Congratulations, this is the 100th time I've seen someone post nonsense regarding C2D.
Not all gamers are tech-noobs, but they tend to be on the younger side, overexcitable side and to be honest, not that bright when it comes to the bigger picture. I mean, this is just priceless, "They also acknowledge how faster cpu's help people with CAD, and stuff like that, but since most people don't do that there is no point." What kind of FUD are you/they trying to pull here? Do you know what most people don't actually do? Play high end games with extreme resolutions and settings. The people that do are in the minority.
If you get a PC just for gaming, sure scrimp on the CPU now and pay more later when you have to upgrade to get those high framerates. Buying an E6600 NOW means I don't have to upgrade my system later because it is future proof. So when DX10 cards come out, and there are a lot of support for them, I can just upgrade the graphics card and my system is up-to-date in regards to gaming.
There are 2 CPU's I would recomend to anyone who wants to get a complete new system.
E6300 for budget to midrange systems. The CPU may cost fractionally more than an X2 3800+, but with the cost/performance and performance/watt ratio's highly in it's favour. With the option to overclock safely and easily with average boards, it'd be my pick or recomendation to any friend who relied upon my judgement.
E6600, my system. My system's great. I can play high end games, surf the web, check email, encode videos, play music, create content, everything really. And what's best, I can do this ALL at the same time if I want to. Even with the dodgey memory I bought that had to be returned, I was able to do those things. That's a power user, getting the best bang for your buck - by a long way. When you are upgrading your X2 3800+ my PC will be still going strong. I think the extra £120 on the CPU now is worth it.
Anything else is either going to be, an enthusiast system (in which case the choice is obvious and down to their enthusiast preferences) or someone who does hardly anything with their PC except daily office tasks, net surfing and email. To those people I say, goto Dell 😛
AMD can increase their market share as much as they like. I don't care, if they had the better product I would have bought it, they didn't. No sensible person is going to recomend an inferior product like the X2 range. Most people who come here looking for advice, have a price limit with different intentions. And as such, they will often go away with a recomendation for a couple of C2D cpu's to consider, do you know why? Because it's the best thing on the market now.
*feels she has made her point fully enough and goes back to installing drivers and programs, while muttering about bad ram*
core2drew
Distinguished
- Aug 11, 2006
- 39
- 0
- 18,530
Very true. Your point's completely valid.
But, not everyone knows how to correctly overclock. It's very possible they just raise the CPU voltage a bunch right in the beginning to make sure they have the power headroom for being able to raise their FSB, yet they're completely unaware that having the CPU voltage up higher than it NEEDS to be will kill the processor.
And, something I think about, is ... It doesn't seem like a person asking for help on selecting a processor would be a person who does know how to correctly/safely overclock.
Either way ... For most nerds like us, killing off 20% of the life of a proc means nothing because the upgrade will come long before that.
1Tanker
Splendid
- Apr 28, 2006
- 4,645
- 1
- 22,780
So many people like to prey on the inexperienced people's fears regarding overclocking. Overclocking isn't the "black art"/ "taboo" that it used to be. You know it's a widely accepted practice when Intel starts enabling overclocking on their own motherboards. The reason that it is widely accepted now is, because it's relatively safe, but like anything, if done to extremes it can have consequences. Just because you have money to burn/no budgetary concerns, doesn't mean that we(people who respect the value of a dollar) shouldn't strive to get the most value out of our systems. :roll:
mickeddie
Distinguished
- Dec 9, 2004
- 750
- 0
- 18,990
Very true. Your point's completely valid.
But, not everyone knows how to correctly overclock. It's very possible they just raise the CPU voltage a bunch right in the beginning to make sure they have the power headroom for being able to raise their FSB, yet they're completely unaware that having the CPU voltage up higher than it NEEDS to be will kill the processor.
And, something I think about, is ... It doesn't seem like a person asking for help on selecting a processor would be a person who does know how to correctly/safely overclock.
Either way ... For most nerds like us, killing off 20% of the life of a proc means nothing because the upgrade will come long before that.
I never overclocked before and will be SURE to post in the OC forum before I do anything. I will do it very slowly and carefully, especially on my GPU.
core2drew
Distinguished
- Aug 11, 2006
- 39
- 0
- 18,530
That's it. I have no respect for the value of a dollar.
