Alienware vs Falcon Northwest

[TheEnd187]

i bought from alienware before, big mistake, i was young and foolish lol, build my new pc myself and saved a lot of cash

Add me to that list.

 

[dario03]

Buying prebuilt is only ok if its a really low budget computer for surfing the net and you get a great deal with a legit windows and monitor. Even then check and make sure you can't beat it, or at least come close because prebuilt can be low quality.

As for the build I personally wouldn't get a gtx or Ultra. I would get a 8800gts 512mb or dual ati 3870's.

 

[the_patriot2008]

do you even kno what you are talking about? the 6000+ has trouble keeping up with a e6400 let alone a e6600, you do not add up the cpu speed, ghz does not matter as much as your thinking it does, the 2.4ghz e6600 will complete more tasks per clock then the 6000+ will, and even if the e6600 will oc past 3ghz anyway and be even faster, your a noob to our forums its ok, but dont go shooting at the top dogs in our forum when you clearly kno nothing about cpu's.

proof CPU Charts | Tom's Hardware

now oc the e6600 to 3ghz then rebenchmar, then oc the 36600 to the max wich is probably 3.6, and then the 600+ to the max which is like 3.4 and bench, either way the e6600 will beat the 6000+.

actually I do know what im talkin about, and yes i know you cant add the two cores up to make 6 ghz total power, its 6 ghz of processing power not the actual speed, it is still 6 ghz of effective processing power. and by the way your the noob if you think that it will only oc to 3.4 my friend has the same processor oced it to 3.7. eat that toms hardware. you can sit here and diss me all you want i know what my processor can do and i know it can outperform core2duo. you just assume that since i just started on this board i know nothing-i never came in here and said core2 duos suck-i just said the 6000+can outperform a lower end one. whoopdeedo if you take that as an insult then you need a life, and if you really think your lowend duo will outperform my high end athlon then well, fine think what you want but sitting here insulting me like a kindergardner just proves your inferiority.

 

[Poizen22]

ok your friend definatly has liquid cooling then as people on this forum have problems over clocking the 6400+ be to 3.7 and its at 3.4ghz, you do kno nothing and your prooving it to us, the e6600 will out perform the 6000+ in preaty much any task it does, you said the q6600 would at stock, 4 cores of the q6600 will never run 100% if my q6600 outperforms your 6000+ in gaming then the e6600 will aswell as the q6600 is 2 e6600 glued together, and only 2 cores are used when gaming, and you yourself said the q6600 would outperform it, so the e6600 would have to aswell, if you knew anything about processors you would have known this, plus there is still the fact that the e6600 is 2.4ghz and the 6000+ is 3.0ghz and the e6600 outperforms it at 2.4 so if you want a cliock per clock comparison a 3.7ghz e6600 will murder a 6000+ 3.7ghz and you wont need to liquid cool the e6600. and do not call me an intel fanboy dotn even think of it, look at my name, amd is my favorite brand, so im not insulting the 6000+ in anyway, its a great chip, and is capable of preaty muh anything, the e6600 just does it better tis all, unless you coem up with a logical argument with real statistics, dont say it as all, as we can all say we have friends who blah blah blah.

 

[NosBoost300]

actually I do know what im talkin about, and yes i know you cant add the two cores up to make 6 ghz total power, its 6 ghz of processing power not the actual speed, it is still 6 ghz of effective processing power. and by the way your the noob if you think that it will only oc to 3.4 my friend has the same processor oced it to 3.7. eat that toms hardware. you can sit here and diss me all you want i know what my processor can do and i know it can outperform core2duo. you just assume that since i just started on this board i know nothing-i never came in here and said core2 duos suck-i just said the 6000+can outperform a lower end one. whoopdeedo if you take that as an insult then you need a life, and if you really think your lowend duo will outperform my high end athlon then well, fine think what you want but sitting here insulting me like a kindergardner just proves your inferiority.

i'm sorry your absolutely wrong, it will not act as 6ghz in any kind of way

if its not multi-threaded its going to work as a single 2.4 ghz core.. so get it right, hardly any apps are multi-threaded.. its barely getting dual core ready, so quad is far out of the question

the only thing your getting w/ more cores is the ability of doing more things at one time

i will quote someone else

"it's like taking 6 cars, just because there's more doesnt mean your going to get there faster, just means you can get more people there at the same time"

the rate of speed does not change, your still limited to only being able to process at 2.4 ghz

 

[Poizen22]

i'm sorry your absolutely wrong, it will not act as 6ghz in any kind of way

if its not multi-threaded its going to work as a single 2.4 ghz core.. so get it right, hardly any apps are multi-threaded.. its barely getting dual core ready, so quad is far out of the question

the only thing your getting w/ more cores is the ability of doing more things at one time

i will quote someone else

"it's like taking 6 cars, just because there's more doesnt mean your going to get there faster, just means you can get more people there at the same time"

the rate of speed does not change, your still limited to only being able to process at 2.4 ghz

your much better with words thjen i am lol, im a mathematical kinda guy, anyway , the patriot you said a q6600 is faster then the 6000+ which therefore means the e6600 is also faster, as tehre the same proc the q6600 is just two glued together e6600, and the e6600 and q6600 will perform the same when gaming, and other 1-2 threaded apps, the q6600 will just alow you to do more. you yourself have said the q6600 is faster then the 6000+ which means you said the e6600 is faster aswell.

