Bought a core upgrade today *Poll too*

[alkalinetaupehat]

Friend of mine was looking for some help putting together a budget core upgrade for his rig, and after reviewing benchmarks, pricing, etc. we came up with two systems:

AMD Option:

PhII 940 Black Edition ($190)
Gigabyte GA-MA790X-UD4P ($110)
XFX Radeon HD 4850 1GB ($135)
G.SKILL HK 4GB ($55)

Total: $499.56 shipped @Newegg

Intel Option:

Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 ($175)
Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3P ($135)
XFX Radeon HD 4850 1GB ($135)
G.SKILL HK 4GB ($55)

Total: $505.95 shipped @Newegg

BUT there was a $5 off coupon code for the Q8400 that Newegg sent me a couple hours before ordering so the ACTUAL total came to:

$500.95 shipped

Which one did he pick? After literally a half hour of debate between us, it was decided that since the PhII 940 used 30w more on load than the Q8400, and since we were using a P45 instead of the X48 used in AT's testing the difference would be somewhat larger, the Intel system was the way to go.

Most of the benchmarks were a wash or slightly in favor of one or the other, and once the price got to such a ridiculously close point we figured the extra $1.39 would be saved over time in energy consumption savings.

The coupon code was: EMCLTLN26

Does our reasoning check out? Overclocking wasn't really planned out since we didn't include an aftermarket HSF.

 

[richierich1212]

Can't believe you guys just missed out on the AMD 940 + Gigabyte GA-MA790X-UD4P mobo combo a couple of days ago for $258 I believe.

Anyways good choice. Either way your friend is happy I'm sure.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: richierich1212
Can't believe you guys just missed out on the AMD 940 + Gigabyte GA-MA790X-UD4P mobo combo a couple of days ago for $258 I believe. Since you aren't going to be overclocking for now go with the 940 since it's a quad and he'll be more happy with it in the future since software is being optimized for more cores everyday.

The Q8400 is quad also.

The Q8400 & PhII 940 are close enough that it's a wash, IMO.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: richierich1212
Can't believe you guys just missed out on the AMD 940 + Gigabyte GA-MA790X-UD4P mobo combo a couple of days ago for $258 I believe. Since you aren't going to be overclocking for now go with the 940 since it's a quad and he'll be more happy with it in the future since software is being optimized for more cores everyday.

Both options are quads...

OP - accounting for the difference in power consumption is definitely the next "level" to go in differentiating the systems in your decision tree.

Props for that, and yes the Q8400 system wins there for equivalent work loads and idle time ratios, etc.

The only other deciding factor that I can think might be entertained is the psychological one...i.e. if all else is equal would your friend rather see their money go to AMD or Intel? For some folks this doesn't matter, for others it does, so I thought I'd just mention it in case it does matter for you or your friend.

 

[aigomorla]

OVERCLOCK!

then you'll actually be glad you picked up the intel on the UD3P.

Sorry that UD3P board is an absolute monster budget board. Make sure you get the most recient version of bios on it.

 

[richierich1212]

LOL my bad I misread the OP's specs of the Intel system. I thought E8400 ***points gun at head***

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
OVERCLOCK!

then you'll actually be glad you picked up the intel on the UD3P.

Sorry that UD3P board is an absolute monster budget board. Make sure you get the most recient version of bios on it.

500fsb a breeze

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: BTRY B 529th FA BN

Originally posted by: aigomorla
OVERCLOCK!

then you'll actually be glad you picked up the intel on the UD3P.

Sorry that UD3P board is an absolute monster budget board. Make sure you get the most recient version of bios on it.

500fsb a breeze

That's unreal.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: BTRY B 529th FA BN

Originally posted by: aigomorla
OVERCLOCK!

then you'll actually be glad you picked up the intel on the UD3P.

Sorry that UD3P board is an absolute monster budget board. Make sure you get the most recient version of bios on it.

500fsb a breeze

That's unreal.

I always make the mistake of not mentioning that fsb on a quad

 

[nyker96]

if the 940be is the same new core as the 955be, I think after oc, it will be faster than q8xxx.

 

[spinejam]

ud3p is a great mb and very o/c friendly!

 

[LoneNinja]

Although you already purchased I voted AMD, I personally enjoy my Phenom II 940 and Biostar 790GX. 800mhz idle and 3.5Ghz under load on the stock cooler with no problems, gotta love that Cool n Quiet works flawlessly with overclocks. (At least on this combo, the Gigabyte 780G board I own disables Cool n Quiet if any overclocking settings are touched)

 

[alkalinetaupehat]

Forgot to mention that the Gigabyte board has a $20 MIR, so icing on the cake for the decision.

