My current Setup, and what i Want.(C2D or Phenom II?)

todd10k

My current rig: AMD Opteron 165 1.8Ghz (OC 2.2 stock)
Asus A8rMVP deluxe mobo
1.5 GB ddr 1 ram (5-5-5-2)
Geforce 9600 GT
Maxtor 300 GB Sata HDD
X-Power 600w PSU

The rest of the config is inconsequental. I have a very nice Case for it all.
Now, pretty much i've been mulling it over in my head for the last 2 weeks, and it's come down to two choices for me.

Either it's going to be a Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16GHz, with appropriate mobo, and 4gig of dd2.
Or it's going to be a AMD - Phenom II X4 940 3.0GHz Black with appropriate mobo, and 4 gig of dd2.

I plan on taking my current 9600 GT and getting another for dual SLi. For the moment the budget is non existant. Im going to take both options into consideration regardless of price. Basically, the ram the mobo and the cpu need replacing. And i need help making the decision. Any advice you guys can lend me on this would be appreciative. I feel i would get better performance and more time before my next upgrade from the AMD, however i keep having the nagging feeling ill get "more bang for my buck" from the intel offering. Ill be flipping a coin at this rate. Thoughts?

todd10k

Anyone?

galwayguy22

EDIT: Sorry getting my model numbers confused. I got socket AM3 Phenom II and AM2 Phenom II ranges confused. Just pretend that you were thinking of going with the AM3 Phenom II 810 and this post may make some kind of sense...My advice at the very end of the post remains the same.

Well lets see.

A Dual Core Intel in a redundant socket (775), vs a Quad Core AMD in a brand new socket (AM3), with only a marginal increase in the price for the AMD setup.

How about a Phenom II 810 which is closer in price to the E8500 but still a lot faster.

See how they compare:

EDIT: no 810 benchmarks available on this site.
Phenom II 910

E8500

As for bang for buck + future compatibility, I think you'll find the AMD route wins out. In fact it ALWAYS does, as you can even run a Phenom in a socket AM2 motherboard.

With AMD you can get some DDR3 ram which is a slight bit more in terms of cost but again it's "the future" and if in a year or so you upgrade again, you'll still have that 4GB DDR3 RAM.

The beauty of AMD is that you can make minor, and not overly costly upgrades to maintain a very high level of performance over a longer period of time than you can with Intel.

My advice to you is, forget SLi as it is a compete waste of money, and use the saved money to invest in a high end AMD Phenom II with some DDR3 RAM.

OR, forget the SLi, keep the saved money and in a few months buy whatever the best graphics card in terms of price performance is from either AMD or Nvidia, and still go with the AMD Phenom II. Maybe a 910 or 920 and used the saved money to go into your graphics card.

todd10k

In what way is SLi a waste of money? Would adding a second graphic's card to already a powerful one not give me increased performance without having to spend 300+ on a high end radeon or the equivalent?

As for the Gains over intel, maybe. Im still trying to find a good deal on the mobo cpu, and ram on elara and komplett. id like to get all 3 for less than 500 if possible.

machalla

I picked up a Phenom II X4 940 in the last couple of weeks. Very happy with it to date. Of course just after I got it they brought out the AM3 version but according to a review on theregister.com the DDR3 ram made very little difference to the overall performance.

I can't say I've stressed the machine much to date but its definitely quite zippy, even if I did have to put Vista on it for reasons of work..

Reg reviews
AM2
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/02/02/review_cpu_amd_phenom_ii/
AM3
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/02/09/review_cpu_amd_phenom_ii_am3/

They have some suggestions as to the best value in the reviews.

galwayguy22

todd10k wrote: »

In what way is SLi a waste of money?

I've edited my post in case you scroll past it, got my Phenom ranges mixed up.

Why Sli, and Crossfire is a waste of money:

Two graphics cards does not mean double(x2) the processing power. At best, and in a very limited selection of games, it means something like x1.5 or x1.6.

Lets say you have 2 graphics cards in SLi, and these graphics cards where fairly high end in generation X of graphics cards. The next generations midrage graphics card will beat these two previous generation graphics cards in terms of speed and will have improved features, weather it be HDMI outputs, cooler operation, improved rendering techniqes, the latest Direct X implementaion, whatever.

todd10k

I see.

But im all about instant gratification

The 9600 gt is not this generation, last one i think. Adding a 2nd would'nt cost me an arm and a leg. The GFX card is irrelevant though, ive pretty much made my mind up on that. What i need is solid advice on CPU selection. Im currently leaning to the AMD phenom.

todd10k

any more responces?

galwayguy22

My advice and logic is solid.

It always is, in every walk of life. Trust me

Blazer

Go with Intel..AMD are only for the fanboys now.
Phenom 940 is on par with the mid range C2D. But then again as Galwayguy said it's a cheap upgrade path.
If you can afford it go Intel, if not go with AMD.
As for SLI and X-fire you're probably get better off with flogging the 9600GT and getting a GTX260 or ATI 4870.

Donald-Duck

galwayguy22 wrote: »

I've edited my post in case you scroll past it, got my Phenom ranges mixed up.

Why Sli, and Crossfire is a waste of money:

Two graphics cards does not mean double(x2) the processing power. At best, and in a very limited selection of games, it means something like x1.5 or x1.6.

Lets say you have 2 graphics cards in SLi, and these graphics cards where fairly high end in generation X of graphics cards. The next generations midrage graphics card will beat these two previous generation graphics cards in terms of speed and will have improved features, weather it be HDMI outputs, cooler operation, improved rendering techniqes, the latest Direct X implementaion, whatever.

1.5x is pushing it, generally it will be about 1.2x

Solitaire

Mathew Reilly wrote:

Go with Intel..AMD are only for the fanboys now.

A comment worthy of a true Intel fanboi *sigh*

The (unpalatable for fanbois) truth is that Phenom 2 has mixed up the CPU market. Now the E7000/E8000 is challenged by the 720BE and the 940BE is a decent challenge to Intel's stranglehold on the mid-range quads. 810 is an inexpensive Q6600 competitor but we're really waiting for an AM3 Black Edition quad to see how far the new platform can be pushed. Intel still reigns supreme at the extreme low and high ends of course.

Blazer

Solitaire wrote: »

A comment worthy of a true Intel fanboi *sigh*

The (unpalatable for fanbois) truth is that Phenom 2 has mixed up the CPU market. Now the E7000/E8000 is challenged by the 720BE and the 940BE is a decent challenge to Intel's stranglehold on the mid-range quads. 810 is an inexpensive Q6600 competitor but we're really waiting for an AM3 Black Edition quad to see how far the new platform can be pushed. Intel still reigns supreme at the extreme low and high ends of course.

My point exactly...Intel reigns supreme at the extreme high ends.
It;s not that I'm a fan boy..hell I'd love AMD to get their ass in gear much like ATI did. Competition is good for us consumers..it's a simple fact.

I had originally planned to go with AMD for my system below. But then the C2D came out and it blew away everything AMD had.
So off I went and bought Intel..and bit by bit I've been upgrading it along and bar the payout for the board+cpu this time around it was all in small increments..

Solitaire

I know, I know... whoever has the single fastest retail-channel part wins the e-penis awards. But enthusiasts seem to have a serious blindspot with regard to the mainstream. The simple truth is that any system with one or two €900+ Intel CPUs is pure godliness. But a) aside from professional, server and enterprise markets only hardcore enthusiasts can see the additional power as hugely advantageous and b) there is only a small number of users that actually have enough hard cash for a true Extreme Edition-based build regardless of desires. Intel's control of the high-end ensures loyalty to them at that point. But only a doorknob would consider this a valid argument for blindly supporting the rest of the range regardless of their strengths and weaknesses.

Under the €250 mark in particular AMD currently has a considerable lead in the value stakes at the moment, and this is the area most self-builders will inhabit. Intel does retain its lead below €100 but this is primarily due to the continued strength of the E2200 and E5200 and AMDs refusal to attack this market with performance-oriented parts, but focus on OEM-friendly low-cost, low-power units instead (and this pattern is reversed in the sub-entry range with Neo going up against the anaemic OEM-loving Atom). I'm still seeing crazy numbers of OEM built units reducing costs by using 45-65W K8 and K10 dualies, especially in the semi-media-centre segment.

And lets be honest: the cost of an AM3 build is much more than dropping say a 710 into an existing AM2 setup but the latter is only an option for those who don't want to push moderate to large overclocks on their systems; you won't get anywhere near the OC headroom or stability without the new chipset or DDR3 controller. Same way, a new 720BE setup, including DDR3 and mobo, will only cost around half the amount of even a cheap Core-i7 setup, yet may give close to the same real-world performance - it all depends on budget+usage.