Fx-62

[maroon1]

another question....why didnt they measure the frames per second on supreme commander? or did i miss it (really i may have)?
isnt oblivion a cpu intensive game(it may not be, i dont have it)? the difference in the 6750 and the 6000 is a little under 9%. we're talking 9.1

Supreme commander is known to be CPU-intensive game, the performance of Supreme commander depends greatly on CPU unlike other games

do you even notice the 15%? NO(except in some benchmarks...even if then, BARELY). hopefully that puts it into perspective.

I pretty sure that you will not notice the performance difference in gaming between P4 3.2GHz and AMD 3200+, but as I remember many members here 2 years ago were recommending AMD over intel !!!! This is a proof that many members here are biased and AMD fanboys !!!

Intel now is better just like AMD was better 2 years ago

exactly. which is why i choose amd over intel. im a gamer mostly, and there is little or no difference between my 3600 and a quad core intel on the games i play, and i like amd better

Since many games today are not multi-threaded then you will not notice any difference

If you like AMD better then thats your opinion, but your opinion will not change the fact that E6750 is better than 6000+ and FX-62 in every way, E6750 performs better at stock, overclocks better, consume much less power...

Most members here want the best build for the money, they don't care about what you like. There is no reason to recommend 6000+ and FX-62 over E6750 or E6550

has anyone EVER seen an anandtech benchmark that doesnt totally dog-out AMD?

LOL !!!

Anandtech is known to have one of the most reliable reviews on the internet !! Thats not my opinion ! it is the opinion of many other members in many computer forums !!

 

[Nagasama]

here we go again.

This is a proof that many members here are biased and AMD fanboys

look at my avatar. do you need more proof than that?

E6750 is better than 6000+ and FX-62 in every way

cinebench. lol. and lets not forget the aforementioned memory-intensive applications. dude, you're like a broken record. i concede your points a lot of times, but you are so stubborn that you make these general, ambiguous statements like ^^this^^ that aren't neccesarily true. it's like you will melt if you say that amd can actually compete with intel, which they do. i've shopwn (lol mistype, but funny) you benchmarks that prove that the amd's have their strong points over c2d's , and still you continue to misinform and give out a one-sided viewpoint of these discussions. it's like you own intel stock or something.
pardon me mr chairman lol.

Since many games today are not multi-threaded then you will not notice any difference

so what's your ummmmm...point?
here's mine:

Most members here want the best build for the money, they don't care about what you like. There is no reason to recommend 6000+ and FX-62 over E6750 or E6550

actually there is a reason...you explained it yourself...
if they want the best build for the money, and there is no difference in gaming performance in CURRENT DAY GAMES between a 60 dollar cpu and a 225 dollar cpu...well, that makes the decision pretty easy, doesn't it? they do care about what we like, or they wouldnt ask us, and i wouldnt get so many pm's.

Anandtech is known to have one of the most reliable reviews on the internet !! Thats not my opinion ! it is the opinion of many other members in many computer forums !!

i agree. but i didn't say they were unreliable. i said they were one-sided. i said (figurtively) that their benchmarks are biased in intels favor. ask those same people if they disagree with that. what strength do you see of amd's? cinebench? heh awesome.

i give this argument

FOUR THUMBS DOWN!! LMFAOTWICE

i learned my quoting skills from apokalipse. another dirty amd fanboy.

 

[PanzerKammander]

Not to mention RTS games, games with alot of physics, char movement, and units to control are going to do better with a multicore processor, even if they arent coded for dual cores, the more ghz you got pushing the better performance.


and I hear alot of people saying the 6000+ runs pretty hot compared to the fx.

 

[darksideleader]

lmao didn't see this coming after posting that.

The FX-62 should be able to overclock to a 3ghz maxium like most windsors and K8's. So you should be able to get it to a 6000+ easily on stock voltage and cooling. I'm thinking of getting this and a Newegg.com - BIOSTAR TA690G AM2 Socket AM2 AMD 690G Micro ATX AMD Motherboard With HDMI Port - Retail because of the HDMI video port. With unlocked multiplers I can maximize the FSB with a low multiplier making the Memory at maxium speed with the best intergrated video performance. I'm finding the HD 2600XT terrible performance for its price so I'll wait till the drivers are fixed and the price drops for all DX10 High Def videocards.

Seems like a easy plan.

 

[Apokalipse]

I pretty sure that you will not notice the performance difference in gaming between P4 3.2GHz and AMD 3200+, but as I remember many members here 2 years ago were recommending AMD over intel !!!! This is a proof that many members here are biased and AMD fanboys !!!

And?
If we are AMD fanboys, why are you trying to convince us of a fact we already know anyway?
What's in it for you if you convince us to get a Core 2?

Yes, the E6750 is better than the 6000+
But it's nowhere near as big difference as people like you make it out to be.

I have my reasons for staying with AM2 (*cough*Hypertransport *cough*Phenom X4 *cough* *cough*it costs more money to get a new motherboard)

Since many games today are not multi-threaded then you will not notice any difference

between a single or a dual core processor.
Actually you might, if you run multiple programs.

If you like AMD better then thats your opinion, but your opinion will not change the fact that E6750 is better than 6000+ and FX-62

And if you read some of our posts, we aren't trying to dispute that.

Still, what's in it for you if you convince us to get a core 2?

in every way

False. Memory bandwith, cinebench, and some game benchmarks show the K8 processors ahead.

Intel still doesn't have an onboard memory controller, or a quad core CPU with all cores on one die.

I mean, I know the E6750 is better. But it's not better in every way. Not by a long shot.

Most members here want the best build for the money, they don't care about what you like. There is no reason to recommend 6000+ and FX-62 over E6750 or E6550

Not even if they specifically ask for an AMD processor, or if they already have an AM2 motherboard?

LOL !!!

Indeed.

Anandtech is known to have one of the most reliable reviews on the internet !!

yeah, and?

Thats not my opinion !

yes it is.

it is the opinion of many other members in many computer forums !!

that too. But opinions are still subjective.

and I hear alot of people saying the 6000+ runs pretty hot compared to the fx.

My 6000+ runs at 21º at stock.

 

[Nagasama]

dude you are the master of quote lol.

 

[PanzerKammander]

O_O

JC.. quote master.


Do you have after market cooling on your 6000+??

 

[Nagasama]

water cooling i believe.

 

[Gabb]

I think we all indirectly stated the bottom line...

if your building a brand new computer theres no reason to go AMD at all, or even consider them at this point in terms of future proof/value/performance

if you already have a AMD mobo or whatever, then yes it is more convienant for you to upgrade to a AMD processor

I thought this was pretty obvious but people keep re-iterating it over and over

 

[Apokalipse]

if your building a brand new computer theres no reason to go AMD at all, or even consider them at this point in terms of future proof/value/performance

*cough*X2 3600+*cough*