What is the sweet spot these days with CPU's?

[fastman]

I would like to upgrade from Opti 165 and Asus A8N32-SLI, 3% O/C using ASUS AI-Booster. Stability is more important than raw speed to me.

This is a system report taken from Everest:

CPU Type DualCore AMD Opteron 165, 1854 MHz (9 x 206)
Motherboard Name Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe (3 PCI, 1 PCI-E x4, 2 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR DIMM
Motherboard Chipset nVIDIA nForce4 SLI X16, AMD Hammer
System Memory 2048 MB (PC3200 DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type AMI (07/13/06)

Video: nVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2 and still happy with it.

I've been a long time AMD fan and user, but I guess these days Intel has regained the lead. So I'll make the jump if need be.

I haven't been staying in the loop these days either of what's on the horizon, but if need be I can wait a couple of months for the new and improved?

Thanks all in advance.

 

[IL2SturmovikPilot]

How much you got to spend for a new CPU + Board + RAM?

 

[fastman]

I have the cash, but I don't chase the bleeding edge these days and a QX9775 or what ever is top dogs these days is uneeded.

Main use for this system would be for gaming!

 

[IL2SturmovikPilot]

Originally posted by: fastman
I have the cash, but I don't chase the bleeding edge these days and a QX9775 or what ever is top dogs these days is uneeded.

Main use for this system would be for gaming!

Try to aim for:

E4500,E6750 or even a Q6600.
Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L or Abit IP35-E at the least.
2x1GB DDR2 800 RAM from G.SKILL,Crucial,Corsair or any other good brand.

You should be around $400-500 at most if you get the Q6600 with one of those boards and RAM,though i could be wrong.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

The gamers choice seems to be E8400 wolfdale dual core these days, if you heavily multitask or do more than game or just want the added power of a quad then a Q6600 or the new Q9450 is the ticket.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
The gamers choice seems to be E8400 wolfdale dual core these days, if you heavily multitask or do more than game or just want the added power of a quad then a Q6600 or the new Q9450 is the ticket.

From the sounds of the forum posts here at AT I'd say the choice may be E8400 but that's not what anyone is buying because no one can find them anywhere in stock.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Good point IDC if the OP is building right away the E8XXX chips may not be an option. The E8400 and X3110 are hard to find, you can still find them from reputable sellers on ebay but your gonna pay $240+, I've seen some sell for over $300.

Hopefully the recent listings of E8200's and Q9300's signal that the supply of 45nm parts will be improving shortly, Intel can't milk the 65nm parts forever

 

[fastman]

How are those ECS mobo combo's from Fry's, those look inexpensive, but are they cheap?

 

[videopho]

Originally posted by: fastman
How are those ECS mobo combo's from Fry's, those look inexpensive, but are they cheap?

If you're a tweaker, stay away from ECS.
It's basically a no-frill mobo with little room for tweaking.

 

[Drsignguy]

Originally posted by: IL2SturmovikPilot

Originally posted by: fastman
I have the cash, but I don't chase the bleeding edge these days and a QX9775 or what ever is top dogs these days is uneeded.

Main use for this system would be for gaming!

Try to aim for:

E4500,E6750 or even a Q6600.
Gigabyte GA-P35-DS3L or Abit IP35-E at the least.
2x1GB DDR2 800 RAM from G.SKILL,Crucial,Corsair or any other good brand.

You should be around $400-500 at most if you get the Q6600 with one of those boards and RAM,though i could be wrong.

For what I have seen in here, I must agree. If you get a p-35 board (of your choice) with a quad core, you cant go wrong. Here is some info on the P-35 boards

 

[fastman]

I see over at Toms hardware on his CPU charts that when testing the Quad he uses a 38 chipset I beleive? Is there a big difference in the 35 and 38?

 

[Markfw]

The Q6600 works fine on 965P or P35. The X38 is the latest and greatest, but not required at all. My favorite is the P35-DQ6, its spendy, but works great for quads.

And a Q6600@3.4 or better, is very close in games to a E8400@4.0 or better, and in one or two, the Q6600 is actually better. If you have to do this in the next 30 days, its no question, Q6600 (IMO), but if you wait 2 months, and you absolutely want the best for games, an E8400 MIGHT be your choice.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: fastman
I would like to upgrade from Opti 165 and Asus A8N32-SLI, 3% O/C using ASUS AI-Booster. Stability is more important than raw speed to me.

