AMD unleashes the 6000+

Status
Not open for further replies.
RalliArt882 said:
In comparison to C2D, AMD is not really great at this point in time. Think, I'm on a $300 e6600 that can take on a $600 FX-62 at stock speeds. Wouldn't it be just a little stupid to go AM2 if you have the budget that can fit LGA 775 into it? AMD's products are great, but not for the price if you have a bigger budget.

i agree with you.. people keep saying amd is cheaper... blah blah blah....

once you step into the 180 dollar price range.. there's nothing that will beat the e6300... and now that there are cheap motherboards and ram is cheaper again, i see no reason why not to go c2d.

sure i love amd... but right now i'm just not in favor of them.. now for the punch i'm getting in my e6600 for only 300 dollars... i'd have to spend like 700 dollars to get this kinda performance from amd..

amd's lower end is spectacular... but if your even looking for mid or high mid... your crapped out.. and wasting your money at this moment.
 
M733mhz said:
To "King X13"

Ever think it's a model number? Just because a BMW is a 320 doesn't mean it has 320 horse power. The fact that it's a 6000+ is because there have been models before it such as the 3200+ and 4000+, not because they're saying it's like having 6GHz. Since when is 2x1MB cache crappy? Let me ask you something, Whens the last time you found yourself at 100% computer usage during a game, Fact is, it MORE THAN LIKELY, won't happen. For the software that's available right now (even things like photoshop and intense editing programs), you could build a 939 system and run everything out there reasonably. Why have power you're not going to use other than to say you have it. What are you talking about AMD doesn't have the balls to announce they're running a high GHz chip? You say that like all of their marketing ideas come from one person. AMDs have almost always had the lower GHz. If you're really that big on intel, Remember running a 3.2GHz P4 and it getting beat in benchmarks by a 2.0Ghz AMD chip? Also I'd like to know what "Real clock speeds" are? Does that mean my 3.0GHz 4000+ isn't real because it's a high clock speed? It's really funny you should mention AMDs running such high clock speeds considering your E6600 came stock at 2.4, which is also what my 4000+ and many other AMD models hover around. If you're going to talk bad about something, Atleast have the right information and why you feel that way.

I like you :)
 
NosBoost300 said:
i agree with you.. people keep saying amd is cheaper... blah blah blah....

once you step into the 180 dollar price range.. there's nothing that will beat the e6300... and now that there are cheap motherboards and ram is cheaper again, i see no reason why not to go c2d.

sure i love amd... but right now i'm just not in favor of them.. now for the punch i'm getting in my e6600 for only 300 dollars... i'd have to spend like 700 dollars to get this kinda performance from amd..

amd's lower end is spectacular... but if your even looking for mid or high mid... your crapped out.. and wasting your money at this moment.

Once again... AGREED>>>>

I still see no point in going with a AM2 system right now unless you are just supporting the company, or you are getting a budget system.
 
Is it me or is processor speed not that big of a deal..? I get by fine with a 70 dollar processor, and I honestly think I won't get that much of a performance boost with a C2D, except for multitasking. But seriously, is the difference between say an x2 3800+ and a e6300 @ 3.0ghz that much, at least in a gaming FPS standpoint? isn't it really a lot more reliant on the GPU?
 
Deathawk said:
Is it me or is processor speed not that big of a deal..? I get by fine with a 70 dollar processor, and I honestly think I won't get that much of a performance boost with a C2D, except for multitasking. But seriously, is the difference between say an x2 3800+ and a e6300 @ 3.0ghz that much, at least in a gaming FPS standpoint? isn't it really a lot more reliant on the GPU?

YOUR RIGHT< nice to someone THinking for a change..what cpu do you have? ...and depending on what you do with it and HOW you use it, is completely relevant.....

where as before you could run two back ground programs and play bf2 , now you can 6...

fact remains its 3 times as good and for the same price as we were paying...thats the point here, mostly bragging rights, and CAUSE WE CAN...

I run a single core and use the internet, play poker and listen to music every night, with AV and firewall running, at the same time, with no lag or issues...see my specs...
 
with my c2d i've noticed a pretty big jump compaired to my s939 3800 x2. when i'm converting audio files this knocks my x2 out of the water... burning cd's is way faster, multi-tasking is way easier.

FPS in games have jumped up about 3-5 fps (which makes a huge difference when i was trying to use my 6800gs!)

3dmarks have skyrocketed thanks to it, and i don't have to worry for a good long while for upgrading (but all of you knowing me.. i'll have a new cpu once prices drop)
 
NosBoost300 said:
i agree with you.. people keep saying amd is cheaper... blah blah blah....

once you step into the 180 dollar price range.. there's nothing that will beat the e6300... and now that there are cheap motherboards and ram is cheaper again, i see no reason why not to go c2d.

sure i love amd... but right now i'm just not in favor of them.. now for the punch i'm getting in my e6600 for only 300 dollars... i'd have to spend like 700 dollars to get this kinda performance from amd..

amd's lower end is spectacular... but if your even looking for mid or high mid... your crapped out.. and wasting your money at this moment.

just reading ur guys comments n i have to agree with u NosBoost300, C2D is kicking AMD's butt because of how much OCing u can do to the C2D n not to AMD, but hey im cool with that. I'm, however, am not buying a new processor anytime soon, reason is is because AMD is making 3 kinds of quad-core processors.

*if u want to skip this next paragraph, it's up to u*

First quad-core processor is Barcelona Opteron 65nm *Q2 2007*, second is Budapest, 65nm processor for single socket mobos like AM2 n AM3 *Q2-Q4 2007* n im getting that one, last is a remake of Barcelona n this one is codenamed Shanghai to make it 45nm, n some other tech stuff*Q1-Q2 2008*.

right now AMD is focusing on this right now n the CPU/GPU fusion, but once AMD launches Barcelona n Budapest AMD is gonna be getting good money this summer n fall ^_^.
 
I think AMD is doing the smartest thing they can until the newer quads come out. and if the history of inutel and AMD leapfrogging each other holds true, then they will outperform the Conroes, and then you will be telling people to not to buy intel again.

there really isn't that much of a history of leapfrogging. everything up to and including AMD's K6 was on par or inferior. early K7 started to take a lead in some respects. the Athlon XP asserted power over the Intel competitors fairly well with Intel only taking minor victories here and there. K8 pretty much completely took all advantages from Intel and was completely superior. now is really the first time i would say Intel has "leapfrogged" AMD.
 
NosBoost300 said:
with my c2d i've noticed a pretty big jump compaired to my s939 3800 x2. when i'm converting audio files this knocks my x2 out of the water... burning cd's is way faster, multi-tasking is way easier.

FPS in games have jumped up about 3-5 fps (which makes a huge difference when i was trying to use my 6800gs!)

3dmarks have skyrocketed thanks to it, and i don't have to worry for a good long while for upgrading (but all of you knowing me.. i'll have a new cpu once prices drop)

Well, obviously when doing things like converting audio files, burning CDs, where the CPU is doing all the work, then yes, there will be a difference. Also, you're comparing an e6600, and a x2 3800+, and the x2 3800+ is (was before Brisbane) the budget dual core processor, compare it to an e6300 and I guarantee the difference is negligable. I mean, the difference in FPS between an e6300 at like 3.0ghz and an Athlon x2 3800+ at 2.5ghz is probably non existant in gaming.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom