• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Which processor? (new build, Finally!)

R

RaphaelVinceti

Gawd
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
600
Ok, i was bouncing around Newegg planning my build, and i noticed something strange.. the Intel dual cores are cheaper than the AMD dual cores (some of them), so, i was wondering, which should i get.. the Intel Pentium D 820 (2.8ghz, 800mhz FSB, 12+16kb L1 cache, 2x1mb L2 cache, the 830 (3.0, 800, 12+16, 2x1mb), the X2 3800+ (2.0, 1ghz,64+64kb L1, 2x512 L2) or the Opteron 165 (1.8, 1ghz, 64+64, 2x1mb L2)?

Im stumped, i know the AMD dual core architecture is superior, but is the performance difference between the 820, and the opteron 165 worth the extra 100 dollars?


(BTW, this is also over in the AMD forum)
 
RaphaelVinceti said:
Ok, i was bouncing around Newegg planning my build, and i noticed something strange.. the Intel dual cores are cheaper than the AMD dual cores (some of them), so, i was wondering, which should i get.. the Intel Pentium D 820 (2.8ghz, 800mhz FSB, 12+16kb L1 cache, 2x1mb L2 cache, the 830 (3.0, 800, 12+16, 2x1mb), the X2 3800+ (2.0, 1ghz,64+64kb L1, 2x512 L2) or the Opteron 165 (1.8, 1ghz, 64+64, 2x1mb L2)?

Im stumped, i know the AMD dual core architecture is superior, but is the performance difference between the 820, and the opteron 165 worth the extra 100 dollars?


(BTW, this is also over in the AMD forum)
Click to expand...


Hm, you can get a dual core 3800 for $285 shipped. Look in hot deals forum. I wouldn't touch the 90nm intel dual cores with a 10ft pole to be honest. However the 65nm ones look really nice, if you can wait I would get that, if not then amd.
 
The performance difference is worth the extra $100 IMHO. The Opteron 165 will run cooler, faster and consume less power.
 
I dunno. My brother is running a dual core Intel and seems to perform very nicely with anything we throw at it. Not saying it is a superior CPU, which I don't think it is, but it's not crap. For what it is, it may be a bit overpriced, but if you're an Intel fan, you wouldn't go wrong. Personally, I feel Intel is stale. I used to prefer them over AMD, but in recent times I have jumped ship onto AMD's boat.
 
Wait for Yonah/Conroe unless your computer is really horrible and you gotta get off it. intel's got a couple of changes. If you guys have read the benchmarks of the Yonah core (experimental and mobile processor) against an X2 3800+ and 4400+ (2.0Ghz processors), it isn't far behind any of them... Wait till about 2nd or 3rd quarter next year. It'd be worth the wait.
 
Um.. What socket are those going to be? I would really like to upgrade soon, and if those will be on a socket currently out, Ill just get a low end processor on that socket, and build the rest of the system.
 
These are socket 775, which is here to stay for a while so don't worry about that.

Yes, the Intel processors are cheaper than the AMD ones. However. Intel motherboard are also a lot more expensive than AMD nForce motherboards, so what you save on the processor you lose on the motherboard. You're looking at $200-$250 for an Intel motherboards, compared to $100-$150 for an AMD nForce motherboard. Really, when it all comes down to it, you spend the same ammount of money either way so it is really more of personal prefference.

The biggest difference between the two is how the cores communiquate. On the Intel side each core is an independant entity that must talk to each other on the already-crowded 200MHz FSB. On the AMD side, there is a hypertransport link between the cores so they can talk directly to each other and avoid the middle-man. The AMD is superior in architecture by far. I'm not trying to come of as an AMD f-boy here, but they also run cooler and perform much better than Intel.

Summary: The prices are the same, and AMD is faster. Unless this is a workstation that demands maximum reliability, I would go AMD.
 
Remember the processor isn't the the only thing you may need to upgrade, memory and video card help out dramatically over a cpu upgrade. I am running a Pentium D 820 and am very surprised on the performance but I also added more ram and better video card and the system will run anything I throw at it. Yes Intel may be lagging a little but they are improving greatly recently. 2mb cache on chip for Intel is a plus and help greatly in performance also. I like AMD for single core processors over Intel anyday, but I think the dual core on both is very comparable. Just my 2 cents worth if it means anything. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top