Conroe vs AMD... uprade paths?

[Proprioceptive]

Alright guys... I'm not trying to start a flame war or anything, but a previous post I made had me thinking hard about this. Could it still be a smarter choice to stick with AMD if you're thinking long term? Here is my thinking:

We have all be made aware now that AMD's AM3 processors will be compatible with today's AM2 boards. I haven't heard anything (and please correct me if I'm mistaken) that says LGA775 will survive past Conroe. If you wanted to upgrade a couple years down the road, for Intel, you'd have to most likely buy a new mobo along with the new processor. For AMD, you won't have to deal with this when you get an AM3 processor. So, even if the $/performance difference is still leaning a bit in Intel's direction, you would still have to fork out extra dough for the mobo.

Anyways, I may be wrong on something here or I may be missing something, but I would love to hear what you guys have to say about this.

 

[cmdrdredd]

While I agree with you I don't see why intel would abandon the socket so quickly. I Do understand that they might do it, simply to sell more chipsets.

That being said I still like AMD alot more than Intel. I'm not a fanboy but after using AMD then switching to Intel I still liked AMD better and it's what I use now. I knew C2D was comming yet I stuck with AMD for the time being. AMD has always seemed to be more of a gamer/enthusiast CPU (since the athlon days) than Intel. Prices on AMD CPUS and motherboards were usually more appealing too from what I remember. Anyhow, it's a wait and see...I'm not going to upgrade anything until I see both Intel and AMD's Quad Core CPUs, and motherboards (intel chipsets are usually better than their ATI/Nvidia counterparts on that side of things).

 

[n7]

It's possible that AM2 is a better investment longterm, but if there's one thing i've learned about PC hardware, it's that you can never plan too far ahead.

I seriously wouldn't count on future-proofness with how fast things change these days.

And for now & the next while, C2D is certainly the best choice out there...well as soon as they can actually meet the demand with supply.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: n7
It's possible that AM2 is a better investment longterm, but if there's one thing i've learned about PC hardware, it's that you can never plan too far ahead.

I seriously wouldn't count on future-proofness with how fast things change these days.

And for now & the next while, C2D is certainly the best choice out there...well as soon as they can actually meet the demand with supply.

When the prices come down I think so...see I don't care that you can overclock an E6400 rediculously. I can still get an AMD system cheaper. There's a point where more speed doesn't help me (others may disagree). I don't live to break benchmarks, and what I have now is a very capable gaming system and I'm extremely happy.

I'm sure other people can share my feelings. It's not like going from a P3 to an Athlon was way back when. Things move fast and all sure, but the feel isn't really there anymore. The difference is large on paper and benchmarks, but what you notice and feel doesn't back that up IMO.

 

[thecrecarc]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: n7
It's possible that AM2 is a better investment longterm, but if there's one thing i've learned about PC hardware, it's that you can never plan too far ahead.

I seriously wouldn't count on future-proofness with how fast things change these days.

And for now & the next while, C2D is certainly the best choice out there...well as soon as they can actually meet the demand with supply.

When the prices come down I think so...see I don't care that you can overclock an E6400 rediculously. I can still get an AMD system cheaper. There's a point where more speed doesn't help me (others may disagree). I don't live to break benchmarks, and what I have now is a very capable gaming system and I'm extremely happy.

I'm sure other people can share my feelings. It's not like going from a P3 to an Athlon was way back when. Things move fast and all sure, but the feel isn't really there anymore. The difference is large on paper and benchmarks, but what you notice and feel doesn't back that up IMO.

um... if you can get AMD cheap, you can *most of the time* get a better intel, for the same price. and... if they are both the same price, and intel is faster.... you get amd!?

ur confusing me.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: thecrecarc

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: n7
It's possible that AM2 is a better investment longterm, but if there's one thing i've learned about PC hardware, it's that you can never plan too far ahead.

I seriously wouldn't count on future-proofness with how fast things change these days.

And for now & the next while, C2D is certainly the best choice out there...well as soon as they can actually meet the demand with supply.

When the prices come down I think so...see I don't care that you can overclock an E6400 rediculously. I can still get an AMD system cheaper. There's a point where more speed doesn't help me (others may disagree). I don't live to break benchmarks, and what I have now is a very capable gaming system and I'm extremely happy.

I'm sure other people can share my feelings. It's not like going from a P3 to an Athlon was way back when. Things move fast and all sure, but the feel isn't really there anymore. The difference is large on paper and benchmarks, but what you notice and feel doesn't back that up IMO.

um... if you can get AMD cheap, you can *most of the time* get a better intel, for the same price. and... if they are both the same price, and intel is faster.... you get amd!?

ur confusing me.

No you confused yourself... AMD is cheaper that's what I said. You're twisting everything because it's not what you weant to hear.

 

[Skeeedunt]

upgrade paths are for suckers

 

[nismotigerwvu]

you know...the last post is right....who says we'll still be using x16 pci express slots for video or ddr2 866 (or whatever is the prerred speed for c2d/am2 systems)...the best thing to do is build for now....and when tomarrow comes....dump the rig on a fs forum and build for today again

 

[thecrecarc]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: thecrecarc

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: n7
It's possible that AM2 is a better investment longterm, but if there's one thing i've learned about PC hardware, it's that you can never plan too far ahead.

I seriously wouldn't count on future-proofness with how fast things change these days.

And for now & the next while, C2D is certainly the best choice out there...well as soon as they can actually meet the demand with supply.

When the prices come down I think so...see I don't care that you can overclock an E6400 rediculously. I can still get an AMD system cheaper. There's a point where more speed doesn't help me (others may disagree). I don't live to break benchmarks, and what I have now is a very capable gaming system and I'm extremely happy.

I'm sure other people can share my feelings. It's not like going from a P3 to an Athlon was way back when. Things move fast and all sure, but the feel isn't really there anymore. The difference is large on paper and benchmarks, but what you notice and feel doesn't back that up IMO.

um... if you can get AMD cheap, you can *most of the time* get a better intel, for the same price. and... if they are both the same price, and intel is faster.... you get amd!?

ur confusing me.

No you confused yourself... AMD is cheaper that's what I said. You're twisting everything because it's not what you weant to hear.

AMD is cheaper? i dinnt know that, i though intel was cheaper so i assumed... w/e

but seriosuly, what amd is cheaper and better than intel? i couldnt find any, and i need to help my cousin build a cheap, best bang for the buck computer. so if you know a cheap amd, feel free to share!

 

[bobsmith1492]

There's no point in buying a motherboard for future CPUs. There are so many different technologies that change on a mobo it usually makes sense to keep a CPU and mobo pair together.

 

[Zinthar]

I'm debating this same issue myself. The price difference between an AM2 X2 3800+ CPU/mobo and E6400/Gigabyte DS3 is almost $200 (esp. since stock intel CPU cooling sucks and will need replaced immediately).

I'm leaning towards the E6400 combo because E6400 is a better overclocker than 3800+ and already around 25% faster at equal clocks. My thinking is that this will prolong the amount of time till I need to replace everything again, and that perhaps I can survive with this system for 3-4 years with some video card and RAM upgrades.

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: Zinthar
I'm debating this same issue myself. The price difference between an AM2 X2 3800+ CPU/mobo and E6400/Gigabyte DS3 is almost $200 (esp. since stock intel CPU cooling sucks and will need replaced immediately).

I'm leaning towards the E6400 combo because E6400 is a better overclocker than 3800+ and already around 25% faster at equal clocks. My thinking is that this will prolong the amount of time till I need to replace everything again, and that perhaps I can survive with this system for 3-4 years with some video card and RAM upgrades.

Getting the E6300 should make that decision easier

And you should still be able to get around ~3 GHz+

 

[Zinthar]

Originally posted by: n7

Originally posted by: Zinthar
I'm debating this same issue myself. The price difference between an AM2 X2 3800+ CPU/mobo and E6400/Gigabyte DS3 is almost $200 (esp. since stock intel CPU cooling sucks and will need replaced immediately).

I'm leaning towards the E6400 combo because E6400 is a better overclocker than 3800+ and already around 25% faster at equal clocks. My thinking is that this will prolong the amount of time till I need to replace everything again, and that perhaps I can survive with this system for 3-4 years with some video card and RAM upgrades.

Getting the E6300 should make that decision easier

And you should still be able to get around ~3 GHz+

Good point...but if I was willing to push the E6300 to 3+ Ghz with the cooling solution that I'm likely to use (Scythe Ninja Plus for the CPU + some different NB heatsink/fan for the DS3), then with the 8:1 ratio offered by the E6400 I could probably push an extra 400 Mhz or so at the same FSB, right?!?

 

[saymyname]

If you're worrying about sockets I'm surprised you're here. The upgrade path by socket is so limited that even when I try I can't pull it off. Something always changes. FSB at the very least. I went from a socket A Tbird to a Socket A Thoroughbred and managed to keep my motherboard, but only because I didn't upgrade to the newest thing out. Then to socket 939 which barely lasted a year and a half.

 

[Bobthelost]

Originally posted by: Skeeedunt
upgrade paths are for suckers

To expand on this:

You're upgrading in a year. By then you may be wanting faster RAM (Hell that 667 is going to cripple your AM3 6400X2!), your motherboard may not be able to overclock the new generation of CPU as well as current ones, it may not even be compatible after all despite all claims that it would.

Maybe i just wait too long between upgrades, maybe i just don't buy high enough end parts. But every time i've gone for a new CPU i've gone for a new motherboard too.

 

[TheDoctorWHO]

Im sure that when Intel releases the 4 core CPU in '07 that they will have at least SOME of them that work with LGA775 if they havn't introduced a new socket by then. But I really doubt that they will. The point about build for today until it becomes obsolete is quite a good idea. Core 2's will most likely be some of the best for at least the next 2 years, and after that (we'll use mPGA478 as an example) they'll probably still have someting that will be utilizeable on 775 and you wont have to get alot of new junk, and will be able to coast out the rest of the years on 775 till it becomes obsolete, and still have a decent rig.

Now, as far as AMD goes...
From what I've heard and from what I've seen, they seem to be switching socket types at rediculus paces. I don't know what exactly sparked this constant change they seem to be going for, but I don't like it. Even if AM3 CPU's are going to be backwards compatable with AM2 mobo's, chances are there still will be some limitations you wont be able to overcome. That being said, it most likely means that they will only make AM3's that work with AM2 mobo's for a limited time and then *poof* there goes your support. You had the best for a year or so, and now everyones moving on (or at least the company is) to better things, while your in the cold with an AM2 CPU in an AM2 mobo, and we dont make CPU's for that anymore, sorry. Don't get me wrong, I love AMD. But once people at the beginning of the year began to proclaim that AMD has won the processor wars, they just stopped making new and better things. No new good CPU's (except the FX 60 & 62) no real new lines of CPU's so that way they would have stayed ahead of intel. Instead intel begins to scheme with their new cpu's and all of a sudden AMD does a 180 and looks behind at intel and discovers that "Oh dear, it appears that they have strapped a booster rocket on their production and are about to surpass us" and now AMD has to live with the fact that since they got lazy and decided not to pull forth anything new (like a new Athlon line) or something really cool and much better, that they now have to play catch up. I know your gonna say "Well AM2 is new" and I'm gonna say yes it is, but all it offers is DDR2 support and thats about it. Plus your gonna need to upgrade because AMD has more junk on the horizon to make that become obsolete and your goona have to upgrade again. Sticking with intel right now means that I know my purchase is gonna allow me to not have to worry about buying a totally new system in the next 2~3 years, while AMD seems to think that after a year, your gonna want to upgrade anyway. No, I just dont like it. Thats why i have to go with intel right now, because they have a more stable upgrade path for the next few years. AMD just looks to wonky