...
Interesting reply mate, I notice on benchmarks that the two (comparable) chips get the upper hand in different tests. I understand that the conroe chips are very popular here on the forums but I take it that is down to the super overclocking ability of the chips!
 
player said:
Interesting reply mate, I notice on benchmarks that the two (comparable) chips get the upper hand in different tests. I understand that the conroe chips are very popular here on the forums but I take it that is down to the super overclocking ability of the chips!
Click to expand...

Yes, that's a big factor. Also that the C2D's really shine in gaming which a lot of people on here mainly use there PC for. Also, some people haven't noticed that the AM2 chips have continued to creep down in price.
 
Yeah I would go with AM2 if you're on a budget and not overclocking, definitely seems to have the better long term upgrade path as well, Intel are talking about a complete replacement for 775 and AMD are talking about AM3, which interestingly will be backward compatible with AM2 sockets.

Jokester
 
I would still say the conroe would beat the AMD at stock and overclocked.

Edit: suppose depends what your doing though. and yeah if your on a budget...
 
pc-modd said:
I would still say the conroe would beat the AMD at stock and overclocked.

Edit: suppose depends what your doing though. and yeah if your on a budget...
Click to expand...
When I had a look on toms hardware a week or two ago, I think the conroe did come out on top in the benchmakes, but the AM2 still gave a good account of its self.
 
pc-modd said:
Edit: suppose depends what your doing though. and yeah if your on a budget...
Click to expand...

Yes, it varies a lot from one app to the next.

The following scores are from Custom PC's CPU roundup Feb 2007 issue :

(Higher = better)

Benchmark 4600 + / E6300

Paint Shop Pro : 1.38 / 1.35
TMPGEnc DVD Encode : 1.21 / 1.17
Multi-Tasking : 1.72 / 1.49
Medievil 2 : 23 / 28
Quake 4 : 44 / 50
Cinebench : 673 / 580

The e4300 is a little slower than the e6300 at stock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom