AMD FX 62 or Intel Extreme Duo core
- Thread starter Kairo
- Start date
- Status
stishdr
New Member
here, read this...
E. duo vs. FX http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/07/27/core_2_duo_vs_athlon_64_fx-62/
E. duo vs. FX http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/07/27/core_2_duo_vs_athlon_64_fx-62/
MIK3daG33K
New Member
Very very true. This used to be the case in the preshot days, but as of right now intel is top dog again and we are waiting for AMD to fire back with something substantial. Intel and AMD round about and I just buy the best processor at the time for the cheapsest price.
murphys_law
New Member
amd
ceewi1
VIP Member
I wouldn't even consider the Pentium EE 965. Look at the superior Core 2 Duo X6800 instead.
diduknowthat
formerly liuliuboy
Not helping here.
The C2D is by far the better CPU. Absolutely no competition here.
The FX-62 is $700 and the X6800 is $950. I think that the performance per dollar there is pretty even, because the X6800 doesn't totally slaughter the AMD, it's just considerably better.
Archangel
VIP Member
But...but... the casebadge?
but yes, amd doesnt have anything to compete with the C2D atm, however,.. the AMD chips arnt bad at all, the intel's atm are just faster (i didnt want to say better.. since they are both really good, and quality wise absolutely equal) 
bigsaucybob
New Member
The E6600 out performs the FX-62, so the C2D Extreme basically owns the AMD.
I would still throw out the extra cash to get a C2D.
I would still throw out the extra cash to get a C2D.
ceewi1
VIP Member
Those looking at purchasing the top of the line CPU are rarely concerned with 'performance per dollar'. For those who are, the E6600 and E6700 will outperform the FX-62, with a considerabely lower price-tag.
Jakesteads
New Member
they both are
I have a funny feeling that Sophocles knew nothing about computers, apj101. Call it a hunch.
By the way, interesting way of trying to twist my words by adding and removing emphasis with the use of brackets. Do you do that often?
I buy a particular computer part because I have done my research and I know what it is capable of doing. All the fools went the Axp route because they thought "wow! I'm getting something for nothing". When in reality they weren't. It came at a price, whether they want to admit it or not. It is the age old problem that has been around since people thought that Cyrix was giving them something for nothing.
Interestingly enough, I don't have problems. Do you see me posting a ton of problems on this board? Why is that? Because I know what the hell I'm talking about because I've done my homework. Intel offered a superior quality product. The supporting products were of a superior quality. Period. That has changed since the A64 was released, but I haven't bothered upgrading. Good thing I didn't. Now that the C2D is wiping it's ass with the A64, there is no question which route to go. I still don't need a new computer, but when I do it's no contest.
AMD had their chance with my personal business, and they lost it (yes I had an Athlon XP system that I ran for about six months. It was all top of the line hardware.. The best money could buy.. Even the HSF was a $120 unit. The mobo was almost $300. and it was still a piece of shit.) I still want a pair of Opterons for my server though. I will admit that they are awesome CPUs.
EDIT: By the way, a comparable AMD and Intel CPU (A64 vs P4) are roughly the same price. What advantage is there to going to the AMD? If given a choice, what does enterprise buy? Intel.. You see, if AMD doesn't offer a significant price advantage, there really is no reason to go AMD. AMD figured that out the hard way when they had to run in the red for almost a decade. Selling on par with Intel does not gain them marketshare. The market has proven this.
So don't twist my words around, make fun of my sig, and call me a marketeers dream without having the whole story.
By the way, interesting way of trying to twist my words by adding and removing emphasis with the use of brackets. Do you do that often?
I buy a particular computer part because I have done my research and I know what it is capable of doing. All the fools went the Axp route because they thought "wow! I'm getting something for nothing". When in reality they weren't. It came at a price, whether they want to admit it or not. It is the age old problem that has been around since people thought that Cyrix was giving them something for nothing.
Interestingly enough, I don't have problems. Do you see me posting a ton of problems on this board? Why is that? Because I know what the hell I'm talking about because I've done my homework. Intel offered a superior quality product. The supporting products were of a superior quality. Period. That has changed since the A64 was released, but I haven't bothered upgrading. Good thing I didn't. Now that the C2D is wiping it's ass with the A64, there is no question which route to go. I still don't need a new computer, but when I do it's no contest.
AMD had their chance with my personal business, and they lost it (yes I had an Athlon XP system that I ran for about six months. It was all top of the line hardware.. The best money could buy.. Even the HSF was a $120 unit. The mobo was almost $300. and it was still a piece of shit.) I still want a pair of Opterons for my server though. I will admit that they are awesome CPUs.
EDIT: By the way, a comparable AMD and Intel CPU (A64 vs P4) are roughly the same price. What advantage is there to going to the AMD? If given a choice, what does enterprise buy? Intel.. You see, if AMD doesn't offer a significant price advantage, there really is no reason to go AMD. AMD figured that out the hard way when they had to run in the red for almost a decade. Selling on par with Intel does not gain them marketshare. The market has proven this.
So don't twist my words around, make fun of my sig, and call me a marketeers dream without having the whole story.
Last edited:
fade2green514
Active Member
the e6600 would win in 90% of benchmarks, run cooler, and cost less.
Rambo
New Member
I wanted an E6600, but I can definately justify my E6300 purchase...
I'm not sure which one I want... What I do know is that I have several systems with the P4 in them. One of them is a 2.8 Prescott. It has been running 24/7 since I bought it 3 or so years ago, and never given me one minute's problem. Again, I bought all top of the line gear, and there has never been one game that I've thrown at it that it can't play, so I figure why bother upgrading the dumb thing? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
I think I might hold off for a while and see what the quad core CPUs are capable of doing. I'll check out both AMD and Intel offerings and see who has the superior quality product. Then I'll just do a complete rebuild and throw this stuff in another rig.
I think I might hold off for a while and see what the quad core CPUs are capable of doing. I'll check out both AMD and Intel offerings and see who has the superior quality product. Then I'll just do a complete rebuild and throw this stuff in another rig.
- Status