Originally posted by: porschetr
wow, I heard AMD was more affordable. That's $30 CDN more than the Intel. I know from Newegg, it is only few dollars more
they're definitely a better deal on the low end; they have a $60 x2 that overclocks to the high 2ghz range and its not uncommon for someone to hit 3ghz. intel simply doesn't have anything that cheap that performs that well, plus when you take into consideration the generally cheaper amd motherboards, well then in that instance it's cheaper (it's what i went with

).
Originally posted by: coolpurplefan
Actually, you could always go with socket AM2 simply to be able to upgrade to a K10 CPU when they come out. They may come out in September or October.
But, having a socket AM2 instead of AM2+ (which isn't out yet) means the K10 is going to run without HT3. As far as I know anyway.
let me quote an anandtech article here...
"Current platforms only support HyperTransport 2.0, while the new + platforms will enable HT3.0 which brings faster link speeds and greater bandwidth. For desktops, a faster HT link won't really change performance, but in multi-socket workstations and servers there will be a benefit.
The more tangible feature is the ability to support split voltage planes. As we mentioned in our preview of AMD's Barcelona architecture,
the CPU cores and the Northbridge can operate at different voltages and frequencies."
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=2986&p=6
***drool***