best processor+motherboard under 300$

C

CooperxX

n00b
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
11
im looking to get the best bang for my buck. i want to get the best combo of processor and motherboard for under 300$ the cheaper the better.

any help?
 
Well the 5000+ BE's are only $100. I would find a nice mobo that overclocks well and pair it with a 5000+. Are you looking to game on this machine or just everyday stuff? You could get a nice AM2+ board and have Phenom upgradeability in the future.
 
Speaking of Phenom ready motherboards, even many of the AM2 570SLI equipped motherboards will accept them. And those motherboards are generally around the $100 mark or less. Go to Newegg and check out the Gigabyte offering.
 
A few weeks ago I built a AMD 5000+ BE and Gigabyte 570SLI system for $198.00. I got the 5000+ clocked to 2.9 with no problems. The board has a Phenom ready bios- matter of fact a new bios was released the end of January. I will be upgrading to a Phenom once the clock speeds increase later in the year- but the 5000+ is plenty fast now. For under $300.00 you could get a 5000+ BE, motherboard and 4gb of ddr2 memory.

The AM2+ board with the AMD 770/7900 chipset uses an older southbridge that has had some issues so beware. I went with the 570SLI beacuse I plan on SLI'n my 8800GTX soon.

Scott
 
GA-P35-DS3L + E8400 or E8200. If you'd like to go cheaper, E4600. Depending when you're building, the 8400 and 8200 will drop significantly in price (as more 45nm parts enter the market...at the moment there is a fair amount of price gouging going on).
 
quadnad said:
GA-P35-DS3L + E8400 or E8200. If you'd like to go cheaper, E4600. Depending when you're building, the 8400 and 8200 will drop significantly in price (as more 45nm parts enter the market...at the moment there is a fair amount of price gouging going on).
Click to expand...

+1

The 5000+BE is nice and cheap and I am completely happy with my purchase of it, but I already had an AM2 motherboard. If I was doing a motherboard+CPU upgrade, I would certainly go with the C2D...

@BrokenArrow: Theoretically all AM2 motherboards can run a Phenom - its just that a lot of AM2 motherboards don't have the BIOS update to do it (my M2N32-SLI does, though)
 
brokenarrow03 said:
Hmm...didn't know that. Is it the same for the 590SLI boards?
Click to expand...

You have to be very careful when selecting a 590SLI board.... not many of them support the Phenom like the 570's will. For some odd reason.

Certainly don't rule out a C2D unless you are looking to get away with the cheapest possible but good performing system right now. And if that's the case, you might as well just snag a 5000+ BE or something in the 4000 series and scoop up a cheaper motherboard.
 
well yes its intended for some hardcore gaming

and i would prefer duel core. i like the amds cause they seam to be cheaper compared to the intel at the same performance.

i want something that would be able to stand up to some long nights of FPS like COD4 and some MMOs like lotro or v:soh
 
CooperxX said:
well yes its intended for some hardcore gaming

and i would prefer duel core. i like the amds cause they seam to be cheaper compared to the intel at the same performance.

i want something that would be able to stand up to some long nights of FPS like COD4 and some MMOs like lotro or v:soh
Click to expand...

The cheap C2Ds can be easily overclocked to 3ghz+ on stock cooling, so that swings the budget category in Intel's favor. That said, there are same pretty good AMD procs for cheap (such as the $100 5000+BE, or the $160 6400+).
 
CooperxX said:
i like the amds cause they seam to be cheaper compared to the intel at the same performance.
Click to expand...

I do apologize Cooper, but your information is incorrect. If you don't want to go scouring the web for info, just go here to find a nice summary of the situation.

The setup I posted above is the highest performing, and even more so should you choose to overclock.
 
quadnad said:
I do apologize Cooper, but your information is incorrect. If you don't want to go scouring the web for info, just go here to find a nice summary of the situation.

The setup I posted above is the highest performing, and even more so should you choose to overclock.
Click to expand...

True. However, Cooper is planning for an SLI GPU setup which will boost framerates even more, and at 100+ fps, it doesn't matter what CPU is under the hood at that point.
 
