|
|||||||
 |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
02-08-2007, 08:29 PM
|
#1 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Fort collins, Colorado
Posts: 33
|
Amd
Am planning on getting a 5000+ X2 is that going to be a big difference from my old pentium 4 the one without HT
|
|
|
|
02-08-2007, 08:32 PM
|
#2 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: tfp
Posts: 1,959
|
Yes, but you'd get much more power for your money with an Intel Core 2 Duo, such as the E6300 or E6600
__________________
System: ASUS A8N32-SLI Deluxe AMD Opteron Denmark 165 Sapphire Radeon 4850x2 2X1GB G.Skill DDR400 Ram Corsair 850W PSU Thermaltake Soprano case Seagate 7200.10 320GB |
|
|
|
|
02-08-2007, 08:51 PM
|
#3 |
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,387
|
What Lefty said...especially if your P4 didn't have Hyper Threading. Go C2D...unless you hate Intel bad enough. Otherwise bump up to the 5200. 10 bucks more and you get twice the cache.
__________________
Disclosure: I make bad music. Listener beware. |
|
|
|
|
02-08-2007, 09:05 PM
|
#4 |
|
Member (6 bit)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Fort collins, Colorado
Posts: 33
|
about how much of an increase would i get with c2d e6400 from the X2 5000+
|
|
|
|
|
02-08-2007, 09:18 PM
|
#5 |
|
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 1,387
|
The e6400 is 60+ bucks cheaper, has a lower clock speed, has 65nm tech, has equal cache...
Thats about it, really. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819115004 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819103759 EDIT: I posted the link and gave my abbreviated stats based on the 5200 instead of the 5000. |
|
|
|
|
02-08-2007, 09:40 PM
|
#6 |
|
Forum Administrator
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Joplin MO
Posts: 41,159
|
Read the benchmarks for yourself.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html The E6400 and 5000+ are very close to each other. |
|
|
|
|
02-08-2007, 09:43 PM
|
#7 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: tfp
Posts: 1,959
|
Take a look at http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.ht...=465&chart=193
You can change the benchmark and see how the two compare. The C2D is better on multitasking, and marginally worse on the FEAR benchmark. For near-term upgrades, the C2D is probably the way to go; it's newer technology in general. Performance wise, it's a tossup. EDIT: Dang, sorry GLC, I type too slow :-) |
|
|
|
|
02-09-2007, 06:41 PM
|
#8 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Somewhere in Malaysia...
Posts: 963
|
I'll still go for the E6300 - 'cause it's cheaper. The X2 5000+ is a little bit overpriced... for now if I'm not mistaken.
|
|
|
|
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| 2 Mock Builds, AMD & Intel | Pooh Bear | Computer Hardware | 10 | 10-21-2004 04:27 PM |
| AMD Processor FAQ | Punked Out Comp | Computer Hardware | 1 | 09-25-2004 11:05 PM |
| Which AMD setup is better? Pick between 2 setups. | Jeeper94 | Computer Hardware | 12 | 09-22-2004 08:46 AM |
| AMD Athlon XP OR Intel Celeron ??? | rs125 | Computer Hardware | 29 | 02-04-2003 05:19 PM |
| AMD or INTEL??? | Geron | General Discussion | 39 | 06-02-2001 03:42 PM |
Linear Mode
