Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200 vs. AMD Phenom X4 9550/9500

U

uncertain

New Member
I need to buy a new desktop PC, but I know practically nothing about computers. So... any help would be greatly appreciated.

I need to choose between:

1. Q8200 + 4GB RAM
2. 9550 + 5GB RAM + 256MB NVIDIA GeForce
3. 9500 + 6GB RAM

What I use the computer for: Internet surfing, downloading and watching movies and TV shows, CD/DVD burning, some Word and Excel stuff, some graphics stuff (Paint Shop Pro, Animation Shop, Photoshop), and some video editing (Pinnacle: nothing complicated - cutting scenes from different videos and putting them together and adding some simple effects, mostly - but I do work with some pretty big files, if that matters). Plus I often run a bunch of programs (e.g. uTorrent, Nitro PDF professional, Livestation, Limewire, etc.) at the same time.

So... not being a gamer, would I still benefit from getting the better processor, or would the AMD ones work just as well and I should get more RAM instead? And would the graphics card do me any good?
 
Twist86

Twist86

Active Member
Actually for the price the Q8200 it is not bad same cache as the Q6600 and is 45nm for close to the same price...if it overclocks as well as a Q6600 then I would go with it.

2x2 = 4GB kit 40 bucks DDR2 800
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122

2x2 with MIR OCZ ram DDR2 1066
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227298


Intel outperforms the first generation Phenom by quite a bit and overclock better. For editing/converting you will notice a huge speed up...if you have a AMD board with AMD chipset + a ATI card it will increase a lot of graphic work/editing/converting since they can use the GPU to speed things up.

Nvidia has the same thing but I think its only for the newer GTX 200 and up cards.
 
Last edited:
F

funkysnair

VIP Member
Q8200 has less cache. but better FSB..

i belive the multiplyer on the q8200 is 7.5 and the q6600 is 9 so i pressume that the q6600 should overclock a little better
 
U

uncertain

New Member
I know the Intel is better than the AMDs, and I know most gamers like the 6600 better than the 8200. But I'm not building a system myself - I'm just choosing between a few packages, none of which include a 6600. What I want to know is whether I really need the better (and more expensive) processor if I'm NOT a gamer, or if the cheaper ones should work fine as well (in which case I can get more RAM and hard drive space). I don't care how well any of the processors overclock.
 
Mitch?

Mitch?

banned
if you aren't going to do anything but light stuff like online and word processing, you probably don't even need a quad core.
if you edit/convert videos or music alot, or game a bit, or hardcore multitask, i'd get the q6600 (q8200 if you have the cash). 2 gigs of ram would be enough for most - 4 gigs if you want it (it's like $30 more for 4 gigs than two). if you don't do very intensive things, i'd just get the aforementioned, a low-midline graphics card (4xxx series, not 4870/4850) and a big harddrive (1TB - 1,024 gigabytes that is - for only $99 at newegg.com)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top