Page 1 of 1
AMD price cuts!
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:19 pm
by Naethyn
Looks like they want to combat the new intel conroe!
Sorry in advance for suck linkage to image but I don't know of a decent host.
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:26 pm
by Gidan
X2 3800 here I come
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 2:29 pm
by Arlos
Hrm, why'd they discontinue the X2 4800?
-Arlos
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 4:26 pm
by Tikker
whoa, look at the drop on the x2 4600
suddenly, i'm willing to consider an AMD system, jeje
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 5:03 pm
by Jimmy Durante
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdo ... i=2795&p=1
For someone who is building an entirely new system, it makes more sense to go with a Core 2 Duo for this round assuming the pricing is accurate.
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 5:03 pm
by Harrison
AMD has shit over any mid-range system that Intel has ever put out.
High end, I'd still take Intel over AMD though.
(I'm talking $900+)
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 5:10 pm
by Gidan
I'm not so sure, high end you can get a FX dual core whick more or less owns
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 5:25 pm
by Captain Insano
Harrison wrote:AMD has shit over any mid-range system that Intel has ever put out.
High end, I'd still take Intel over AMD though.
(I'm talking $900+)
hahah well you are way off base.
Most of my performance rigs run AMD X2 series dual core processors and they fucking SPANK the dual core Intel Extreme Edition processors that have price tags 3-400 above an equivalent AMD.
And those AMD are socket 939 running on DDR memory and they smoke the intels.
I HIGHLY recommend getting and AMD X2 5000, socket AM2 cpu with 2 gigs of DDR2 800Mhz memory and an Asus SLI board.
It would fucking kick ass.
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 5:27 pm
by Captain Insano
Harrison wrote:AMD has shit over any mid-range system that Intel has ever put out.
High end, I'd still take Intel over AMD though.
(I'm talking $900+)
My systems benchmark better with an AMD X2 4800+ than with the Intel 3.73GHz Extreme Edition which runs like 500 bucks more in price.
The AMD FX-62 dual core RUINS any intel on the market at the moment.
Conroe might change things but I have a feeling AMD will trump them shortly afterwards.
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:28 pm
by Tikker
it's hard to beat the pentium D 805 tho
for $105, you've got a dual core chip you can easily OC to 4+ghz (4ghz each core)
sure, it might run at 220+ watts, but for 100 bucks.....
Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:39 pm
by Gaazy
i have no clue what you guys are talking about jeje...Are you trying to make my HEAD XPLODE
I still use the same computer I used from around when EQ1 first came out, with no upgrades
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 2:22 am
by Captain Insano
Tikker wrote:it's hard to beat the pentium D 805 tho
for $105, you've got a dual core chip you can easily OC to 4+ghz (4ghz each core)
sure, it might run at 220+ watts, but for 100 bucks.....
I want to try this out soon, but I want to see the actual performance benchmarks before I say that it is actually a good idea. With modern CPU's there is so much more to processing power than just clock speed.
What are your thoughts on the 805 4 gig overclock? Does it just sound good or does it actually deliver performance to match?
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 12:01 pm
by Phlegm
Intel will release the quad core microprocessor before the end of the year. So the prices will drop even more.
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 12:06 pm
by Phlegm
Captain Insano wrote:Harrison wrote:AMD has shit over any mid-range system that Intel has ever put out.
High end, I'd still take Intel over AMD though.
(I'm talking $900+)
My systems benchmark better with an AMD X2 4800+ than with the Intel 3.73GHz Extreme Edition which runs like 500 bucks more in price.
The AMD FX-62 dual core RUINS any intel on the market at the moment.
Conroe might change things but I have a feeling AMD will trump them shortly afterwards.
The current Intel dual core is two single cores fused together so when they communicate with each other they are only as fast as the system bus, usually 800 Mhz. The AMD is a true dual core so it's faster than the Intel one.
The Conroe is a true dual core microprocessor. Independent testing has it about 30-40% faster than AMD and use about 30% less power.
Posted: Sun Jul 23, 2006 8:16 pm
by Naethyn
Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:46 am
by xKALECx
Well fuck me....I just bought an AMD 4200x2 two days ago. Payed 350.00 for it.....
Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:21 am
by Tikker
Captain Insano wrote:Tikker wrote:it's hard to beat the pentium D 805 tho
for $105, you've got a dual core chip you can easily OC to 4+ghz (4ghz each core)
sure, it might run at 220+ watts, but for 100 bucks.....
I want to try this out soon, but I want to see the actual performance benchmarks before I say that it is actually a good idea. With modern CPU's there is so much more to processing power than just clock speed.
What are your thoughts on the 805 4 gig overclock? Does it just sound good or does it actually deliver performance to match?
it actually does pretty well
I wouldn't go and compare it to an $1100 processor, but when you compare performance per dollar, it beats the bejesus out of everything out there
it also gulps more electricity than anything else out there, jeje
Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:04 am
by Naethyn
/gulp
Posted: Tue Jul 25, 2006 9:39 am
by 10sun
The award for the biggest waste of money goes to:
» Powered by Intel® Core™ 2
Extreme Processor
» Intel® Core™ 2 Extreme Processor X6800
» Professionally overclocked
» Microsoft® Windows® XP Professional
» 2GB DDR2 800MHz memory
» Dual 150GB Western Digital Raptor
10,000RPM hard drives In Raid 0
» 400GB SATA 3.0GB/s 7200 hard drive
» Dual 512MB ATI Radeon X1900-XTX
video cards with Crossfire
$4499.99
From Microcenter.com