This is a system report taken from Everest:

CPU Type DualCore AMD Opteron 165, 1854 MHz (9 x 206)
Motherboard Name Asus A8N32-SLI Deluxe (3 PCI, 1 PCI-E x4, 2 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR DIMM
Motherboard Chipset nVIDIA nForce4 SLI X16, AMD Hammer
System Memory 2048 MB (PC3200 DDR SDRAM)
BIOS Type AMI (07/13/06)

Video: nVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2 and still happy with it.

I've been a long time AMD fan and user, but I guess these days Intel has regained the lead. So I'll make the jump if need be.

I haven't been staying in the loop these days either of what's on the horizon, but if need be I can wait a couple of months for the new and improved?

Thanks all in advance.

GIGABYTE GA-MA770-DS3 AM2+/AM2 AMD 770 ATX All Solid Capacitor AMD Motherboard $100

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5400+ 2.8GHz Brisbane AM2 65W $100

Kingston ValueRAM 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) $50

$250 Total

Mobo has PCIe 2.0 - can save $10 going with the S3 and PCIe1 (but why bother? )

You should be able to reuse your Opty heatsink (especially if it's the one with the really cool copper heat pipes), OC to 3.2GHz on stock volts with 28c temps (if you are so inclined)

 

[Denithor]

No reason to go AMD these days.

This motherboard + memory:
abit IP35-E $67 after MIR
Corsair 2x1GB DDR2-800 $28 after MIR

With one of these processors:
e2180 (2.0GHz, 1MB cache) $76
e4500 (2.2GHz, 2MB cache) $119
e6750 (2.66GHz, 4MB cache, Lost Planet free) $190

Total after MIR: $171/e2180 or $214/e4500 or $285/e6750

The stock e4500 is about equivalent to the stock X2-5400+ but once you take overclocking into account all three of these chips will destroy the AMD processor. Note that the e6750 at stock speed is going to be faster than the X2-5400+ overclocked to the max.

Intel vs AMD mid-range gaming performance
Intel vs AMD overclocking performance

AMD just doesn't offer a good value these days for anything but the very lowest priced systems.

 

[harpoon84]

I'd have to agree, a $70 E2160 chip overclocked to 3GHz is enough to outperform just about any overclocked X2, so the 'sweet spot' these days is definitely in the Intel camp as far as overclocking is concerned.

AMD still presents a good value at stock speeds, but it simply lacks the headroom and IPC to challenge Intel in the overclocking stakes.

 

[hennethannun]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
The Q6600 works fine on 965P or P35. The X38 is the latest and greatest, but not required at all. My favorite is the P35-DQ6, its spendy, but works great for quads.

And a Q6600@3.4 or better, is very close in games to a E8400@4.0 or better, and in one or two, the Q6600 is actually better. If you have to do this in the next 30 days, its no question, Q6600 (IMO), but if you wait 2 months, and you absolutely want the best for games, an E8400 MIGHT be your choice.

I have to disagree with this reasoning. The Q6600 can almost match the gaming performance of the E8400 when heavily overlocked, but it also uses more power, generates more heat and doesn't have the 45nm improvements (SSE4, the video encoding instructions etc). Also, Microcenter's $200 in store deal not withstanding, it costs quite a bit more.

Unless you plan to keep this processor for 4-5 years I just don't see quad as the way to go. A fast dual core will be just fine for games in 2010 and will perform better in many games and cost you l ess money to operate in the mean time. Remember, we are almost 3 years into the dual-core era and there still aren't any games that actually REQUIRE a dual-core processor to run (though RTS games like Supreme Commander do benefit from more cores). Dual-core is the way to go for gaming right now.

 

[v8envy]

Get the cheaper of E2160 or E2180 and OC it to 3ghz or so. Enjoy not being significantly CPU limited in any modern game for at least a year. Put the $40-50 you save over any other CPU into a drawer labeled 'for future CPU upgrades.' Talk to us again in a year or two once you are CPU limited.

A $250 AMD based build is absolutely ridiculous in this day and age. A cheaper core2 equivalent will be faster and not as much of a dead end platform-wise. Now, if we were shooting for a sub-$100 build for basic internet usage I'd say consider AMD. Not for a gaming rig.

 

[richwenzel]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
The gamers choice seems to be E8400 wolfdale dual core these days, if you heavily multitask or do more than game or just want the added power of a quad then a Q6600 or the new Q9450 is the ticket.

From the sounds of the forum posts here at AT I'd say the choice may be E8400 but that's not what anyone is buying because no one can find them anywhere in stock.

Reminds me of the old Yogi Berra quote, "Nobody goes there no more, it's too crowded!"

 

[chinaman1472]

Originally posted by: Denithor
No reason to go AMD these days.

This motherboard + memory:
abit IP35-E $67 after MIR
Corsair 2x1GB DDR2-800 $28 after MIR

With one of these processors:
e2180 (2.0GHz, 1MB cache) $76
e4500 (2.2GHz, 2MB cache) $119
e6750 (2.66GHz, 4MB cache, Lost Planet free) $190

Total after MIR: $171/e2180 or $214/e4500 or $285/e6750

Bingo. If you're looking for a good price/performance upgrade, this is what you should be buying.

 

[fastman]

Thanks for the links, I?ll look into those.
Does the Quad give a lot of heat?
That where does 1 go to get one?

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: fastman
Thanks for the links, I?ll look into those.
Does the Quad give a lot of heat?
That where does 1 go to get one?

One of the top 2.
I know its a little more than the others mentioned, but if you want it for the reasons I stated above, here you go. They put out more heat, but its very manageable.

 

[QuixoticOne]

Here's a $49 E2180 OEM (no warranty to speak of, no heatsink / fan included) CPU:
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...y&keyword1=tigerdirect
http://www.google.com/aclk?sa=...eLc9eWlmCkQcCHLODb_lqQ
Topic Title: Intel Pentium E2180 2.0ghz OEM Core 2 Technology $49.99 + S/H after $20 Rebate

Here's a well reputed ABIT IP35-E motherboard for $60:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16813127031
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2063989&enterthread=y
($59.99 after $30.00 Mail-In Rebate)
3 Business Day Shipping $7.48

Here's some reasonably trustworthy cheap RAM; buy two sticks for 4GB for $65 cost:
http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=T8UB2GC5&show=p
Part#: T8UB2GC5
Package: RETAIL
Manufacturer: Super Talent
Manufacturer Part#: T8UB2GC5
Shipping Weight: 0.10 lbs.(0.05 kg)
Item# Price Qty
T8UB2GC5 $32.67
STT DDR2-800 2GB/128x8 S-RIGID Memory

If you don't have a reasonable CPU heatsink/fan already either look for a RETAIL box CPU which includes one, or look for a superstock third party unit that is superior in performance to Intel's own HSF if you plan to overclock much any.

This will get you a system that is in every respect a good value, decent, reputable, and powerful in capabilities to do most everything you NEED to do. If you really want high compute performance and are willing to pay more for the capabilities, jump up to a Q6600 especially if you can get in on the $200 deal at Microcenter (in their retail stores only) or similar.

I wouldn't waste time on the $200+ price range dual core CPUs like the E8400/E8500;
they're great powerful CPUs, but if you really want future-proof high compute power you might as well pay a similar amount for a Q6600 or Q9450 quad core unit and get far more long term overall performance at the expense of a slight level of overclockability that really only buys you something in a few single threaded games/applications which won't be the norm in the months to come (more and more games and other apps are using 4 cores well all the time).

The RAM is reputable to meet specification, though it is on the low performance / very low cost side of the spectrum, though it is fully lifetime warranted, and made by a major manufacturer. So I'd trust it to meet spec, but it isn't the uber overclocking fastest possible RAM either. But even at its stock 400 MHz speed it's a perfect match to an E2180 or Q6600 since you'll not be running those CPUs any faster than 400 MHz no matter what anyway because of their multiplier and designs. Maybe you'd want faster RAM for an E8500 or Q9450, though.

I own one of each of these things, so I've "put my money where my mouth is" and like the value propositions of the CPUs / Motherboard / RAM. I'd go for 4GB of RAM if not 8GB if you'll run Vista 64. The speed benefit of having more RAM is often times more pronounced than having a much faster CPU since a lot of the time for typical office / daily applications your CPU sits waiting for things to be loaded from disk into RAM as the main bottleneck, so having more RAM cache is good.

You can look for accessories like heatsinks , fans, or whatever at places like these:
http://www.jab-tech.com/YATE-L...-D12SL-12-pr-3009.html
http://svc.com/
http://www.monoprice.com/home/index.asp
http://www.directron.com/
http://www.zipzoomfly.com
http://www.newegg.com/

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: fastman
Thanks for the links, I?ll look into those.
Does the Quad give a lot of heat?
That where does 1 go to get one?

You do not need a quad core cpu.

To take advantage of a four core cpu you would need to use software which is multithreaded and will run four threads in parallel across those cores. There is very limited availability of such software.

Exceptions: Adobe Premiere and Vegas Pro will run threads in parallel across those four cores, as will Flight Simulator X. Supreme Commander 'sort of balances' the load across cores by designating audio threads to run on a seperate core.

If you are looking for future 'expansion' you need to purchase a motherboard with a PCIe 2.0 x16 slot for your video card. PCIe2 provides twice the voltage and twice the bandwidth of PCIe1.

PCIe2 is available on AMD 700 series chipset motherboards and Intel X38 chipsets.

You will not be 'cpu limited' or 'cpu-bound' at standard gaming resolutions with any AMD or Intel processor above 2.6GHz.

Originally posted by: Denithor
No reason to go AMD these days.

The stock e4500 is about equivalent to the stock X2-5400+ but once you take overclocking into account all three of these chips will destroy the AMD processor. Note that the e6750 at stock speed is going to be faster than the X2-5400+ overclocked to the max.

Intel vs AMD mid-range gaming performance

Intel Fan Boy FUD

The X2 5400+ is faster than any AMD cpu in the article. Anand in the link above would seem to disagree with your FUD:

""The race honestly couldn't be closer between AMD and Intel""

""it's a tossup between AMD and Intel once again""

""Intel is slightly ahead in the standings but not by a significant margin""


Objectivity is not a virtue of the Intel Fan Bots at Anand.

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
You will not be 'cpu limited' or 'cpu-bound' at standard gaming resolutions with any AMD or Intel processor above 2.6GHz.

This is not true for all games - some show significant CPU scaling beyond 2.6GHz on an AMD X2. For example:

Supreme Commander
Call of Duty 4
World in Conflict
Neverwinter Nights 2

In regards to an E4500 vs X2 5400+, Denithor is on the money. At stock speeds performance between the two chips is close, but if you take into account overclocked performance the E4500 would dominate. Both chips should overclock to 3GHz or higher, but the E4500 has a significant IPC advantage. Even an E21x0 overclocked to 3GHz will beat any overclocked X2. This is not FUD, its the simple truth.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
You do not need a quad core cpu.

To take advantage of a four core cpu you would need to use software which is multithreaded and will run four threads in parallel across those cores. There is very limited availability of such software.

Exceptions: Adobe Premiere and Vegas Pro will run threads in parallel across those four cores, as will Flight Simulator X. Supreme Commander 'sort of balances' the load across cores by designating audio threads to run on a seperate core.

Would you agree that another exception would be when you are running multiple single-threaded applications in parallel...perhaps in the background while gaming? Ripping, burning, anti-virus scan, archive/backup, etc?

It's not necessarily a "must absolutely have multi-threaded apps to take advantage of multi-core CPU" situation...at least not for my computers

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
Objectivity is not a virtue of the Intel Fan Bots at Anand.

Ah now this just isn't necessary, is it? If you have data that counters someone else's statement then you really undermine yourself when you let negative comments cloud the message.

Just present the data and your counterargument and let the reader make conclusions (if they need to be made) regarding the motives behind the original poster's comments.

You do yourself a disservice when mixing your argument with negative personal attack comments.

It took me years to realize this, please just take my comment here as an attempt to offer friendly advice on enhancing the presence and stature of your posts (which are awesome btw when the negative stuff is stripped out, keep up the good fight of interjecting data to replace or reinforce opinion ).