The fact that I have the ability to spend a bit more money on my processor doesn't mean I don't strive to achieve a high value from my processor. All chips overclock, not just the low end ones. I can take my 6700 past 6800 specs; seeing as the 6700 comes up at a much lower price than the 6800, I think that's a fantastic value.
Overclocking is a very normal practice, but many people are still new to the scene. Recommending a 6300 right off the bat knowing that the processor has the POTENTIAL to reach FX speeds isn't always wise.
If they're looking for the best flat-out bang for the buck w/ a limited budget, then the 6300/6400 hits the sweet spot. But, what if they want to be sure they hit a certain speed/performance limit, but are overclocking amateurs? They could start off with a higher clocked processor, and do a mild overclock. That way, they hit their speed/performance mark for sure, and are getting a better value on their proc by overclocking it.
Don't look down on those who go with a higher clocked processor instead of going the ultimate 'value' route.
The fact of the matter is, is that the Conroe CPU makes a difference for every computer enthusiast out there because it just lowered the cost of a better system no matter what you do with it, gamers included.
Am I going to buy one, YEP!!! And a shiny new motherboard and DDR2 ram to go along with it. And guess what, I am also going to buy a 5000+ A64 to go in the gaming rig you see below.
That is why Conroe matters.
To say there is no point to Conroe is not looking at the big picture.
Now if we can get AMD to lower the price of the ATI video cards when the next generation comes out that would be a blast.
Am I going to buy one, YEP!!! And a shiny new motherboard and DDR2 ram to go along with it. And guess what, I am also going to buy a 5000+ A64 to go in the gaming rig you see below.
That is why Conroe matters.
To say there is no point to Conroe is not looking at the big picture.
Now if we can get AMD to lower the price of the ATI video cards when the next generation comes out that would be a blast.
Synergy6
Distinguished
- Dec 8, 2005
- 463
- 0
- 18,780
Overclocking isn't rocket science. Read a FAQ or two and you're past the "amateur" phase. I agree, if we were telling newbies to get LN2 and voltmod their boards up the ying-yang, that would be bad. Telling them, on the other hand, to push their CPU within its limits (which C2Ds excel at, even on air) is not only sensible, it would be rather vindictive of us not to. Just because you're scared/apprehensive/uncaring about overclocking doesn't mean the information that most people would value should be hidden. After all, overclocking god or newbie, the vaaast majority of people aren't going to get near the operational limit of their CPU in terms of time anyway, so "OMG, don't OC, you'll fry your CPU sooner" is rather a moot point.
E.g., say an average CPU lasts 10 years and dies. OC it hard, and it might only last 7 years. Say I had a P3 700MHz from 7 years ago, and I had OCed it to 1GHz from purchase till today. Now, it would die today, instead of 2009. But, which is more valuable. A good ~30% more performance over 7 years, or having a chip which is now worth around $3 for the next 3 years. I think the answer is rather obvious.
Synergy6
Gary_Busey
Distinguished
- Mar 21, 2006
- 1,380
- 0
- 19,280
Solid points. Few of us will use our processors long enough to see them die out, even if overclocked. Processors, even overclocked ones, last much longer than most people's computer replacement cycles, usually 3 or 4 years.
1Tanker
Splendid
- Apr 28, 2006
- 4,645
- 1
- 22,780
I don't look down on those who choose the high-end chips, i just think the scare tactic regarding O/Cing is like beating a dead horse. Almost everyone on these forums are beyond the "grandma/grandpa" (who just want to send e-mail, surf, and play solitaire) stage, and as such are ,or should be made aware of the potential value of low-end processors. Yes as your metaphor about cars is valid...i take it one-step further and go back to the muscle-car days. You could buy a Chevelle with a "Big-Block" or buy a Chevelle(same class) with a "Small-block" and throw a high-lift cam, headers, good intake-manifold/750 Holley DP, shave and "cc" the heads,etc. etc. on the small-block and then have fun with the Chevelle SS (454) from stoplight-to-stoplight. See, they're both Chevelle's with varying motors(like both C2D with varying MHz) If by the next stoplight, the Big-Block beat you...it was still a fun ride, and you still probably gave him a good run for his money. Now...You could have been unlucky and thrown a rod, but so could the 454 also.
Gary_Busey
Distinguished
- Mar 21, 2006
- 1,380
- 0
- 19,280
I don't look down on those who choose the high-end chips, i just think the scare tactic regarding O/Cing is like beating a dead horse. Almost everyone on these forums are beyond the "grandma/grandpa" (who just want to send e-mail, surf, and play solitaire) stage, and as such are ,or should be made aware of the potential value of low-end processors. Yes as your metaphor about cars is valid...i take it one-step further and go back to the muscle-car days. You could buy a Chevelle with a "Big-Block" or buy a Chevelle(same class) with a "Small-block" and throw a high-lift cam, headers, good intake-manifold/750 Holley DP, shave and "cc" the heads,etc. etc. on the small-block and then have fun with the Chevelle SS (454) from stoplight-to-stoplight. See, they're both Chevelle's with varying motors(like both C2D with varying MHz) If by the next stoplight, the Big-Block beat you...it was still a fun ride, and you still probably gave him a good run for his money. Now...You could have been unlike and thrown a rod, but so could the 454 also.
I think you're really an American at heart.
core2drew
Distinguished
- Aug 11, 2006
- 39
- 0
- 18,530
I agree with everything that y'all are saying for sure.
Maybe it's just my experience w/ family/friends that have an extremely small understanding of comps that leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth regarding topics of overclocking.
I'm just happy that Intel is again competitive in the gaming market. More players in the game benefits everybody.
Maybe it's just my experience w/ family/friends that have an extremely small understanding of comps that leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth regarding topics of overclocking.
I'm just happy that Intel is again competitive in the gaming market. More players in the game benefits everybody.
quantumsheep
Distinguished
- Dec 10, 2005
- 2,341
- 0
- 19,790
DeMonOfElRu
Distinguished
- Jul 16, 2006
- 84
- 0
- 18,630
DeMonOfElRu
Distinguished
- Jul 16, 2006
- 84
- 0
- 18,630
Welllll .... would you have a look at this.
How on earth did this ****ty thread turn into an overclocking one ???
**** , no matter. Since overclocking is my thing .. might as well join in.
Overclocking is fun ... Most people overclock because its fun.
...... did I say most ?? I mean many many many ......
And I'm one of them. But not to the point of breaking. That would just be stupid , unless you have a lot of money to burn.
Don't you just wish you could be more like old uncle Bill. :!: :!:
How on earth did this ****ty thread turn into an overclocking one ???
**** , no matter. Since overclocking is my thing .. might as well join in.
Overclocking is fun ... Most people overclock because its fun.
...... did I say most ?? I mean many many many ......
And I'm one of them. But not to the point of breaking. That would just be stupid , unless you have a lot of money to burn.
Don't you just wish you could be more like old uncle Bill. :!: :!:
- Jan 15, 2006
- 1,545
- 0
- 19,780
No, i just wanna win that $10 000 pc from tom's.... too bad i live in Canada and am only 17
Actually since i can't win, yes i do want to be like Bill
Ok, so when would you recommend intel over amd? Because from your mass spam of posts I can't imagine any situation you would recommend intel over amd...
I would recommend intel for video editing and cpu intensive tasks for a person with a decent budget. I would recommend intel for overclockers. I would also recommend the very high end ones for people that won't listen to reason and just have to have the best. I would recommend AMD for normal gaming, and people on a budget. I would also recommend some AM2 cpu's for overclockers. I would recommend AM2 EE's for people concerned about power. I would also recommed AM2 x2 3600 or 3800 EE for an internet machine, since the price difference beteween them and a PD805 arn't much, but performance increase is dramatic.
So don't say i wouldn't recommend intel for anything.
See this is the only thing I don't get about you, though your points are well put and very good. But the low end Intel "805" is by far more then enough for Internet. The AM2 and 3800 EE are over kill in the way you are putting it in other post from you. I wouldn't recommend anything higher then an Semptron or Celeron for Internet and email use. Even video play back doesn't need that much for Mpeg 4 and below. HD on the other hand needs some of the best stuff out there today for it.
But see most people start off with just doing internet stuff and then they move onto other things. If people just wanted to game on there PC then they shouldn't even get a PC, get a console for that. The PC isn't just for gaming and far from it. Even tho I play a lot of games, most of my time is done doing work on my PC. I'm sure most are like that as well. I know there are a few out there like me that normaly have 20 plus windows opened when doing work.
But back to my point, if your going to say you recommend a certain processor for Internet/email use, then use the lowest ones out there, because that is all they need. I forget who made the comment about BB vs Dial-up when he worked at RR. It's the same thing, why tell them to get an 3800, when anything around from AMD and Intel around 2GHz would be over kill for them.
Not trying to flame you on this, but just want to see what you think about that. When these cpu's from both AMD and Intel are still out and about and cheap, why not recommend them to someone for general purpose use.
- Jan 15, 2006
- 1,545
- 0
- 19,780
Yes i think your right, but theres no point in saving very little o get a crappy celeron. I would recommend a sempron because they are much better and will work with vista. I don't think celerons are 64 bit but don't quote me on that. I wouldn't recommend a p4 of any kind now because they are so hot and use so much power that getting a slightly more expensive sempron or x2 3600 will pay for itself with power savings.
quantumsheep
Distinguished
- Dec 10, 2005
- 2,341
- 0
- 19,790
For gods sake you ignorant b******, do you not realize that one of the new 65nm Celerons at a low clockspeed is not very hot at all and is hardly "power hungry".
I retract my other statement about you being unbiased.
Grimmy
Splendid
- Feb 20, 2006
- 4,431
- 0
- 22,780
Gawd... Recommend this or that.
If someone is totally naive to computers, why not explain both AMD and Intel, and let them decide for themselves.
I dont think what people recommends is going to matter much, but you guys seem to think it does, by far. Most people that buy stuff, end up being happy as long as it works, most of the time.
Why not just worry about what you want?
If someone is totally naive to computers, why not explain both AMD and Intel, and let them decide for themselves.
I dont think what people recommends is going to matter much, but you guys seem to think it does, by far. Most people that buy stuff, end up being happy as long as it works, most of the time.
Why not just worry about what you want?
- Jan 15, 2006
- 1,545
- 0
- 19,780
For gods sake you ignorant b******, do you not realize that one of the new 65nm Celerons at a low clockspeed is not very hot at all and is hardly "power hungry".
I retract my other statement about you being unbiased.
I said i wasn't sure. If thats the case and the price is right then maybe thats the way to go. I'll check it out to look at its stats. I'm not unfair, i just didn't know about that.
EDIT: I looked at it and it may have fixed the power issue, but its also a POS, for a seemling unreasonable price of $89. The semprons are like $50. For a little more you can get a x2 3600 and get dual core and 64 bit. Now don't call me bias if it has 64 bit capability because i didn't see that mentioned.
quantumsheep
Distinguished
- Dec 10, 2005
- 2,341
- 0
- 19,790
For gods sake you ignorant b******, do you not realize that one of the new 65nm Celerons at a low clockspeed is not very hot at all and is hardly "power hungry".
I retract my other statement about you being unbiased.
I said i wasn't sure. If thats the case and the price is right then maybe thats the way to go. I'll check it out to look at its stats. I'm not unfair, i just didn't know about that.
EDIT: I looked at it and it may have fixed the power issue, but its also a POS, for a seemling unreasonable price of $89. The semprons are like $50. For a little more you can get a x2 3600 and get dual core and 64 bit. Now don't call me bias if it has 64 bit capability because i didn't see that mentioned.
Sorry for the biased thing, it's just that now after the transition to 65nm the celerons are on a par with the Semprons. I used to be a massive Sempron fan but now that the Celerons have dropped in price in my country (UK) they seem about even.
Sorry again mate, i "love" geting off on the wrong foot with people. Happens all the time.
Gahhhhhh.
Edit!
The new ones are 64 bit, which should help with Vista. IF the user has enough RAM (i.e. at least 1gb.)
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question temp issue with ssd nvme gen 4 on mobo pcie 3 or gen 3 ?- Started by impzx
- Replies: 4
-
Question can my underwatt psu causing my vga driver error?- Started by gach
- Replies: 4
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram