Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD or Intel for UT3?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by [TT]BrundleFly View Post
    I simply use what ever processor I can shoplift from the display case when the clerk has gone for a dump. When it's free why be choosy???
    LOL !!

    On a serious note, I'm not a fan of either as I will have both a Pentium and AMD rig primed to play UT3.

    Comment


      #32
      If you overclocked an FX-62, then no other sub- $150 CPU would be able to touch it.
      Not 100% sure but didn't the fx62 have real problems getting much above 3ghz even on water. If so the low end Exxxx will still win o'ced. It would have to get up to >4.5 to really kick ***. You can get above 4 on a water cooled Exxxx.

      (clock for clock the x2/fx's are slower than the Intel core2's/quad)

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by Luseferous View Post
        Not 100% sure but didn't the fx62 have real problems getting much above 3ghz even on water. If so the low end Exxxx will still win o'ced. It would have to get up to >4.5 to really kick ***. You can get above 4 on a water cooled Exxxx.

        (clock for clock the x2/fx's are slower than the Intel core2's/quad)
        My q6600 is overclocked to 3.6 ghz (all 4 cores) on air

        Comment


          #34
          hum... let me see...

          i think i had an AMD chip way back in my 486, which i got for free from a school program.

          after that, i bought an Intel Pentium II 233... Celeron 400, Pentium III 733... and then an AMD Athlon XP +2200 (1.8 GHz). though that CPU did last a number of years... all i had was problems. the fan on my GeForce3 that i was using with my P3 died while using the AMD chip (i replaced the fan). the motherboard died. then my GeForce3 competely died... and finally BOTH my CPU and 2nd motherboard died. the two motherboards were two seperate boards with different chipsets.

          in the mean time, while i was using that AMD computer, i had bought a 2.8 GHz P4 laptop.

          when the Athlon died, i moved back to my P3 system (and a really old video card, Diamond Viper II)... luckily, all i was using it was as a file server. then that finally died on me... interestly enough, if i have an AGP system, i could probably still use the ViperII.

          so after all that... i rebuilt my desktop, back into a gaming system (more or less). i bought an Intel E4300... the slowest of the dual core CPUs. and i stopped using my laptop. then a few months after that, i got a free upgrade to an Intel QX6700.

          all that being said... i'll probably never go back to AMD... in all the time i've been using computers (since about 1994, earlier if you count my 8088 :d)... that AMD-based system gave me the most problems. and even though i probably did as many, if not more upgrades while having the older Pentiums and Celeron, none of those upgrades were due to failures.

          that being said... go Intel... go QUAD!!!!

          Comment


            #35
            all that being said... i'll probably never go back to AMD... in all the time i've been using computers (since about 1994, earlier if you count my 8088 :d)... that AMD-based system gave me the most problems. and even though i probably did as many, if not more upgrades while having the older Pentiums and Celeron, none of those upgrades were due to failures.

            that being said... go Intel... go QUAD!!!!
            I may go back to AMD depends how Baraclona/Phenom (new generation AMD Quad) stack up when they hit the shelves over the next two or three months. Sooner for Barcalona though its the Opteron (server chip) replacement. They look very good on paper but will be launched at imo non-competitive speeds. Phenom when it arrives towards Christmas might just be an Intel killer. Well for a few months anyway

            Comment


              #36
              Originally posted by da ghost View Post

              That's OVERCLOCKED. If you overclocked AMD processors you'd get FX-62 speeds as well. you could overclock ANY recent processor to reach the speeds of ANY other processor, as long as you have the cooling for it. If you overclocked an FX-62, then no other sub- $150 CPU would be able to touch it.
              Yeah, but with any c2d, you can do it with with default intel cooling and by just increasing the fsb . Like i said, all of them should go to those speeds without issues, maybe only some cheap *** 533mhz ram could prevent you doing that. FX-62 on the other hand, is factory oc'd to max already, so you can't get it much further than that

              That's why people are waiting for future amd cpu's, because athlon 64 is having its max scale at 3ghz. :P

              Comment


                #37
                Let's say I had $250 to spend on a CPU... Which one would I get more for my money? AMD or Intel? And by the way, I'm currently running a Athlon +3000 at 1.8 Ghz...

                Comment


                  #38
                  Originally posted by Evil Homer View Post
                  Let's say I had $250 to spend on a CPU... Which one would I get more for my money? AMD or Intel? And by the way, I'm currently running a Athlon +3000 at 1.8 Ghz...
                  Intel. You would buy a Core 2 Duo E6600 or Q6600 and overclock it to 3 GHz on the stock cooler, then you would be GPU-limited. :/

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Originally posted by Bersy View Post
                    I drink water - It's refreshing, doesn't poison you, and it doesn't need any advertising, period.
                    Bottle water companies might call BS on that.

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by Bersy View Post
                      I drink water - It's refreshing, doesn't poison you, and it doesn't need any advertising, period.
                      Ahhhhh... Aquafina.

                      Comment


                        #41
                        I'll buy C2D, it can be easely overclocked to 3.4-3.8 GHz (depends on your luck and cooling). For Athlons 3-3.2 Ghz it's often the edge even with supercoolers.
                        But I will definitely wait for tests of upcoming Barcelona - if it beats C2Q in games, it can be a good choice to buy Athlon 3800 or 5600 now and wait for Phenom.

                        Comment


                          #42
                          I already have Core 2 Duo E6550...

                          Comment


                            #43
                            just buy the cheapest with the best overall processing power... thats why i went quad core intel 3.2ghz for only 300 bucks....i got it on sale...

                            Comment


                              #44
                              Originally posted by LibertySaint View Post
                              just buy the cheapest with the best overall processing power... thats why i went quad core intel 3.2ghz for only 300 bucks....i got it on sale...
                              3.2 GHz? there are no Intel Quads at 3.2 GHz... unless you overclock.

                              if you got an overclocked Q6600... then it wasn't a sale... it costs as low as $266.

                              if you got an overclocked Q6700... then it was a "sale"... since the cheapest is about $550.

                              the "Extreme" version of the Q6700 is the QX6700... that costs $1000 (didn't get a price drop like the rest).

                              the fastest quad core is the QX6850... that runs at 3 GHz. and that costs about $1000 too.

                              Comment


                                #45
                                Originally posted by The Marauder View Post
                                Intel. You would buy a Core 2 Duo E6600 or Q6600 and overclock it to 3 GHz on the stock cooler, then you would be GPU-limited. :/
                                Well it doesn't look like he OC's but I agree. Get the E6600 IMHO.

                                While the article does show a trend. That trend is starting to swing the other way as newer technologies in rendering and programming are being implemented. Plus if you use your PC for things other than gaming. You'll be much happier. This coming from a long time AMD fan.

                                MR said in an interview that the programming of the game to take advantage of dual cores is what has been the most costly for Epic. Thus I'd go with Intel as they're definitely leading the pack. Oh and go with nVidia also.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X