Would You Buy A Core 2 Duo System Today?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar

Would you buy Core 2 Duo today?

  • Yes, right away

    Votes: 103 25.8%

  • Yes, but with my next upgrade

    Votes: 158 39.6%

  • No. I''ll stick with AMD

    Votes: 83 20.8%

  • I don''t intend to buy anything

    Votes: 55 13.8%
  • Total voters
    399
Would a 2X across the board increase in performance over AMD FX62 be a good reason to get a Core 2?

I'll let you know my results (hopefully by this weekend) what I can get my Core 2 X6800 upto (aiming for 4.0-4.5Ghz). On average it appears the Core 2 X6800 is about 50% faster than an AMD FX62. With overclocking that should post 80-90% faster (almost 2X).

I'm not into "brand" loyalty, I go with what works the fastest and is stable and produces the best results. Primarily FSX and FS9 are the simulations I'm most concerned about performance. Doom3, Quake 4, F.E.A.R., Far Cry, Half life just don't push a PC like FS9 or FSX (demo) does.

The processor has arrived, the other components are being ordered as I type.

When/if AMD respond with a faster processor, I'll jump on their boat -- going back and forth, just how AMD & Intel want it.

Rob.
 
While the Core 2 Duo may infact be an amazing processor I continue to wonder about the benchmarks and hype it gets.

The benchmarks that are taken of comparing the Athlon FXs and Athlon 64/X2s only show that the FPS gain is usually only 5-10 in a situation where you already easily get 70-100 FPS. Anyone running an Athlon FX or X2 now would be wasting their money in my opinion. While benchmarks tend to be an accurate measurment of performance I would like to think that they are a factor in over hyping hardware.

I'm not siding with anyone one company here but here my next buy in a few years will probably be whatever is best at the current moment and right now with an Athlon X2 3800+ there is seemingly no reason to upgrade as I use my computer strictly for gaming and forum whoring and the current state of games right now do not require cpus such as the X6800Extreme or FX62. Obviously being able to purchase a 300$ CPU that performs > or = to is a no brainer, if you don't already have a an X2 or FX system. I think people need to just buy what according to their needs, because while the Core 2 Duo might give a 10fps increase in an already 100 fps game on these benchmarks, I would think that over 50% of most desktop computer users probably don't use 3/4s of them.
 
Erm, you do know most people don't just buy PCs for gaming like yourself? Even for most people that game, they do other CPU intensive stuff as well, that will scale a tad more linearly.

Btw, games are a bad example, as they are mainly bottlenecked by the GPU(s). Getting only 5 more FPS doesn't mean the processor isn't twice as good, it just means it's not the current bottleneck. Look at something like encoding and the situation would most likely be different.
Synergy6
 
Erm, you do know most people don't just buy PCs for gaming like yourself? Even for most people that game, they do other CPU intensive stuff as well, that will scale a tad more linearly.

Btw, games are a bad example, as they are mainly bottlenecked by the GPU(s). Getting only 5 more FPS doesn't mean the processor isn't twice as good, it just means it's not the current bottleneck. Look at something like encoding and the situation would most likely be different.
Synergy6
Click to expand...

Good point, understood.
 
While the Core 2 Duo may infact be an amazing processor I continue to wonder about the benchmarks and hype it gets.
Click to expand...

All the talk about C2D isn't really aimed at or spoken by people who have PCs that fully meet their needs. So if you're not ready to upgrade now, fine. If you are, you have a most difficult choice right now if you are looking in the budget to lower-mid price range. I wouldn't argue with anyone that chose S939, AM2 or C2D machines because all have big bang per buck in my book. But from mid range up, it's hard for me to listen to the AMD argument right now. 6600 to 6800 C2D CPUs rule their roosts, plain and simple.
 
Erm, you do know most people don't just buy PCs for gaming like yourself? Even for most people that game, they do other CPU intensive stuff as well, that will scale a tad more linearly.

Btw, games are a bad example, as they are mainly bottlenecked by the GPU(s). Getting only 5 more FPS doesn't mean the processor isn't twice as good, it just means it's not the current bottleneck. Look at something like encoding and the situation would most likely be different.
Synergy6
Click to expand...

So very true. I think a better benchmark then a game these days would be transcodeing a 700MB Divx file to a 4GB DVD would be a good test. But then again that could be bottle necked by RAM or some other thing 🙁 It seems that CPU's have gotten so good these days that no matter what you use its all good (I use a 3.8Ghz Pentium D 805 and it seems pretty quick to me for so cheap lol) I havent done a transcode from a Divx file to DVD yet with my current machine but I know on my old northwood it would take about 3-4 hours or longer depending on the settings I used !
 
Games and specifically simulations (in my case MS Flight Sim 2004 and I guess FSX) are big CPU and GPU hogs. Decoding or encoding video/audio is CPU, memory, disk, burner dependant. Playing a game/sim is CPU, memory, disk, GPU dependant, audio dependant.