DejaWiz said:
True. However, Cooper is planning for an SLI GPU setup which will boost framerates even more, and at 100+ fps, it doesn't matter what CPU is under the hood at that point.
Click to expand...


I thought I heard somewhere that Steam games were fairly CPU intensive (as opposed to oter games).
 
DejaWiz said:
True. However, Cooper is planning for an SLI GPU setup which will boost framerates even more, and at 100+ fps, it doesn't matter what CPU is under the hood at that point.
Click to expand...

That is certainly misleading saying "it doesn't matter what CPU is under the hood at that point." Although I agree that gaming is GPU limited in general, check out the latest (still a good year old) [H] SLI review with the 65nm C2Ds. There are differences, and the delta will continue to widen as you upgrade videocards/play newer games. More importantly, even though this is "just a game machine," presumably he'd prefer the machine that is faster at doing everything else.

If he's really looking to SLI (and he's only spending $300 on the mobo/CPU combo...) then go with the Asrock 650i when that is released.
 
quadnad said:
That is certainly misleading saying "it doesn't matter what CPU is under the hood at that point." Although I agree that gaming is GPU limited in general, check out the latest (still a good year old) [H] SLI review with the 65nm C2Ds. There are differences, and the delta will continue to widen as you upgrade videocards/play newer games. More importantly, even though this is "just a game machine," presumably he'd prefer the machine that is faster at doing everything else.

If he's really looking to SLI (and he's only spending $300 on the mobo/CPU combo...) then go with the Asrock 650i when that is released.
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with you whatsoever. But, I fail to understand how the C2D will perform so fast compared to the AMD solution, that the AMD will seem like running Windows XP on an 4.77MHz 8088 XT processor.

Bottom line is: both processors are "fast" enough to run any software/games out today and there isn't going to be much, if any, noticeable real-world difference...especially at those kind of frame rates. Don't allow benchmarks to sway you away from one product or the other right now.. because chances are if it won't run on the AMD, it's not going to run on the intel, so it's upgrade time anyway.
 
To add: If you get the 5000+ BE and a decent 570SLI board, you're looking at around $200. Take the extra $100 and put it towards the second video card, some beer, gas money, whatever.

If you absolutely want to spend $300, then go with the C2D solution to maximize that expenditure.
 
DejaWiz said:
I'm not disagreeing with you whatsoever. But, I fail to understand how the C2D will perform so fast compared to the AMD solution, that the AMD will seem like running Windows XP on an 4.77MHz 8088 XT processor.

Bottom line is: both processors are "fast" enough to run any software/games out today and there isn't going to be much, if any, noticeable real-world difference...especially at those kind of frame rates. Don't allow benchmarks to sway you away from one product or the other right now.. because chances are if it won't run on the AMD, it's not going to run on the intel, so it's upgrade time anyway.
Click to expand...

It all depends on what you do. Any self-respecting enthusiast looking to spend only $300 on a processor/motherboard combination for an SLI system should look at the 45nm C2Ds for better performance and better power consumption. Reading that Xbit article really does explain everything, and I'm surprised that with that budget anyone is saying otherwise.

Nowhere did I say that compared to the Intel solution AMD would run like shit. I'm saying that the Intel solution is better performing, overclocks better, has better power consumption figures, and fits in his budget (which again I note nobody but I pointed out his misconception that the Intel solution always costs so much more); it's just plain logic. I'm entirely aware of how benches relate to real life, so I don't need to be told that.
 
quadnad said:
It all depends on what you do. Any self-respecting enthusiast looking to spend only $300 on a processor/motherboard combination for an SLI system should look at the 45nm C2Ds for better performance and better power consumption. Reading that Xbit article really does explain everything, and I'm surprised that with that budget anyone is saying otherwise.

Nowhere did I say that compared to the Intel solution AMD would run like shit. I'm saying that the Intel solution is better performing, overclocks better, has better power consumption figures, and fits in his budget (which again I note nobody but I pointed out his misconception that the Intel solution always costs so much more); it's just plain logic. I'm entirely aware of how benches relate to real life, so I don't need to be told that.
Click to expand...

As I stated, if $300 needs to be spent, then the C2D is certainly the route to go. If $100 wants to be saved, then there are great alternatives out there. ;)
 
DejaWiz said:
As I stated, if $300 needs to be spent, then the C2D is certainly the route to go. If $100 wants to be saved, then there are great alternatives out there. ;)
Click to expand...

The way you stated it was "to maximize expenditure." Somehow I don't read that as positively as you may have hoped. In any event, at least we're agreed to some extent.
 
quadnad said:
The way you stated it was "to maximize expenditure." Somehow I don't read that as positively as you may have hoped. In any event, at least we're agreed to some extent.
Click to expand...

Maximize expenditure = best bang for the buck (for $300).
 
harpoon said:
:confused:

I suggest you take a read of this article:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTI2MiwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

If anything, a multi-GPU system requires more CPU grunt, not less.
Click to expand...

Thanks for pointing out an article I read over a year ago right here at the [H]. 2560x1600 (30" LCD) with AA and AF enabled is going to slow down any system. On the bright side, that article articulates my point further: both platforms are fully capable of running today's software/games at acceptable/playable frame rates. And something worth repeating, imo: If a game or software app ever comes out that doesn't perform well on the AMD system, then it's not going to with the intel system either.... time for an upgrade either way.

I don't know how many times or ways I've got to say this.... if the OP wants to spend all $300 of his budget, then he should seriously consider the C2D platform to get the most out of the purchase. If he's looking to save the better part of $100, then the AMD platform is a viable choice. Either way, there is no software app/game out right now that will run just fine on one but not the other.
 
DejaWiz said:
Thanks for pointing out an article I read over a year ago right here at the [H]. 2560x1600 (30" LCD) with AA and AF enabled is going to slow down any system. On the bright side, that article articulates my point further: both platforms are fully capable of running today's software/games at acceptable/playable frame rates. And something worth repeating, imo: If a game or software app ever comes out that doesn't perform well on the AMD system, then it's not going to with the intel system either.... time for an upgrade either way.

I don't know how many times or ways I've got to say this.... if the OP wants to spend all $300 of his budget, then he should seriously consider the C2D platform to get the most out of the purchase. If he's looking to save the better part of $100, then the AMD platform is a viable choice. Either way, there is no software app/game out right now that will run just fine on one but not the other.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Just look at the differences between the X6800 and FX-62 in FS-X, Oblivion or Medieval: Total War. When you look at the 'Apples to apples' performance between the two, you can clearly see that the X6800 is capable of playable framerates at detail levels that would render the FX-62 'unplayable'. Note that the clockspeed difference between an X6800 and FX-62 is only 130MHz.

The difference between an E8400 setup and say, an X2 5000+ BE setup would be far more substantial, given the IPC advantage (~30%) and ~1GHz gulf in clockspeeds between the two chips (when overclocked).

Even with a $200 budget, you can get E4x00 series chips that overclocked to 3GHz+ will easily beat any AMD setup. Even at the $150 mark, E21x0 chips @ 3GHz+ would beat any AMD setup.

Of course if the discussion was about stock CPUs then I would agree that AMD is the better buy at the $200 mark. I have been taking overclocking into account, since, well, this is [H]. ;)
 
harpoon said:
Of course if the discussion was about stock CPUs then I would agree that AMD is the better buy at the $200 mark. I have been taking overclocking into account, since, well, this is [H]. ;)
Click to expand...

And there lies the difference. And since overclocking is never a guarantee... ;)
 
DejaWiz said:
And there lies the difference. And since overclocking is never a guarantee... ;)
Click to expand...

Cmon, this is [H], overclocking is the norm, not the exception. ;)

Of course, overclocking success is not guaranteed, but the sheer weight of statistics shows that an overclocked C2D is very likely to exceed an overclocked X2 in performance.
 
DejaWiz said:
And there lies the difference. And since overclocking is never a guarantee... ;)
Click to expand...

Sure overclocking isn't a guarantee, and nobody disputes that.

Lets be honest though, the top end silicon from AMD (either F3 or G2) will hit ~3-3.2 on a regular basis. In fact, I haven't read one case where it hasn't at least made it to 3ghz. On the 65nm C2D side however, we're seeing at least 3.2-3.4, and with the 45nm parts we're seeing 4ghz possible on air. I still put the indisputably better overclocking prowess of the C2D (in addition to its better IPC and TDP) as yet another advantage of the processors over their competition. Just take a look at the 65nm and 45nm overclocking databases to see just how consistently they're hitting these targets.

With that kind of spending limit, you can get the faster processor, which consumes less power, which runs cooler, and overclocks better. I don't see the issue, unless saving $100 (on an SLI system!?) is a big deal. Hell, even then I think that Xbit article poses additional options..

Edit: also I'd like to point out that upgrading to the better quad core procs is also an upgrade path with this option.
 
harpoon said:
Cmon, this is [H], overclocking is the norm, not the exception. ;)

Of course, overclocking success is not guaranteed, but the sheer weight of statistics shows that an overclocked C2D is very likely to exceed an overclocked X2 in performance.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is [H] and I've been oc'ing my processors for years. But I never purchase a processor anticipating or expecting moderate to high oc's... I'd be setting myself up for disappointment in the same way I've seen many do here the past few years because they buy a processor then complain that they can't get it to xxx MHz over the stock clock.

I will not disagree that the odds are better for being able to oc the piss out of a C2D and reap the performance benefits vs. an X2, but my advice to the OP (or anyone, for that matter) is this: buy the platform you want based on personally acceptable stock performance vs. overall cost. If you're planning to oc, know that nothing is guaranteed, it's just a really nice bonus if you can squeeze some extra speed out, be it an extra 10Mhz or 1000MHz. :cool:

quadnad said:
Sure overclocking isn't a guarantee, and nobody disputes that.

Lets be honest though, the top end silicon from AMD (either F3 or G2) will hit ~3-3.2 on a regular basis. In fact, I haven't read one case where it hasn't at least made it to 3ghz. On the 65nm C2D side however, we're seeing at least 3.2-3.4, and with the 45nm parts we're seeing 4ghz possible on air. I still put the indisputably better overclocking prowess of the C2D (in addition to its better IPC and TDP) as yet another advantage of the processors over their competition. Just take a look at the 65nm and 45nm overclocking databases to see just how consistently they're hitting these targets.
Click to expand...

See above response.... same applies.
 
DejaWiz said:
See above response.... same applies.
Click to expand...

Again, I'm not disputing that you shouldn't purchase based on overclocking alone; I am however saying that it's an advantage because of the fact that every C2D (certainly the 45nm ones) have massive headroom. This isn't the days of the Clawhammer, or any of the early 939 procs; while we both know overclocking isn't guaranteed, the speeds we're seeing out of these 45nm parts are insane. They're insane and consistent. In my opinion the OP has all the info he needs; if he's an enthusiast, this is a no-brainer.
 
quadnad said:
Again, I'm not disputing that you shouldn't purchase based on overclocking alone; I am however saying that it's an advantage because of the fact that every C2D (certainly the 45nm ones) have massive headroom. This isn't the days of the Clawhammer, or any of the early 939 procs; while we both know overclocking isn't guaranteed, the speeds we're seeing out of these 45nm parts are insane. They're insane and consistent. In my opinion the OP has all the info he needs; if he's an enthusiast, this is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Before 45nm 4GHz was the 'holy grail', now any n00b can get an E8400 to 4GHz with a simple FSB adjustment. :cool:
 
ok anyways i ended up getting a deal with my local computer tech i know

he was able to get me an amd duel core 5600+ along with a decent motherboard, he said he'll install it and put in windows proff edition and do all the dirty work and give me back my computer up and running for a total of 400 alltogether.

the 5600+ X2 will play anygame out there at the moment right?
 
