FFS you so deserve to get banned. When you lose an argument, you say people lie. Wheres your proof that they're lieing? It's not like he claimed 5GHz on air, 3.5GHz can be attained by a LOT of people.
In you actually read the forums, instead of going apeshit at anyone who dares suggest C2D is superior to AMD, you might realise that 3.5GHz, while slightly above the average C2D overclock, can hardly be considered a 'super' overclock in C2D land...
Markfw900, may I suggest you post a few screenshots of a stable 3.5GHz overclock and put this clown back in his circus... it's getting ridiculous. Being a fanboy is one thing but attacking someones integrity is just not on, especially when it is so uncalled for.
Markfw
Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
- May 16, 2002
- 27,194
- 16,092
- 136
Actually, one is at 3400 since my power supply is weak(it was at 3500), once I put the X1900XT in there to do F@H, and the other is actually at 3466, not 3.5. It will run for 3.5 for days, but over a week or two, it would reboot at that speed, so I went down to 3466, and it runs forever at that. I don;t even need screen shots, Duvie has 2 of the same, and his both run 3430 (close enough). If this troll doesn't believe 2 well respected long time members, thats his problem, I don't want to waste my time with screen copies, uploads, etc...
So you got caught thus ask for my banning.
Ok, you weren?t lying, but just distorting the truth. Is that better?
Who the hell are you, harpoon or duvei that I must respect?
So laughable expecting me/us to believe you because you're an old timer.
If you are not really, really lying about 3.5GHz 24/7 (which you have already admitted was not true and was 3.34ghz), just post a screenshot of that speed w/ prime running in the background. You won?t because you can?t.
EDIT:I am just curious on this C2D stellar overclocking. One should ask these guys if they claim C2D is faster (performance speaking) clock for clock, why do they want to OC that poor chip to 3.5 GHz? Hell I am content @ 2.7 GHz w/ this x2, and if I had a C2D that was giving me 10-15% better performance why would I want to go beyond 2.7 GHz that was plenty fast already?
I hope by now you see where I am going and realize the gross exaggeration these stuck up morons feeding the net.
Markfw
Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
- May 16, 2002
- 27,194
- 16,092
- 136
How long must prime be running ? under what settings ? If I get time in the next 24 hours, I may just to call you out for the liar you are. And its at 3.5 for days....... So STFU
If I have the time I may if you dare to respond.
bob4432
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2003
- 11,727
- 46
- 91
considering the fact that i have to o/c my x2 3800 to 2.5 to be even close to a stock 6300-6400, and since i do video encoding how could you say this? the x2s go to what, ~2.8 on air? the 6300-6400 will do that to, but with a more processing power. if i was into the idea of upgrading the c2d would be the only platform to go with atm. if the encoding was making me $$ then it would be a no brainer as the machine would pay for itself in 2 days.
STOP
POSTING
JUST STOP
Read this, shut up, and leave.
Not neccessarily in that order.
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=28&threadid=1972469&enterthread=y
Check my sig. I'm running at 3.42GHz with 1.350 volts, which is hardly enough to require phase cooling. Keep in mind, that's a 1.0GHz overclock. The max I hit with my X2 4200+ was 2.6GHz (400MHz overclock), and that was only after I pumped it up to nearly 1.4 volts. I plan on hitting 3.5-3.6GHz on my E6600 before I'm done, and I have no doubt that my motherboard, memory, and especially processor can handle it.
I don't regret my X2 purchase; it was a great processor for the year that I used it. X2s are still a decent deal on the mid-low end of the spectrum, if you figure it motherboard cost. The simple fact is, Core 2 Duo comes out on top in just about every other category - check the numerous CPU charts floating around the Internet.
To me, this just sounds like someone who's pissed because they went the AMD route when Intel was enjoying their time at the top of the hill. To justify their poor choice, they have to stick their neck out to defend it in every way. Face it, AMD was king of the hill last year. This year, it's Intel's turn.
Hard Ball
Senior member
- Jul 3, 2005
- 594
- 0
- 0
Even the hard core AMD fanboys would be ashamed of your rants; you are simply going beyond anyone's patience and reason.
C2D rightnow, especially when OCed, beats AM2 (at least the 90nm ones, haven't seen many 65nm OC results yet) chips into pulp. If you want to argue against empirical facts that are easily statistically significant, then don't expect anyone here to take you seriously. Sure, C2D may have had more errata in its first consumer released stepping than the average new CPU, but do you really think that hard core gamers are goint to care one way or the other?
Even if there is some exaggeration on the net (which there probably will always be some, with the release of any new CPU, AMD or Intel), how does that invalidate everyone else's experience with C2D, simply because there may have been a few bad seeds? Where does this supposed "vast consipiracy" come from, and how has it lodged in your imagination. Why are you so arrogant as to be unable to admit that there is a possibilty that the vast majority of people who own C2D are honest, and they really are as good OCers as people profess.
If you still want to hold onto your belief, you better provide some hard evidence as to people on this board and elsewhere ganging up to make Intel look good!! If you can provide any, just be prepared to eat crow.
Very true, though they issue wasn't quite as "heated" until last year, at least as far as I have seen.
OP, How much is the 5000+ and what DDR2 do you possess?
