Originally Posted by parks71
What intel cpu would that AMD compare to?
Also, on the Motheboard you recommended for the intel I found this con several times.
Cons: Be aware that if you run the SATA 6GB/s or USB 3.0 that your PCI-E Bandwidth is cut in half.
So I get SATA but I lose speed for my video card?
There really isn't a CPU from Intel to compare the Phenom II X3 720 too, as Intel doesn't sell tri-core CPUs.
The Phenom II X3 720 has the potential to unlock to a quad core. (Not 100% though, it's luck of the draw.)
In which case it would compare in gaming to the i5 - 750 or i7 - 920, but only when overclocked/unlocked.
For the most part, it's a stepping stone to the Phenom II X6 releasing later this year.
In gaming, you shouldn't notice a difference between the Phenom II X3 720 and Intel's current offerings, but in other applications and in CPU intensive RTS games there may be a noticeable difference, but I can almost guarantee it'll handle SC 2 better than your current rig by magnitudes, probably maxing it until scenes with several hundred troops being commanded at once. Then it might be a little bogged? But if you can manage to unlock it, or overclock it sufficiently, you won't notice a problem.
Mind you, I don't know for sure as SC 2 is still in beta?
The Phenom II X3 720 could potentially max it 24/7 for all I really know.
I actually suspect that it can, because the listed specs for the beta mention a 2Ghz Pentium 4? LoL
Overall, I think the Phenom II X3 720 would probably compare to a low-mid Core 2 Quad.
But when unlocked and overclocked, it would compare to an i5 - 750 or i7 - 920 in gaming performance, and a higher end Core 2 Quad in applications and rendering.
AMD Phenom II 720 and 810 AM3 Review Page 8 - Testing: Far Cry 2 - Overclockers Club
Here's some gaming benchmarks to give you a perspective.
techPowerUp :: AMD Radeon HD 5870 PCI-Express Scaling Review :: Page 25 / 26
x16 vs x8
There isn't much of a difference tbqh
That's with a 5870, needless to say the difference with a 5850 would be almost non existent.
But I suppose that con is something to look for.
But it's not if you use SATA, it's if you use SATA 6Gb/s.
(No HDD's that I know of at this moment currently use SATA 6Gb/s, it's a future proofing step, really.)
All HDD's currently available use SATA 3Gb/s.
And there aren't many devices which currently use USB 3.0 either.