Intel Core 2 Duo or AMD 4000+

[Apoorv Khatreja]

@ SushubhI've researched a lot recently on new configs, and I spent a lot of time at Nehru Place too. Have a contact there, and he told me that the prices of the quad core processors are expected to drop very soon. So I would advise you to wait. If you look around the Internet, you'll find tons of blogs, articles telling you on whats hot/in, what kinda config too look for etc. But what really matters is that what is available, and how it is priced. So my advice would be, ask from the market guys, who know the suppliers, about the latest piece of technology they have, and how their price is expected to vary.@vishalraoYah, that name got me confused too. It was the E6600.

 

[Sushubh]

duh. i guess i will wait till january. but by then i should have placed the order for a macbook pro with leopard if all went according to plans i have been saving money to buy that thing since years now

 

[vishalrao]

yea, once intel hit the 4 ghz barrier they started pasting confusing model numbers instead amd just put their ridiculous "p4 equivalent" numbers, something like an athlon 2.2 ghz would be marked "4000+" or the like ...now the race is shifted from ghz to multi-core...

 

[gregory house]

As far as I know the first processors that AMD releases are better than Intel ones. Intel dual core was just two cores attached together whereas AMD actually integrated them. But the second generation Intel dual core processors (core2duo) equalled (or even exceeded) AMD dual cores. The same is happening in the quad core race. I believe Intel's quad core is 2 core2duo's on the same die. Whereas AMD is developing the *real* quad core.

 

[Sushubh]

right. intel's earlier dual core were too bad. my cousin had one of those processor and it heats so much that he has to keep the cabinet open all the freaking time. the new core 2 duo are better than the dual cores from amd.amd's barcelona are supposed to be great but intel's upcoming ones are expected to beat the crap out of them. 45nm processors are coming up... things are getting too confusing.

 

[gregory house]

I have a Pentium D myself. Compared to Intel Core 2 Duo, it is crap. Just got a c2d system built for a friend for about 28000 bucks. And it is fast! Want one myself. Am trying to borrow money from Donald Trump.

 

---

[Sushubh]

Pentium D right. that was the name. sounds so cool. it's like the windows me of processors.

 

[torrentbhai]

have been using e6300 for 4 months now,,and it does well for all my needs..i am able to play bluray discs/hddvds( not the mkv rips) at 1080p with max 50% cpu usage and this is the only cpu intensive thing i do as of day...only thing that made this processor look insufficient was colin mcrae - DIRT but still only 75% usage with some tweaks...and yes i have never overclocked..if you need more power you should wait for quad core extreme i see no point buying something in between core 2 and regular quad core and prices keep falling everyday..also ddr3 mobo and ram are already in market as i have heard and should be here soon..may be you want to take a bite at that...for me am waiting for quad core extreme to come below 10k and i might upgrade as all other requirements such as mobo already compatible..also with these new chips even core 2 you need good well cooled cabinets like chieftec, antec ...or may be some sinks if you need to overclock..

 

[vishalrao]

yea AMD sounds better with their "native" quadcore. but i read on an article (anandtech or arstechnica) that intel's quadcore (which is 2 dualcores fused together) is not that bad due to some cache sharing.and intel will have the size advantage, AMD's new quadcores will be 65nm while Intel's new one's will be 45nm. But the new CPUs will be on the higher price range, which is why I'm planning to get the 65nm Intel Q6600 2.4ghz quad around Jan time...

 

[leomax]

A low end 'yorkfield' than a q6600 would be a better idea in jan 2008.