Are you processor privy?

M

mightymiff

New Member
Alright, I want an efficient value-driven processor that won't be completely outmoded next week. It will not play games, it will run the internet and encode movies. If I'm not a gamer can I get by with 2 cores? What about 3? Ideally, I'd like to be under 200 for the mobo/processor combo., but can be compelled to up my price.

I'm new to the PC arena. I'd be happy if you could steer me in the right direction, perhaps by commenting a bit on the quality, value, performance, etc. of the processors listed below.

AMD Phenom 8650 Toliman 2.3GHz 3 x 512KB L2 Cache 2MB L3 Cache Socket AM2+ 95W Triple-Core Processor - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103253

AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 3.1GHz 1MB L2 Cache Socket AM2 89W Dual-Core Processor - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103272

Intel Core 2 Duo E7400 Wolfdale 2.8GHz 3MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115206

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz 2 x 4MB L2 Cache LGA 775 Quad-Core Processor - Retail
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115017
 
the q6600 is one of the best price to performance processors out there, and they overclock like no tommorow, they completely stomp out a current phenom also
 
well i know how video coding goes, and converting and all that, if you have a program that will use four cores, the q6600 is amazing, most people get it to like 3ghz on stock cooling. i'm sure that most nicer software uses at least two cores, as both of mine are maxed when converting. if you know that your programs dont/wont use 4 cores, i'd just get the e7300, another good processor.
 
just a noob said:
the q6600 is one of the best price to performance processors out there, and they overclock like no tommorow, they completely stomp out a current phenom also
Click to expand...

yeah the q6600 will still be a damn good chip in a year or two from now. dual core are good at the moment but they wont cope with some software in a years time.
 
I would agree, the q6600 would be the best for what you want and from the choices you selected. The 3 core AMD's are a joke. Every reviewer out there agrees.
 
+1 for the Q6600, at the moment i have one and i've OC it on the stock cooler to 3.15ghz
 
paratwa said:
I would agree, the q6600 would be the best for what you want and from the choices you selected. The 3 core AMD's are a joke. Every reviewer out there agrees.
Click to expand...

I would respectfully disagree. The AMD Tri-Cores are not a joke. Are they as efficient and good as an Intel E8400 or a Q6600 processor? No, but the Phenom Tri-Cores can hold their own and will not be something outdated and running sluggish within 30 months.

For what he wants to use his system for I would probably go with the Intel Q6600 Quad-Core processor.
 
^well said. :)

Well if you want speed then go with intel, if you can sheel out the extra 50$ for a Q6600 then go for it, if not them you would be more than satisfied with the 7400, you can get those things up 3.5+ on stock coolin, my friend got his up 3.9 on aftermarket cooler.

But i would go with intel, if you have the extra money for it.If you want to save money, then go with amd, they are the budget pc's right now.But run pretty damn good, so don't listen to biased reviews saying amds suck or what not, they are good cpu's...
 
Thank you everyone for you input. I went against a lot of it when I went ahead and purchased the E8500 (basically the same price as the 8400 with a newegg combo deal). Ultimately I was swayed by the 45nm architecture and the lower power rating.

I'm going to put it in a Gigabyte P45 mobo--next year I can stick in a quadcore for peanuts and see how much more I like it? (I'm budget-conscious now because my computer is on the fritz and I needed to shell out money for a whole new setup).

Think I'll be happy, or am I an idiot for disagreeing with several of you?
 
Last edited:
mightymiff said:
Thank you everyone for you input. I went against a lot of it when I went ahead and purchased the E8500 (basically the same price as the 8400 with a newegg combo deal). Ultimately I was swayed by the 45nm architecture and the lower power rating.

I'm going to put it in a Gigabyte P45 mobo--next year I can stick in a quadcore for peanuts and see how much more I like it? (I'm budget-conscious now because my computer is on the fritz and I needed to shell out money for a whole new setup).

Think I'll be happy, or am I an idiot for disagreeing with several of you?
Click to expand...

you sir are an idiot.








nah just kidding

but you wouldve been much better off with the Quad core. especially since your gonna encode vidios atc, which would utilize all four cores...

but the E8500 aint that bad
 
mightymiff said:
I'm going to put it in a Gigabyte P45 motherboard--next year I can stick in a quad-core for peanuts and see how much more I like it?
Click to expand...

In my opinion I wouldn't upgrade your motherboard or processor until at least June 2011. Your hardware performance won't diminish much by then and Quad-Core processors will likely be commonplace then and the technology will be refined and also consume less power and be lower in price. The Intel E8500 is a very good processor and you won't be disappointed with what it can do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top