If you like to run games/sims at 1920 x 1200 or higher, you'll understand why someone wants a faster PC. I've successfully brought my old AMD FX57 with two 7800GTX 512MB SLI down to 2 fps in FS 2004 (with add-on scenery, aircraft, and airports) and that was NOT max detail either!

Anyway, day 1 of my build and so far so good, no surprises and on schedule -- I'll be ready to run a leak test on the cooling loops tomorrow AM.

Components:
Thermaltake Mozart case.
Intel Core 2 X6800 Extreme
Patriot 2GB memory
ATI X1900XTX video card
Asus P5W DH Deluxe motherboard
Creative Lab X-Fi Elite
Plextor 716A DVD burner
Two WD Raptors 74GB
Silverstone 650 Watt PS
Two water cooling loops 1/2" (one for CPU one for GPU) using
Swiftech MCP-655 Pump
Swiftech dual 120mm Radiators
Swiftech Storm CPU waterblock
Swiftech VGA waterblock w/BGA ramsinks

There are 4 120mm fans on the radiators and 3 additional internal 120mm fans. I've mounted both radiators on outside rear of the case. The VGA pump is mounted externally also and the CPU pump internal -- I was concerned about getting those large magnetic based pumps too close to other components (hence the exterior rear mounting of one).

I'm a little worried my 650 Watt Silverstone does not have enough juice, but I figure I'm only running one video card -- worse case I'll have to upgrade to the PC Power & Cooling 1KWatt PS.

My goal is to hit 4Ghz on the CPU and get a stable (and relatively quiet) PC to hit 14000 3DMark05 by this Monday.

Rob.
 
Uhm, have you looked at the E6300? Pretty damn cheap if you ask me, especially so considering the performance. Intel's main problem right now is ramping production, so they won't be in much of a mood to slash prices anytime soon.

Oh, and I would love to have heard your opinion on the FX series about a month ago.

Synergy6
 
i have used amd for several years now, but still go for the best at reasonable prices, i would buy a core 2 duo, but not until the bugs are worked out & the prices are lower. over 200.00 for a mother board with all the goodies, please, get real.
 
Roncpem,

With the exception of the Core 2 X6800 Extreme, all other Core 2's have a better price to performance ratio over all AMD CPUs.

The E6600 outperforms the AMD FX62 and has considerable overclocking potential on certain motherboards. Intel $360 vs. AMD FX62 $827, FX60 $635, FX57 $415.

Don't understand what you mean by Core 2 motherboards being expensive?? $99 is expensive?

What "Bugs" are these? There have been some driver issues and some games need updates to work with dual core, but that has applied to both AMD and Intel.

Keep your mind open, the information you have provided is not accurate and doesn't help anyone reading this thread.

Rob.
 
The primary triade for the next jump:

Vista
DX10
DDR2/3 RAM

The CPU will follow.

"Condensing fact from the vapor of nuance."
Click to expand...

exactly what I am thinking.

btw athlon 2000
6800 ultra
756 ram ddr2100
ide hdd 180gb

My comp runs all new games just fine as long as I tune down the CPU load a bit.

so what is the rush?

DX10 and Vista

cooler graphics,

and a cooler OS.

we use hardware to use software.

why get cool hardware just so we can all be in a pissing contest?

o wait nvm...
 
Swamp_Man,

I think you just lost credibility points with 4 identical posts in a row -- do you know how to use a computer?
 
It would seem overclockers or anyone wanting to overclock would find the Conroe hard to resist. OCing on air and obtaining reasonable gains is certainly a hook.

Most people have answered this from a single PC standpoint. Even those who have stated they have more than one, have ended referring back to a single aging PC replacement probably being a Conroe.

There are indeed families out there like mine (five people using computers often at the same time). To keep the family budget in line, I have tried to build same platform type, which is currently AMD 939. This way, if necessary, parts can be interchanged and spare parts left from upgrade (IE cpu change to faster speed, video card upgrade) still have value (emergency re-install) should something fail.

While I would love to overclock a Conroe, the price of the CPU (reasonable yet a bit more cash than I will spend on an AMD X2), added to the cost of the motherboard, added to the cost of a RAM change (2 GB per machine) is a LOT more than I want to spend. When considering the entire system thing, there is more than just the price of the CPU to consider.

At this point the AMD's still do everything I need them to do with ease and I am confident they will until a major overall will be needed. Besides, sooner or later AMD will release something that blows Intel off the throne and the whole cycle starts over.

If I were building a single system for myself, I would indeed look intently at the E6600.

Questors
 
From my point of view, at this point, the E8400 or the E8500 for those with a slightly bigger budget are the two prime choices. But, for hardcore overclockers I would say Xeon chips are the top, essentially the same as Core 2 Duo, exept with - in laymen's terms - higher durability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom