Looking to upgrade CPU, need advice!

Status
Not open for further replies.
They can handle gaming, but not as well as the Intel counterpart.

I think that system requirements are unbalanced in some cases. For example, Crysis Warhead recommends: Core 2 Duo 2.2 GHz/Athlon X2 4400+ or better

But there's no chance that a 4400+ is even remotely as fast as a C2D 2.2GHz. Maybe an AMD 5400+ would be closer.

BTW, I never knew it was possible to overclock an IGP :eek: That's a weird thought. Though IGP's are improving, they'll still never match up to a dedicated card.



Charts, benchmarks CPU Charts 2008 Q1/2008, 3DMark06 - CPU


they are all balanced @ stock speeds

Overclockability isnt a factor for most people, the enthusiast market is growing, but its still not huge.
(most overclockers are novice at best.)


And AMD remains the best bang-for-the-buck, hands down.
 
Charts, benchmarks CPU Charts 2008 Q1/2008, 3DMark06 - CPU


they are all balanced @ stock speeds

Overclockability isnt a factor for most people, the enthusiast market is growing, but its still not huge.
(most overclockers are novice at best.)


And AMD remains the best bang-for-the-buck, hands down.

Not indefinitely in terms of bang for the buck.. some places in terms of Bang for the buck Intel wins too

Rest is true.. plus some people just don't like Intel and don't play their game
 
Well it's funny you say that, because i have tried just about everything to improve my fps and have been told its my cpu. Anyway, i do get really decent FPS it's just in raids and when people are around me i get like 10-15.

This is normal in this kind of game, remember that what you are seeing are lots of other people moving "real time" at their own and they are all gathered in one place.

Blizzard have made WoW to run on lower system without a problem but when you get or go to a place point there are lots of people, even in a high en system you can see some FPS drop due to a lot population in that area.

You don't need a high end CPU but the game have been optimized for dual-core recently, and more than the CPU I think that the RAM is more helpful on the game.
 
AMD is only the best bang-for-the-buck if you ignore the E5200.

AMD did have the lead for the longest time simply by seeing more work done per cpu clock cycle over Intel's quest for clock speed. The Core 2 was a big leap for Intel there performance as well as temp wise since the P4s run the warmest.

AMD is now trying make a come back with their newer Phenom models since Intel beat the punch line on quads. They simply came out with the idea of running two FX-74s while Intel saw the quads. AMD did realize the 3ghz mark however with the FX-60(939) and 6000+/6400+ X2 models(AM2 also referred to as 940 originally server).
 
There are AMD cpu's that offer great bang for your buck, especially if you need a motherboard with integrated video or don't plan on overclocking.

I was just disagreeing with the statement that AMD is the best bang for your buck overall, which isn't the case if you are willing to overclock since the E5200 is capable of hitting 4ghz on air cooling.
 
If you over clock then yes, the E5200 and the E2*** series are a better bang for your buck. But if you did NOT over clock (like 90% of computer users) would you go with the 2.0ghz (Intel E2180) Dual Core or the 2.7ghz (AMD X2 5200+) Dual Core instead?

Newegg.com - AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Brisbane 2.7GHz 2 x 512KB L2 Cache Socket AM2 65W Dual-Core Processor - Processors - Desktops

Newegg.com - Intel Pentium E2180 Allendale 2.0GHz 1MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor - Processors - Desktops

AMD does have price/performance when it comes to ever day average computer users who do NOT over clock.

I will agree though, Intel is in the lead price/performance when it comes to overclocking which pretty much everyone on this forum does.

Oh and yeah I am getting ready for Deneb :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom