Building a new pc

[hikaricloud]

I also second the Biostar, but since I firsted it, I guess I third it. Amazing motherboard, cheaper after MIR, lots of overclocking options, whether you get the x4 940 or the x3 720.

 

[baron5]

I also second the Biostar, but since I firsted it, I guess I third it. Amazing motherboard, cheaper after MIR, lots of overclocking options, whether you get the x4 940 or the x3 720.

sorry i must have missed your post, Yeah i would go for the biostar over the gigabyte, biostar just make some amazing products when it comes the overclockability and quality.

 

[hikaricloud]

Biostar has some great stuff nowadays. They used to be an iffy company, but in the last couple years they have been picking up the slack. Now they have some pretty good quality boards. I used to only really trust ASUS boards, but I'm glad I went with my TA790GX.

 

[veg1992]

Biostar has some great stuff nowadays. They used to be an iffy company, but in the last couple years they have been picking up the slack. Now they have some pretty good quality boards. I used to only really trust ASUS boards, but I'm glad I went with my TA790GX.

Emphasis on used to.. I tried recommending a build to my friend with his e8400.. and he flat out refused the Biostar I45 b/c he felt it was a crappy company (he had an AMD nForce 570 which shipped on him)

 

[hikaricloud]

A lot of good companies today were crap companies back then, Biostar, Gigabyte, etc. They've been really picking up the slack in the quality department lately.

Sounds like your friend needs to start keeping up with current events.

 

[veg1992]

I disagree.. (I am not by any means an Intel fanboy.. if anything I'm more of an AMD one)

I can say that in the Mid-Range that's slightly true.. The Quad's are a little more pricey $2-10, then the boards are a little bit more..

but in the low-end Intel is just as competitive as AMD, their e5000 and e7000 series do some damage

 

[chesirecat1701]

but in the low-end Intel is just as competitive as AMD, their e5000 and e7000 series do some damage

I second the e5xxx because my e5200 is great, I had a x2 5600+ and my e5200 whoops it back and forth, I went from a 9850 in 3d Mark 06 to a low 14000 (OC'd at 3.4 GHz)
and I noticed that this proc only loads at about 70% to what fully loaded my 5600+ (at the same freq, 2.9GHz)

try not to be a too obsessed about a brand because imo it's just foolish

 

[hikaricloud]

It's just a matter of preference. Between a 7750 and a 5200, I would pick a 5200. But if I needed absolute budget, I would pick the 7750 and get a 780G for decent onboard video.

 

[hikaricloud]

...where are you getting your info from?

And if you think GHz is the only measure of speed, you are sorely mistaken.

 

[Pinscher]

Newegg.com - Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale 3.16GHz 6MB L2 Cache LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor - Processors - Desktops

Newegg.com - AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Windsor 3.2GHz 2 x 1MB L2 Cache Socket AM2 125W Dual-Core Processor - Processors - Desktops

you have just been proven wrong...

and the intel absolutely obliterates that amd

EDIT: oh clock speed has very very VERY little to do with speed when comparing different architectures