OCHungy;
I dont have a C2D yet, but I have a P-M 760 (2.0 GHz) with a 800 MHz OC 24/7 with 1.6v on AIR and it barely goes past 35ºC. If I mod the CT-479 and get better cooling I can push the M to 3.0 Ghz. Either ways since 2005 and the introduction of the CT-479, alot of people saw Intels potential with the M chips. Alot of the 730 CPUs (1.6GHz) got 1.1 GHz OC and even 1.2 GHz OC. So its not news that Intels can OC 1 GHz + with a decent set up. A P-M slaps any A64 and even FX single core chips... Intels P8 uses quite a few things from Dothans....
I know a few individuals with C2D at 3.6GHz playing MSFS X. If the PC doesnt crash with FSX its more than safe to say its an stable OC....
Alex
OCHungy;
I dont have a C2D yet, but I have a P-M 760 (2.0 GHz) with a 800 MHz OC 24/7 with 1.6v on AIR and it barely goes past 35ºC. If I mod the CT-479 and get better cooling I can push the M to 3.0 Ghz. Either ways since 2005 and the introduction of the CT-479, alot of people saw Intels potential with the M chips. Alot of the 730 CPUs (1.6GHz) got 1.1 GHz OC and even 1.2 GHz OC. So its not news that Intels can OC 1 GHz + with a decent set up. A P-M slaps any A64 and even FX single core chips... Intels P8 uses quite a few things from Dothans....
I know a few individuals with C2D at 3.6GHz playing MSFS X. If the PC doesnt crash with FSX its more than safe to say its an stable OC....
Alex
Get the 5000 or keep the 3800 and overclock it. The relatively small step up to a 6600 isn't really worth the hassle in my opinion. (unless you have a cr@p load of money
)
)Originally posted by: Cruise51
Get the 5000 or keep the 3800 and overclock it. The relatively small step up to a 6600 isn't really worth the hassle in my opinion. (unless you have a cr@p load of money
If the OP has some fast RAM (PC6400) and the 5000+ is as much as a E6400 + a S3 or DS3, well the C2D is a better idea as it can be OCed to 3.4 GHz just fine. Now if the 5000+ is much less as he has mentioned getting a deal, well the 5000+ is the best route. Actually unless benching to show off a 5000+ would do just fine with a nice GPU.
Alex
Well, msot c2ds reach 3.4 ghz to 3.6 ghz ... you can a) get a E6300 and get some good ram ... doesn't need to be named brand and overclock to hell ... you end up with something tons faster than a X5000 overclocked to 2.8Ghz
It sux they jacked up the price of Ram. Bastard newegg stores. Prices should go DOWN not up. When I bought my patriot 2gb, which overclocks to 500 from its "supposed speed" of 333, it was only 130 after rebate. Now its 200
It sux they jacked up the price of Ram. Bastard newegg stores. Prices should go DOWN not up. When I bought my patriot 2gb, which overclocks to 500 from its "supposed speed" of 333, it was only 130 after rebate. Now its 200
Quit feeding trolls. Don't give them the attention they want.
Anyway, as to the original question, it all comes down to your applications and budget. The AM2 chip upgrade is obviously your cheapest option, but, still coming in at around $300, it is not exactly (what I would call) cheap. What is your budget?
As for your applications, you mention gaming and watching movies. Well, for movies, I think the thing that matters most is your display. No (reasonable) CPU out there is going to be better than another for that. So, what display are you using? This is also important in relation to the gaming. A display that is locked to a lower resolution, such as a 19" LCD at 1280x1024, would garner a different recommendation than say a high-end CRT capable of 2048x1536 (or an LCD at higher resolutions).
Without knowing what your current video card is, it's impossible to make a recommendation to you for your gaming purposes. Depending on what games you play, and what resolution you play at, it's likely a new CPU won't give you any performance benefits. Your $300 budget might be much better used on a new video card instead.
I realize you would rather not overclock. It is pretty simple and would likely turn your 3800+ into a 5000+ in mere minutes for a lot less than $300. But, again, that increase is not going to help movies play any better, and might not increase your gaming performance either.
Anyway, as to the original question, it all comes down to your applications and budget. The AM2 chip upgrade is obviously your cheapest option, but, still coming in at around $300, it is not exactly (what I would call) cheap. What is your budget?
As for your applications, you mention gaming and watching movies. Well, for movies, I think the thing that matters most is your display. No (reasonable) CPU out there is going to be better than another for that. So, what display are you using? This is also important in relation to the gaming. A display that is locked to a lower resolution, such as a 19" LCD at 1280x1024, would garner a different recommendation than say a high-end CRT capable of 2048x1536 (or an LCD at higher resolutions).
Without knowing what your current video card is, it's impossible to make a recommendation to you for your gaming purposes. Depending on what games you play, and what resolution you play at, it's likely a new CPU won't give you any performance benefits. Your $300 budget might be much better used on a new video card instead.
I realize you would rather not overclock. It is pretty simple and would likely turn your 3800+ into a 5000+ in mere minutes for a lot less than $300. But, again, that increase is not going to help movies play any better, and might not increase your gaming performance either.
bob4432
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2003
- 11,727
- 46
- 91
that is really the only thing stopping me from switching to c2d - memory prices are ridiculous.....wonder when they will go down.
you would think that since both amd and intel have switched to ddr2 supply would start = demand, but i guess not yet
wonder if memory prices will get lower before the quad cores come down in price...
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 331
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter