What I want from AMD

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,579
1,031
136
#26
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Markfw900
$160 for cpu and stock HSF + $52 for ECS PT890T-A V1.0 LGA 775 VIA PT890 + $100 for a gig of PC5300. So $10 less for the motherboard and $10 more for the chip, but its a minimum 20% faster. So it wins price/performance.

And yes, the memory on my 6300;s is $100/gig, less actuall. And if you OC a little you can use stock hsf, but like AMD, massive OC's require aftermarkey HSF's

As for the money comment, why do you think we buy C2D ? because stock or OC'ed they offer better price/performance. AGAIN, I have my $52 motherboard with stock HSF right next to my Opty 170 with aftermarket HSF, BOTH using DDR PC3200 memory, the C2D@2.5, the same as the opty, and it beats it by 40% performance. And where do you find a $64 motherbord that will OC ? Granted my $52 motherboard won't go far, but when you start out at 20% performance advantage, a $64 motherboard will never make up for that.

Also, you need to specify all parts, and the objective. Total less $ , no OC ? Bang/buch with OC ? Whaichever category you pick, C2D wins.
I don't think it wins, I think they tie. I don't want to start insisting we nitpick on the current falling prices of DDR memory and overclockability of an X2 with stock cooling or that I can go cheaper on the 939 but specified a quality board and Gigabyte is. But I'll say that outside of professional benchmark running, the upgrade from X2 to C2D is the first one I ever thought was gratuitous even for enthusiasts. For some people the difference is worth it, and for others it's marginal. Consider what a drastic turn for the better your rig would take if you dumped $150-200 extra into the video card or sound card and went with X2 over C2D.
OK, even if I were to gree with you on the equal value and price (which I don't), then why would you buy a dying platform over a current platform when all else is equal ? You are still pumping a dead horse......

You can;t buy a 939 X2 rig for less than a C2D, and I showed that, so you are out of reason here dude.

Last... You don't own a C2D rig, but I have almost exactly the combo you are referencing sitting beside the combo I am referencing, and have have PROOF as well as experience with both, where as you have opinion.

GIVE IT UP
 
Oct 27, 2006
19,670
159
106
#27
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Markfw900
$160 for cpu and stock HSF + $52 for ECS PT890T-A V1.0 LGA 775 VIA PT890 + $100 for a gig of PC5300. So $10 less for the motherboard and $10 more for the chip, but its a minimum 20% faster. So it wins price/performance.

And yes, the memory on my 6300;s is $100/gig, less actuall. And if you OC a little you can use stock hsf, but like AMD, massive OC's require aftermarkey HSF's

As for the money comment, why do you think we buy C2D ? because stock or OC'ed they offer better price/performance. AGAIN, I have my $52 motherboard with stock HSF right next to my Opty 170 with aftermarket HSF, BOTH using DDR PC3200 memory, the C2D@2.5, the same as the opty, and it beats it by 40% performance. And where do you find a $64 motherbord that will OC ? Granted my $52 motherboard won't go far, but when you start out at 20% performance advantage, a $64 motherboard will never make up for that.

Also, you need to specify all parts, and the objective. Total less $ , no OC ? Bang/buch with OC ? Whaichever category you pick, C2D wins.
I don't think it wins, I think they tie. I don't want to start insisting we nitpick on the current falling prices of DDR memory and overclockability of an X2 with stock cooling or that I can go cheaper on the 939 but specified a quality board and Gigabyte is. But I'll say that outside of professional benchmark running, the upgrade from X2 to C2D is the first one I ever thought was gratuitous even for enthusiasts. For some people the difference is worth it, and for others it's marginal. Consider what a drastic turn for the better your rig would take if you dumped $150-200 extra into the video card or sound card and went with X2 over C2D.
Are you high? For anyone who's not trying to re-use old parts, upgrade an existing platform, or is a brand zealot, it would border on the INSANE to build AMD at this point for anything but the cheapo systems ($50-$100 cpu, etc).

Not to mention that I've seen a $55 Asrock mobo running a C2D 6300 @ 2.58ghz w/retail fan and *horrible* PNY DDR2-533.

I like AMD, and still recommend them for many builds, as a $55 AM2 mobo w/GF6150, some cheap DDR2, and a $50 Sempron will make a great office system, and with a PCIe slot and X2 capability, have a bit of upgrading headroom should the need arise. However, for anyone able to swing a few more bucks on the front end, the C2D is the only logical choice at this point.

But whatever, stay in la-la-land, you can always drink your sorrows away with OCHungry. :beer: :wine: :brokenheart: :music:
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,275
0
0
#28
Originally posted by: Markfw900
OK, even if I were to gree with you on the equal value and price (which I don't), then why would you buy a dying platform over a current platform when all else is equal ?
What platform isn't dying? Look ahead 12 months and then ask yourself if you're really going to use the performance increase from 775 over 939 in the meantime.
 

Duvie

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
16,215
0
71
#29
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Markfw900
OK, even if I were to gree with you on the equal value and price (which I don't), then why would you buy a dying platform over a current platform when all else is equal ?
What platform isn't dying? Look ahead 12 months and then ask yourself if you're really going to use the performance increase from 775 over 939 in the meantime.


Another terrible argument.....

Sckt 775 still has life cause people will have the ability to add a quad core. Qx6700 is out now, but the Q6600 and Q6400 are still yet to be released. then you have the E6450, E6650, E6750, etc....All 1333mhz fsb parts. What are you see for new parts coming for the sckt 939?

Sckt 939 is all but dead now. You get 90nm parts and that is it, and AMD is currently shifting over to 65nm.

if you dont want to use the word dead then lets just look at what is the state of platforms....You have sckt 775 or ????? nothing it is the current platform. Sckt 939 cannot say that as AM2 is already out and has been...It is clear which one is closer to total death.

We wont see a new desktop platform for Intel announced until q3-q4 of this year and then it will only be to the point AMD was about 4 months ago. So basicall 13-16 months the sckt 775 platform will be to the level AMD sckt 939 platform is now. how you can even draw a comparison is insane.

Not to mention the state of DDR. At least if a person has DDR2 they have an easily move to competing platform. Buying more DDR is just insuring you will have to replace your ram again in the next upgrade.

Anyone who can remotely and objectively look at this could clearly see the sckt 775 has a better future path at this moment compared to sckt 939. DDR2 as well against DDR.
 
Dec 27, 2001
11,275
0
0
#30
Originally posted by: Duvie
Buying more DDR is just insuring you will have to replace your ram again in the next upgrade.
We'll all be dumping our current memory to move to DDR3.
 

Duvie

Elite Member
Feb 5, 2001
16,215
0
71
#31
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Duvie
Buying more DDR is just insuring you will have to replace your ram again in the next upgrade.
We'll all be dumping our current memory to move to DDR3.

Only difference will be that it will be 2 platforms away from sckt939 but only one from sckt775. Plus I have not heard of the yorkfield chipset will even have DDR3. I ahve not heard definitely if the K8L derivative is DDR3 for sure.

I guess if we all look far enough in the future we can justify your claims. I think it is wrong. If anything there ma be some crossover boards for ddr3 like there is for DDR/DDR2. All in All this likely will give DDR2 users a good 2 year lifespan while DDR has pretty much ended minus the ECS boards.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,579
1,031
136
#32
So what ! in a year or something....... And DDR2 will be around then for a while anyway.

So your point is ?

Bottom line, a NEW system build should be C2D for anything but extreme bottom end.
 
Oct 27, 2006
19,670
159
106
#33
Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
Originally posted by: Duvie
Buying more DDR is just insuring you will have to replace your ram again in the next upgrade.
We'll all be dumping our current memory to move to DDR3.
AM2 is heavily rumored to support K8L w/DDR2 on existing mobos. :)
 

coldpower27

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2004
1,677
0
0
#34

The Bearlake family will support both DDR2 and DDR3 memory types, so you won't be forced to go DDR3 if you don't want to.

There is not too much info on AMD DDR3 for the moment, probably Socket AM3 as they are tied with a new memory means a new Socket. However Socket AM3 is not due for sometime, and there will be Quad Core derivatives of K8L/K10 that will be able to plug into the existing Socket F and AM2 platforms based on DDR2 technology.

LGA775 as a Socket will have quite some lifetime left until the arrival of Nehalem based processors where Intel will have to change Sockets.

For current users if you considering anything with any sort of longevity Socket AM2 and 965/975/680I/650I LGA775 derivatives are the way to go. Basically any LGA775 that can support the Core 2 Quad family.

If you don't want to take a gamble on performance then Intel would be the way to go for now as K8L/K10 is unproven and a big question mark at this point in time.


 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS