AMD X2 5000+ vs. Intel E6300

[TheBigBlueBox]

Which processor of those 2 should I get for gaming?

Everyone seems to say get the Core 2 Duo, but I'd like some more opinions... I know GHz doesn't matter that much these days, but 1.86 GHz on the E6300 scares me especially for games that might not fully support dual core...

I wish I could afford the E6400, but unfortunately I have a hard spending cap...

 

[Pciber]

the x2 5000+ will be faster in most applications. I'de equate an e6300 to somewhere between an x2 3800 and an x2 4200.

 

[Kromis]

Originally posted by: Pciber
the x2 5000+ will be faster in most applications. I'de equate an e6300 to somewhere between an x2 3800 and an x2 4200.

Remember, its all about overclocking!

 

[CurseTheSky]

Do you plan on overclocking at all?

If so, DEFINATELY go with the E6300. With some Arctic Silver 5 and a decent heat sink (even the Freezer 7 Pro for ~$25 will work), you should be able to hit 2.8-3.0 GHz no problem. Even with the stock heat sink and paste you should still be able to hit 2.5 or so.

If not, go for the X2 5000+, some DDR2 533 memory, and put everything else into the graphics card.

 

[hurtstotalktoyou]

Whoa...not quite. The 5000+ will be *a little* faster in most applications if you keep everything at stock. If I were to equate the two processor lineups, I'd say:

E6300 = X2 4800+
E6400 = X2 5000+
E6600 = X2 FX-62

However, the E6300 is a beast of an overclocker. At 3GHz it should beat any overclocked AMD chip.

Check out these benchmarks for more info:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2802&p=4

 

[darkhorror]

You should be able to hit 2.8-3ghz with totally stock cooling.

 

[bamacre]

WTF? An X2 5000+ is more expensive than an E6400.

 

[skriefal]

The selected AMD mobo may be cheaper than the selected Intel mobo, thus allowing more of the budget to be spent on the AMD processor...

Even so, the X2 5000+ @ stock won't be much faster than the E6300 @ stock. And the E6300 will indeed overclock much more than the 5000+ will. So if you're willing to or planning to overclock, the E6300 is definitely the better choice. If you're not planning to overclock, the 5000+ will be a little bit faster. In both cases, the availability of new S775/AM2 processors in a couple years will probably be limited... so neither system is likely to be more future-proof than the other.

 

[bamacre]

E6300 plus 965P motherbaord = ~$317

X2 5000+ plus AM2 motherboard = at least $325

 

[Captante]

Go with the E6300, no question about it.

 

[n7]

If you are not overclocking, the X2 5000+ is indeed faster.

If you plan to OC, then the C2D E6300 is a much better choice.

 

[Roguestar]

Remember, don't pay much attention to the megahertz myth! A 1.86Ghz E6300 not overclocked will perform much better than a 1.86Ghz Pentium 4 :thumbsup:.

Overclocking the E6300 is an easy way to get performance exceeding the X2 5000+ without breaking the bank.

 

[gsellis]

You may want to check today's review posting. AT Review

The E4300 review... Wow, Intel has made up some serious ground. And the E4300 is an OC star.

 

[dguy6789]

The 5000+ would be slightly faster than the E6300 in most things, but the E6300 is by far a better value, especially when you consider overclocking. For the misinformed above, the E6300 is around X2 4800+ level, the X2 3800 is not even close to competition performance wise for the E6300.