Given the choice of the two CPUs on the market, which would you go for?
AMD X2?
Intel Core Duo 2?
Ooo reasons too please!
RD
| Gamecommunity =GCHQ= http://forum.gamecommunity.co.uk:8080/ | |
| New CPUs http://forum.gamecommunity.co.uk:8080/viewtopic.php?f=83&t=31756 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | Rainbow Dave =GCHQ= [ Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | New CPUs |
Given the choice of the two CPUs on the market, which would you go for? AMD X2? Intel Core Duo 2? Ooo reasons too please!
RD
|
|
| Author: | Diablo-X [ Sat Aug 26, 2006 11:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
AMD - Just dont like Intel.. |
|
| Author: | Mike=GCHQ= [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
get a conroe they are supposed to wipe the floor with all other processors being extremely fast |
|
| Author: | corned_beef [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
AMD's better for gaming, intel better for other stuff. Get an AMD, and ignore the hype behind everything . After all, if you got a conroe, therd only be some AMD that would wipe the floor with that...and so on and so forth. Although out of curiosity, I voted Intel 
|
|
| Author: | Sgt.King =GCHQ= [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Conroe FTW - ATM |
|
| Author: | elbow=GCHQ= [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
whichever is cheaper - as corned said, it makes little difference |
|
| Author: | [QBS]Dr.Strangelove [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
amd better for gaming = urban myth intel - real processing @ break neck speeds i have the 4400x2 
|
|
| Author: | CoolMan=GCHQ= [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
do not get the intel, their dual cores suck, they are only 2 cpus on one chip and are not integrated nearly as well as the amd equivelent, Pretty much every review i have seen says intel just cobbled something together so they would have a dual chip the same as amd. This is one of many similer reviews http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-1.html Simply put, the intel sucks for gaming(and most other things) and is a lot more expensive |
|
| Author: | Scorchedbee =GCHQ= [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
well you have a 3700 right? get the 4400x2 or 4800x2 they have 2mb lvl2 cache the 42 and 46 only have 512 and wont be an improvement on your 3700. |
|
| Author: | corned_beef [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 11:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
[QBS]Dr.Strangelove wrote: amd better for gaming = urban myth
intel - real processing @ break neck speeds i have the 4400x2 No really, its because AMD do more ops per clock, so you'll get that 1 more extra precious FPS than the intel equivalent
|
|
| Author: | Rainbow Dave =GCHQ= [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Scorchedbee =GCHQ= wrote: well you have a 3700 right?.
Nope, XP 3200+ 
|
|
| Author: | Scorchedbee =GCHQ= [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 1:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
woa stone age
still id go for the 4400x2. |
|
| Author: | Rainbow Dave =GCHQ= [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 4:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Scorchedbee =GCHQ= wrote: woa stone age Theres many people on this forum with less than that... Scorchedbee =GCHQ= wrote: still id go for the 4400x2.
That wasn't in the poll... 
|
|
| Author: | corned_beef [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 5:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Go for a 5000+ 
|
|
| Author: | Krusk [ Sun Aug 27, 2006 5:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
amd is better than intel. ftw |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ | |