Help me decide between 2 PC's

[truegamer129]

I am looking to get a new computer, i built my own in 2001, it is a 1Ghz AMD with 512 ram and was working completely fine and now the motherboard is going out and corrupted 3 of my hard drives so i'm done with it.

I am looking to buy a dell, not an insane gaming pc since i'll do my gaming on my 360, but just a fast computer that can do multi-tasking nicely and just have an overall FAST experience.

Here's the 2 to choose from


Dimension E521:
250GB HDD
1GB RAM
Integrated graphics (already have a card)
Geniune vista premium
No monitor (will buy my own)
And the real question: AMD Athlonâ„¢ 64 X2 Dual-Core 3800+ CPU
Cost: 550

The other is a Dimension E520

It is identical in Specs besides the CPU

A Intel® Core™2 Duo Processor E4300 (1.8GHz, 800 FSB)



It will cost 630

So basically which one of these CPU's is faster and how much faster?

And lastly, will this setup get me nice performance? Speedy performance in 2, 3 years? I keep my computers in nice condition and my 1Ghz processor still felt fairly speedy...

After thinking further...i decided to up my specs a bit.

Would these specs be able to run vista home premium comfortably and speedy?

Vista home premium, aero and everything on..

1.86Ghz intel core 2 duo 1066FSB
250GB SATA Hdd
2GB dual channel RAM at 677mhz
integrated graphics (enough mb's of memory, and no, i dont plan to play games, and if i do i'll just upgrade)

Will this be able to run vista with aero and say, aim classic, firefox with 3 tabs and itunes playing music comfortably?

BTW...cost is 999

Thanks for any help, suggestions are welcome, but i have decided not to build my own computer this time so dont bother with that.

 

[M733mhz]

Any of those would run vista fine. Personally I'd build my own and save the money. I'd go with one of the core2 rigs.

 

[Sora]

The Core 2 rigs are faster but the X2 3800 is plenty fast enough to do what you stated.

However I agree with M733 as you could build a MONSTER desktop PC for 1000...still you don't need a monster for what you stated either. It's just a lot better for your money si all building it piece by piece.

Out of those two I suggest the AMD though and add another stick of RAM

 

[truegamer129]

Oh, and it comes with a dell 19 inch flat panel screen...if that makes any difference to what you think of the high price. Good 19 inch flat panel lcds are 200 just about everywhere..

 

[techsquad]

i would say that amd would be the best. And since you have your own video card that you could add on it would make a big difference. With the first one you would be allowed to do multi tasking. Lets say playing games,Aim,Firefox all toghether. How big is your video card?

 

[truegamer129]

my video card isnt good but it supports direct x 9 and has 128mb of mem...

I've just heard that the intel would kill the AMD.

BTW, i doubt i would be utilizing the 64 bit architecture

 

[techsquad]

i'v had two pcs similar to the ones you describe and from my experience it thought AMD is better, Your video card ain't bad and would be able to most up to date games with the AMD comp Specs.

 

[truegamer129]

So the AMD would be better even though i wouldnt be running my programs in 64 bit? Does 64 bit have more problems?

The intel is marginally more expensive..

 

[Sora]

There is no denying that the Intel would be faster. At stock speeds it would about 20% faster to more exact but for basic computing, bowsing, and everything you stated the Intel would not be needed.

Understand that for 1000 bucks you could build a nice Intel build that could even be overclocked.

Lol you could easily get 3.0ghz on an E6300 which beats a quad-core...Oc'ing is safe as well as long as you aren't mentally retarded.

 

[techsquad]

well i searched the web and found this interesting article and you might wanna take a look, CNET prizefight: AMD vs. Intel dual-core CPUs - CNET reviews
For you to decide.