Phenom 9500 Mobo Recommendations

[Wildside]

Actually, no it isn't much slower. The difference is very small.

As far as boards go, what do you need 3 PCI slots for?

I would recommend the MSI K9A2 Platinum, but it only has two PCI slots

lol im still waiting for that mobo too. Ask soon as i see it next time, im ordering the darn with my own credit card n get myself an early part of my Christmas present.

 

[Poizen22]

dont pci cards fit pci-e?

 

[Wildside]

dont pci cards fit pci-e?

no, nor vice versa. Would be cool though.

 

[maroon1]

Many people recommend AMD even when the author of the thread don't ask about AMD

So, what is the problem if I recommend for him an Intel ? I'm not forcing him to buy Intel, he can choose not to buy intel, right ?

Actually, no it isn't much slower. The difference is very small.

I'm comparing Q6600 to Phenom 9500, not to Phenom 9700

No, the difference is not too small

http://images.tomshardware.com/2007/11/19/the_spider_weaves_its_web/tabelle_q6600.gif

Don't forget that the workaround will make AMD phenom perform even slower

As far as boards go, what do you need 3 PCI slots for?

I would recommend the MSI K9A2 Platinum, but it only has two PCI slots

He didn't ask for a motherboard that have 2 PCI slots

he didnt ask for Intel.

But he didn't say that he don't want an Intel processor

He wants mobo that have 3 pci slots

He wants to run studio recording

Many cheap Intel motherboards have 3 pci slots

Q6600 cost slightly more, but it performs better in studio recording

And when I told him to get the intel mobo and Q6600, this was his reply

Wow. You saved me some time and money! Totally cool!

 

[Apokalipse]

Many people recommend AMD even when the author of the thread don't ask about AMD

That's nice.

So, what is the problem if I recommend for him an Intel ?

I didn't say you couldn't.

I'm not forcing him to buy Intel, he can choose not to buy intel, right ?

And people like me can also give advice.
and my advice is that the Phenom's are not far behind.

I'm comparing Q6600 to Phenom 9500, not to Phenom 9700

which was not meant to compete with Q6600. At least compare the 9600.

No, the difference is not too small

That's subjective.

http://images.tomshardware.com/2007/11/19/the_spider_weaves_its_web/tabelle_q6600.gif

500 internal server error.

Don't forget that the workaround will make AMD phenom perform even slower

if you decide to use it.
And that's because it disables part of the TLB functions that might cause the error.
But, the chances of the error actually occuring, are quite slim. Which is why it was missed by AMD.

He didn't ask for a motherboard that have 2 PCI slots

Which is why I said this:

I would recommend the MSI K9A2 Platinum, but it only has two PCI slots

But he didn't say that he don't want an Intel processor

He also didn't say he didn't want a red and blue striped golfing umbrella.

He wants mobo that have 3 pci slots

And I asked him why he needs 3 PCI slots.

He wants to run studio recording

okay?

Many cheap Intel motherboards have 3 pci slots

that's nice.

Q6600 cost slightly more, but it performs better in studio recording

Not by a big margin.

And when I told him to get the intel mobo and Q6600, this was his reply

that's nice.

Am I able to recommend him anything?

*edit*
@RicoDirenzo:
If you can move one of your PCI cards to USB, or PCI-E, you can get the MSI K9A2 CF, which is quite cheap, and supports the Phenom's.
*edit*
in the long run, it might actually be better to move a couple of things to PCI-E. PCI slots are starting to diappear from motherboards.

 

[maroon1]

which was not meant to compete with Q6600. At least compare the 9600.

At which planet do you live ?

Read the first post in this thread and you will know why I'm comparing it to Phenom 9500

The author of thread was thinking about getting Phenom 9500, and not 9600. No one here was talking about Phenom 9600

500 internal server error.

Try this link
Phenom 9700, AMD's 1st Quad-Core CPU | Tom's Hardware

Edit: I uploaded it to imageshack

Not by a big margin.

I think 18% is a big margin

At least it not very small as you claim

Am I able to recommend him anything?

okay?

that's nice.

I was saying that to Wildside, not you

Don't reply on behalf of him

That's subjective.

You said that "The difference is very small" in one of your previous posts

Thats subjective as well

I don't think 18% is very small, anyway

And it outperformed Phenom 9500 by 19.1% in 3d-studio recording

Maybe in your eyes it is not big margin, thats because your are AMD biased.

I didn't say you couldn't.

And who told you that I was asking this question to you ?

Did I quote you when I said "So, what is the problem if I recommend for him an Intel ?"

The answer is no, please check my previous post

He also didn't say he didn't want a red and blue striped golfing umbrella.

Again, in many other threads many people recommend AMD even when the author of the thread don't ask about AMD. But you never said to them the same thing.

umbrella is not even a computer processor and it is not a computer part. So, your comparison between Q6600 and this golfing umbrella is invalid

EDIT: I was saying that to Wildside anyway (see my previous post). I hope that you stop replying on behalf of others

I don't like to talk with you. I'm trying my best to avoid you, but it seems that you are doing the opposite. You come here and reply to every comment that I make even when I don't quote you

Am I able to recommend him anything?

Did I prevent you from doing that ?

And that's because it disables part of the TLB functions that might cause the error.

I think getting a processor that have no bugs like Q6600 is better idea than getting a processor that might cause an error

 

[Nagasama]

okay let me end the argument.
this mobo is AM2+, and has 3 pci slots:
Newegg.com - ECS A770M-A AM2+/AM2 AMD 770 ATX AMD Motherboard - Retail
coupled with a phenom 9500, the total price is 310.00
the mobo and cpu that maroon suggested totals 375.00
a difference of about 20% (actually a little less).
the q6600 averages 18% faster overall, based on the benches that maroon posted.
therefore, the price difference is proportional to the performance difference.
IF you ARENT going to overclock, price/performance they are almost exactly on par.
its your decision. they are both good chips, and both perform well for how much they cost.
there ya go, problem solved. now, you just need to decide which brand you like better, and if you are going to overclock your processor. that will make the decision.

p.s. the q6600 has its share of bugs as well, especially the earlier steppings. they just arent as pronounced in lab situations as the TLB bug with the phenom. as a matter of fact, c2d had its own TLB errata, which has apparently been eliminated in later steppings.

 

[maroon1]

the mobo and cpu that maroon suggested totals 375.00

But he don't need to get the motherboard that I suggested

There are many cheaper intel motherboard that have 3 pci slots, like this one
Newegg.com - GIGABYTE GA-P31-S3G LGA 775 Intel P31 ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail

It is $22 cheaper than the motherboard that I posted in my other post

This means that he can get Q6600 + A good Intel mobo for a total of $353

 

[Nagasama]

well, even then thats like 12ish% price difference.
in any event...we're splitting hairs here. like i said, if he is going to overclock, the q6600 is the obvious choice.
if not, it really boils down to company preference.

 

[Apokalipse]

At which planet do you live ?

It's called Earth.

Read the first post in this thread and you will know why I'm comparing it to Phenom 9500

Still doesn't excuse the fact that the 9500 wasn't meant to compete with the Q6600

The author of thread was thinking about getting Phenom 9500, and not 9600. No one here was talking about Phenom 9600

Which doesn't somehow mean that it should be compared with the q6600

Try this link
Phenom 9700, AMD's 1st Quad-Core CPU | Tom's Hardware

Edit: I uploaded it to imageshack

Try the 13.5% that you conveniently ignore.
That's with a slower clocked, and less expensive 9600.

I think 18% is a big margin

First of all, I don't. And second of all, you're still comparing the 9500, which again was not meant to be a direct competitor to the Q6600.

At least it not very small as you claim

At least I don't compare products that weren't meant to be direct competitors.

I was saying that to Wildside, not you

that's nice.
Tech-forums won't automatically include secondary quotes when you quote somebody else.

Don't reply on behalf of him

I wasn't replying on behalf of him. I was replying with my own answer.

You said that "The difference is very small" in one of your previous posts

Which it is, if you compare the 9600

Thats subjective as well

Yes.

I don't think 18% is very small, anyway

1. See above.
2. You're still comparing two products that weren't meant to be direct competitors.
3. That's why the 9500 is cheaper than the Q6600 is.

And it outperformed Phenom 9500 by 19.1% in 3d-studio recording

1. Q6600 costs about 25% more
2. you're still comparing products that aren't meant to be direct competitors.

Maybe in your eyes it is not big margin, thats because your are AMD biased.

1. Oh, as if you aren't a fanboy, or anything. when you keep insisting on slamming Core 2 at people.
2. No, it's because I'm not comparing the products that aren't meant to be direct competitors. 9500 IS NOT a direct competitor to the q6600. That's why it's cheaper.

And who told you that I was asking this question to you ?

who told you that I was asking you what colour stripes you like to have on a golfing umbrella?

Did I quote you when I said "So, what is the problem if I recommend for him an Intel ?"

Does tech-forums include secondary quotes when you click the button to quote people's posts?

The answer is no, please check my previous post

Gee, you wouldn't want to make a big deal out of it, or anything, would you?

Again, in many other threads many people recommend AMD even when the author of the thread don't ask about AMD. But you never said to them the same thing.

"I vaguely remember seeing some other guy do the same thing once, therefore that completely justifies me doing it"

umbrella is not even a computer processor and it is not a computer part.

Wow, I did not know that!

So, your comparison between Q6600 and this golfing umbrella is invalid

I wasn't comparing processors to umbrellas. I was pointing out an argument from ignorance, using my own argument from ignorance as an example.

EDIT: I was saying that to Wildside anyway (see my previous post). I hope that you stop replying on behalf of others

See above.

I don't like to talk with you.

Then don't.

I'm trying my best to avoid you, but it seems that you are doing the opposite.

This is despite the fact that in just about any other thread that I wanted to talk about the Phenom processors without even mentioning Core 2, you were there to slam Core 2 at me.

You come here and reply to every comment that I make even when I don't quote you

The only reason I replied to you in the first place, is because you're slamming Core 2 at people, when they didn't ask for it.

Sure, you can recommend Core 2. but you're always so flamboyant about it.

Did I prevent you from doing that ?

You're trying to do it with the very post I'm replying to.

I think getting a processor that have no bugs like Q6600 is better idea than getting a processor that might cause an error

Despite the fact that the chances of getting that error, are so small, that I haven't even heard of it actually happening?

The TLB bug has such a minutely small chance of actually occurring, that AMD didn't even know about it during their testing of the processors.