New Gaming Rig

[Trepkos]

The 5200 will hit at least 2.8 or 2.9 on stock cooling mine runs fine think better to get the 5200X2 and water cooling will get it to 3.2 or 3.3,Then to get a 6000X2 which will only O.C. to 3.2 on stock cooling anyway.Price difference in the 5200X2 and 6000X2 is 71.00 here and a coolermaster watercooling system is only $59

How reliable is watercooling?

 

[scirishman76]

I would be surprised if this is true I have a 5200X2 and the 680i E6600's are having trouble outperforming me I demonstrated in an earlier post that my 5200X2 running at 2.946 was scoring just as well on(and in most cases better) 3dmark06's cpu test as the E6600 running around 2.8 to 2.9 so how is throwing this cpu into yesterdays chipset gonna make it better.

 

[Nagasama]

an amd 5600 draws less power at idle than an e6600.
just thought i would clear that up.
and by the way, here are some benches that the 5600 scores better in:
AMD's Athlon 64 X2 5600+
because it all depends on the app...amd will almost always beat the comprable intel in cinebench. and looking at most sets of benchmarks, the amds are not being destroyed by the intels. they are slower most of the time, that is a fact.
it depends on the equipment and many other factors...we all know that.
p.s. i can overclock my cheap (65.00) x2 3600 to 3ghz with my cheap
(70.00) abit nf4 ultra mobo. thats 135.00 for an x2 6000, basically.
and i know that it uses less power than a 6000 or a c2d.
my point is, if you take the time, you can usually get comprable performance out of cheaper parts.

 

[scirishman76]

Water cooling is as reliable as what you buy read reviews Newegg.com - COOLER MASTER AQUAGATE VIVA RL-M4A-E7E1-GP Liquid Cooling System - Retail
I am getting this 1 its in the mail supposed to be here tomorrow.For the most part water cooling is just as reliable as a fan.

 

[scirishman76]

an amd 5600 draws less power at idle than an e6600.
just thought i would clear that up.
and by the way, here are some benches that the 5600 scores better in:
AMD's Athlon 64 X2 5600+
because it all depends on the app...amd will almost always beat the comprable intel in cinebench. and looking at most sets of benchmarks, the amds are not being destroyed by the intels. they are slower most of the time, that is a fact.
it depends on the equipment and many other factors...we all know that.
p.s. i can overclock my cheap (65.00) x2 3600 to 3ghz with my cheap
(70.00) abit nf4 ultra mobo. thats 135.00 for an x2 6000, basically.
and i know that it uses less power than a 6000 or a c2d.
my point is, if you take the time, you can usually get comprable performance out of cheaper parts.

Your 3600X2 is not even close to a 6000 running at the same speed the 3600X2 has the smallest L2 caches 256KB X2 all the others have 512KB X2 and the 5200,5600,and 6000 have 4 times as much cache as you 1MB X2 this is also why the 5200 will most of the time outperform the 5800 and the 5400.

 

[Nagasama]

actually, when i said "the same" i meant clock speed. hence, the "basically".
i dont think that cache size matters on an amd, certainly not like it does with the intels. it makes a difference, to be sure...but not a major difference.
in any event, i have a brisbane chip with the 512x2 L2 cache. the windsor 3600 is the one with 256x2(open mouth, insert foot). so, yeah...its "basically" the "same" as a 6000, with half the cache. for hmmmmm...170 dollars less. how much is cache worth? not that much, patnah.
p.s. punctuation.

 

[iNFiNiTY_MUSiC]

yeah, i heard many prob about vista lately, i hove vista more friendly in future

 

[Sora]

yes he's right it has been known that the extra cache doesn't help nearly as much as it does on the Intels (which wasn't a lot already) The X2 3600 comes in two flavors. Brisbane (65nm) with 2x512 cache. Or The Windsor (90nm) with 2x256 cache. I don't know why they made the Windsor version as it is just NOT worth the money with a brisbane that cheap..

There is no chip out there right now that can even come close to the brisbanes power by overclock....an X2 at 3.0ghz for 65 bucks. How can you possibly go wrong.

However if you plan to overclock even a little in the 200 price range than Intel's are the way to go becuase they are just way more overclockable than their X2 counterparts for the same price.

if you don't overclock then it's a toss up really...AMD's use cheaper boards and give off less heat while the E6600 has the majority of the benchmarks....but it
all just depends on what your using your chip for like Nagasama said.

EDIT: omg guys an Open Box OEM Brisbane for 57.50.

Open box and OEM are like the same thing almost when you buy them off newegg lmao.

An X2 3600 Brisbane for not even 58 bones....incredible...

Newegg.com - Open Box: AMD Athlon 64 X2 3600+ Brisbane 1.9GHz 2 x 512KB L2 Cache Socket AM2 Processor - OEM

 

[maroon1]

I would be surprised if this is true I have a 5200X2 and the 680i E6600's are having trouble outperforming me I demonstrated in an earlier post that my 5200X2 running at 2.946 was scoring just as well on(and in most cases better) 3dmark06's cpu test as the E6600 running around 2.8 to 2.9 so how is throwing this cpu into yesterdays chipset gonna make it better.

an amd 5600 draws less power at idle than an e6600.
just thought i would clear that up.
and by the way, here are some benches that the 5600 scores better in:
AMD's Athlon 64 X2 5600+
because it all depends on the app...amd will almost always beat the comprable intel in cinebench. and looking at most sets of benchmarks, the amds are not being destroyed by the intels. they are slower most of the time, that is a fact.
it depends on the equipment and many other factors...we all know that.
p.s. i can overclock my cheap (65.00) x2 3600 to 3ghz with my cheap
(70.00) abit nf4 ultra mobo. thats 135.00 for an x2 6000, basically.
and i know that it uses less power than a 6000 or a c2d.
my point is, if you take the time, you can usually get comprable performance out of cheaper parts.

Both of you are giving wrong information

E6600 consumes less power than 5600+

5600+ beats E6600 only in 3d mark CPU test but E6600 beats both 5600+ and 6000+ in almost all other benchmarks

CPU Charts | Tom's Hardware

Edit: And 3600+ doesn't consume less power than C2D. AMD's 65nm processors and C2D both consume 65 watts

AMD's 90nm processors (like 5200+ and 5600+) consume 89 watt

6000+ consume 125 watt

 

[saltynay]

If you were thinking about water cooling then perhaps you should go with a phase-changing case and get your cpu temps to sub -10C it only costs about the same as a water setup but it won't cool any other components directly only the cpu whilst water-cooling has the expandability