CooperxX said:
he was able to get me an amd dual core 5600+ along with a decent motherboard, he said he'll install it and put in windows proff edition and do all the dirty work and give me back my computer up and running for a total of 400 alltogether.

the 5600+ X2 will play anygame out there at the moment right?
Click to expand...

$130 CPU, $100 Mobo, $140 XP Pro OEM = $370. $30 for labor isn't too bad at all.
 
quadnad said:
Again, I'm not disputing that you shouldn't purchase based on overclocking alone; I am however saying that it's an advantage because of the fact that every C2D (certainly the 45nm ones) have massive headroom. This isn't the days of the Clawhammer, or any of the early 939 procs; while we both know overclocking isn't guaranteed, the speeds we're seeing out of these 45nm parts are insane. They're insane and consistent. In my opinion the OP has all the info he needs; if he's an enthusiast, this is a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

True, the speeds we are seeing from these new 45nm parts is purely and simply awesome when overclocked. But, once again, I'll echo what I've been saying for numerous posts now: for $300, it would be easy to categorize buying something other than the E4xxx and a good mobo as stupid. But if the buyer wishes to save a good $100, the AMD offering is a great choice imo. Simply put, $300 doesn't have to be spent to get a good performing system when $200 will do the job as well. Either CPU is more than capable enough to run any apps/games/OS out today.

And it's not fair to say if someone is an enthusiast then the intel needs to be purchased. Brand and price have zero to do with enthusiast computing. After all, isn't finding the true value in oc'ing getting your processor to a higher (or highest capable) speed, comparing that oc to how much an equal natively clocked cpu is, and being happy that you just saved that much money for the same performance? Unless image is everything and you're deliberately bragging about how high of an oc you got out of your cpu compared to so-and-so's.
 
DejaWiz said:
And it's not fair to say if someone is an enthusiast then the intel needs to be purchased. Brand and price have zero to do with enthusiast computing. After all, isn't finding the true value in oc'ing getting your processor to a higher (or highest capable) speed, comparing that oc to how much an equal natively clocked cpu is, and being happy that you just saved that much money for the same performance? Unless image is everything and you're deliberately bragging about how high of an oc you got out of your cpu compared to so-and-so's.
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with branding; it has to do with the higher performing CPU with the least TDP and the best overclocking potential. This has nothing to do with "image" or bragging rights, it's about the most logical choice. I stand by the fact that if someone is looking to build an SLI system (or any other enthusiast level system, one video card or two) with a budget of $300 for mobo+cpu, a 45nm C2D proc is the only way to go unless they have some bias.

I agree that an enthusiast looking to maximize their purchase with an extremely low budget has some alternatives, but at this budget level, they don't.
 
I see the e8400 at $245 at the egg. What board are you recommending that o/c's well and does SLI for $55?
 
FSCDiablo said:
I see the e8400 at $245 at the egg. What board are you recommending that o/c's well and does SLI for $55?
Click to expand...

Perhaps you'd bother to A. Look at the link I provided in an earlier post to the TankGuys site and B. recognize that the platform and processor are a vastly better fit (even/especially with SLI in mind) when considering either a P35 or 650i motherboard.

I have to be honest, I've seen far too much AMD fanboyism in recent weeks defending the embarrassment that is/was Phenom; I was/am an AMD fanboy (as you can see by my sig), however I'm building a Q9450 rig once they've available.

Currently C2Ds have a better IPC, TDP, overclockability, and upgrade path (to 45nm quad core). For this price range, I don't believe there is a better choice. If you're looking to build a budget system, then yes, AMD may provide another option; however for $300 you can certainly build something significantly faster than the AMD options.
 
quadnad said:
I stand by the fact that if someone is looking to build an SLI system (or any other enthusiast level system, one video card or two) with a budget of $300 for mobo+cpu, a 45nm C2D proc is the only way to go unless they have some bias.

I agree that an enthusiast looking to maximize their purchase with an extremely low budget has some alternatives, but at this budget level, they don't.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I have been saying all along! At a budget of $300, the C2D should be at the top of the list no ifs, ands, or buts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top