 

[the_patriot2008]

i'm sorry your absolutely wrong, it will not act as 6ghz in any kind of way

if its not multi-threaded its going to work as a single 2.4 ghz core.. so get it right, hardly any apps are multi-threaded.. its barely getting dual core ready, so quad is far out of the question

the only thing your getting w/ more cores is the ability of doing more things at one time

i will quote someone else

"it's like taking 6 cars, just because there's more doesnt mean your going to get there faster, just means you can get more people there at the same time"

the rate of speed does not change, your still limited to only being able to process at 2.4 ghz

first off the 6000+ is rated at 3 ghz a core not 2.4 if your going to diss AMD at least get their specs right. and the software to run that much power is irrelavant. and like I said-yes i know it doesnt run at 6 ghz, its just performs like a 6 ghz processor. hence the 6000+ I cant believe I am arguing with you, its really not worth arguing with someone who is so biased intel, has no clue what their talkin about, and cant even quote the competitions processor specs right, and is rude on top of that. you could have easily just let me be, thought me an idiot or whatever, or simply tried to correct me without sounding like a stuck up moron. you may not be, you may be a decent guy in real life, but your sure comin off like one, hence im not wasting any more of my breath repeating to you this statement: I DO know what im talking about, whether your understanding what im saying is beyond the point, my processor is rated at 3 ghz and will perform like a 6 ghz processor should perform in theory. and yes your right, the software to use all that has not caught up yet so i am nowhere near using all that, but it will someday and id just as soon have the power when it gets here. have a good day, im moving on to some other threads and hopefully more respectful people.

oh and ps, taking more cars and getting more people there on time is still an upgrade. i mean if you need to get 8 people somewhere but your car can only fit four, well guess what your makin 2 trips and takin twice the time, so takin 2 cars is faster and more efficient. sounds logical dont it?

 

[the_patriot2008]

your much better with words thjen i am lol, im a mathematical kinda guy, anyway , the patriot you said a q6600 is faster then the 6000+ which therefore means the e6600 is also faster, as tehre the same proc the q6600 is just two glued together e6600, and the e6600 and q6600 will perform the same when gaming, and other 1-2 threaded apps, the q6600 will just alow you to do more. you yourself have said the q6600 is faster then the 6000+ which means you said the e6600 is faster aswell.

um no i said nothing of the kind your quote was nosboost. im saying a 6000+ will outperform a 2.4 ghz core 2 duo, the dual core. the 2.4 ghz quad by all means has the 6000+ beat, especially at multitasking, i mean its 2 more cores and what was it, a 8 mb cache size, thats pretty impressive. but as far as dual cores are concerned, your going to have to do better then a 2.4 ghz dual core to beat the 6000+ not to say that that processor is bad, and in modern games no one will probably know the difference unless your running a game like medal of honor airborne that requires a 3 ghz processor to run. you will probably notice no difference in games like crysis however as long as you got a good vid card. I am not anti intel, or pro AMD I actually like both brands, ive used intel in the past, have just recently started with AMD and im liking AMD a lot, but Im not going to diss a core 2 either, in fact i wouldnt mind havin one if they wernt so darn expensive, im just pointing out a few things this guys overlooking.

 

[TheEnd187]

those AMD numberings are from the Intel P4 days. for example AMD used to confuse the noobs and have their 3200+ proessors

according to old naming scheme a
3200+ = 3.2Ghz intel PENTIUM4
4000+ = 4Ghz PENTIUM 4

of course this was due to the fact that AMD processors had a smaller ?pipeline? and required less clock cyces to do the same things a p3 would do. which is why AMd had that naming scheme. even tho the AMD processor says 6000+ it doesnt mean its running at 6Ghz only means that the intel equivilent if that 6000+ processor would be a P4@6Ghz

 

[NosBoost300]

um no i said nothing of the kind your quote was nosboost. im saying a 6000+ will outperform a 2.4 ghz core 2 duo, the dual core. the 2.4 ghz quad by all means has the 6000+ beat, especially at multitasking, i mean its 2 more cores and what was it, a 8 mb cache size, thats pretty impressive. but as far as dual cores are concerned, your going to have to do better then a 2.4 ghz dual core to beat the 6000+ not to say that that processor is bad, and in modern games no one will probably know the difference unless your running a game like medal of honor airborne that requires a 3 ghz processor to run. you will probably notice no difference in games like crysis however as long as you got a good vid card. I am not anti intel, or pro AMD I actually like both brands, ive used intel in the past, have just recently started with AMD and im liking AMD a lot, but Im not going to diss a core 2 either, in fact i wouldnt mind havin one if they wernt so darn expensive, im just pointing out a few things this guys overlooking.

THERE ARE NO AMD CPU'S THAT CAN BEAT AN E6600.. NONE

i will bring you results, tests, anything the e6600 beats even the 6400+

show me some graphs tha show the 6400+ beat the e6600