At the conclusion of the Anandtech article Anand mentions that perhaps the PhII 940 should be the preference "to ensure we have an AMD to talk about in a couple of years." This may carry some validity, but considering that AMD has performance AND price parity with Intel at the midrange segment I think that going forward they will begin to regain market share at several price points which sell in volume, thereby pulling them out of the red and into a profitable state.

It's nice to see AMD properly marketing and designing their chips so that they can compete and therefore sell favorably with Intel chips, though now they need to get the power consumption and die size/transistor count down so they can compete WITH more usable margins, though both I think go hand in hand.

 

[Gikaseixas]

since my 940BE trade blows with my cousin's Q9550, it sure beats a Q8400 more often than not...

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: nyker96
if the 940be is the same new core as the 955be, I think after oc, it will be faster than q8xxx.

I also voted for the 940. It does look to oc better and at least is a "full size" chip, instead of a crippled one, that Q8400 is. I wouldn't touch anything lower then a Q9400 from intel quads today.

 

[alkalinetaupehat]

Originally posted by: error8

Originally posted by: nyker96
if the 940be is the same new core as the 955be, I think after oc, it will be faster than q8xxx.

I also voted for the 940. It does look to oc better and at least is a "full size" chip, instead of a crippled one, that Q8400 is. I wouldn't touch anything lower then a Q9400 from intel quads today.

I noticed from the benchmarks that the value of buying anything higher than a Q8400 on the Intel side was an exercise in diminishing returns, though the Q9550 is admittedly a much better overclocker. When it came to my machine the budget was flexible enough to go for a quad with the full 12MB cache, in this case there is a definite need to stay within budget.

While the Phenom II system did come out to essentially the same price and probably tops out on air at a higher clockspeed, the energy consumption does become a factor and I have strong enough reason to believe that the Q8400 can remain relevant when overclocked in competition with the Phenom II. In other words, if both of them were overclocked 20%, I think the power consumption delta between the two of them would widen significantly but the performance would scale somewhat in parallel with how it is now.

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: alkalinetaupehat
While the Phenom II system did come out to essentially the same price and probably tops out on air at a higher clockspeed, the energy consumption does become a factor and I have strong enough reason to believe that the Q8400 can remain relevant when overclocked in competition with the Phenom II. In other words, if both of them were overclocked 20%, I think the power consumption delta between the two of them would widen significantly but the performance would scale somewhat in parallel with how it is now.

That's what Xbitlabs generally found.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...0-overclocking_12.html

 

[error8]

And usually, those that do overclock to the every last bit of performance , don't give a rats ass about power consumption.

 

[alkalinetaupehat]

Originally posted by: error8
And usually, those that do overclock to the every last bit of performance , don't give a rats ass about power consumption.

Heh...define "performance."

 

[error8]

Originally posted by: alkalinetaupehat

Heh...define "performance."

Performance = highest stable frequency possible, independent of power consumption and dissipated heat.

 

[Munky]

I would have went for the Ph2 940. Not because AMD rulez, but because the Q8400 doesn't have the L2 cache of its higher end counterparts, and in some games that will put it at a disadvantage.

 

[taltamir]

I think the reason people vote for the AMD machine is because they didn't read through your post to find the 30 watt power consumption difference... THAT IS HUGE and translates to a lot of dollars per year.
Either that or they are morons.

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

Originally posted by: taltamir
I think the reason people vote for the AMD machine is because they didn't read through your post to find the 30 watt power consumption difference... THAT IS HUGE and translates to a lot of dollars per year.
Either that or they are morons.

Depends on usage. The X4 940 uses 6w less at idle.

 

[Phynaz]

AMD southbridge?

No thanks, I'll pass.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Originally posted by: taltamir
I think the reason people vote for the AMD machine is because they didn't read through your post to find the 30 watt power consumption difference... THAT IS HUGE and translates to a lot of dollars per year.
Either that or they are morons.

Is that 30 watt difference with all 4 cores pegged at 100%? If so I'd say it's hardly moronic to disregard that piece of information for 99% of users. Most people turn their PC on, play MP3's, movies, maybe rip DVD's/CD's, surf the net, pay bills, etc. etc. etc. on their PC's. And for those of us who game, how many games are likely to peg all 4 cores at 100% or close to it for an extended period of time? Most games use one or two cores. Now if you are going to do something with your PC that does infact really push all 4 cores for extended periods of time, and do that day in day out, it makes sense. But for the vast majority of people out there I'd hardly say that they are 'morons' if they didn't care about a 30 watt difference in power with all 4 cores at full load.

Originally posted by: Phynaz
AMD southbridge?

No thanks, I'll pass.

Care to explain? Looking at them both on Newegg (AMD board and Intel board) they both look quite comparable. Both have 8 x USB 2.0 and both have the exact same onboard audio. I see the Intel board has 2 more SATA ports (8 vs. 6). I really don't see anything that is a deal breaker on the AMD southbridge I guess.