just completed my new rig

We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms

accordin2vtec

/Blind|Side\
I just finished my new rig, currently running:
AMD FX-62
2048MB DDR2 Dual-Channel RAM
200GB Maxtor HDD
512 MB GeForce 7950 GT
nVidia 570 (non-SLI) motherboard
Antec TruPower Trio 650W PS

and now the pics:
img0021dr6.jpg

thebellyofthebeastrq6.jpg
 
well I got the chip in September, when it was still moderately high up, plus I've always been an AMD fan, because of the larger number or instructions per clock cycle, unless of course I am misinformed about that aspect of AMD chips.
 
uh thats t0o much of a generalization. it maybe true before with the P4, but now clock per clock an intel and amds chip are about the same now. roughly at 2.4ghz, the intel will start having a more advantage. anyway, the main point is overrall performance.

at roughly $350 an intel core 2 @ 2.4ghz duo will consume less power and out performance an amd fx-62 @ 2.8ghz for $1000 (at the time of your purchase) in gaming, benchmarking, editing, etc... since the release of core duo, amd is again the budget chipmarker like the old athlon days. however k10 may change that, we'll see.
 
+1 for sticking with AMD even though they aren't the top dog. I've been by their side since my first 5x86 upgrade processor. Behold the almighty 133MHz power!

The performance leaderboard will always go back and forth like this. No need to dump AMD because Intel's chip has slightly higher benchmarks. Even then, there are STILL things that the 64x2's do better.
 
+1 for sticking with AMD even though they aren't the top dog. I've been by their side since my first 5x86 upgrade processor. Behold the almighty 133MHz power!

The performance leaderboard will always go back and forth like this. No need to dump AMD because Intel's chip has slightly higher benchmarks. Even then, there are STILL things that the 64x2's do better.

yeah, well, I've always been a bit of an AMD guy, so I'm gonna keep what I've got, besides it was near the top of the heap last fall :D.
 
uh thats too much of a generalization. it maybe true before with the P4, but now clock per clock an intel and amds chip are about the same now. roughly at 2.4ghz, the intel will start having a more advantage. anyway, the main point is overrall performance.
at roughly $350 an intel core 2 @ 2.4ghz duo will consume less power and out performance an amd fx-62 @ 2.8ghz for $1000 (at the time of your purchase) in gaming, benchmarking, editing, etc... since the release of core duo, amd is again the budget chipmarker like the old athlon days. however k10 may change that, we'll see.

yeah, I can see where you're getting at, but I only ended up spending about 780-800 bucks on the chip, so it had already been down priced a bit, yeah I've been looking at the K10 stuff and so far I like it, just gotta see where they're gonna go now.
 
yeah, I can see where you're getting at, but I only ended up spending about 780-800 bucks on the chip, so it had already been down priced a bit, yeah I've been looking at the K10 stuff and so far I like it, just gotta see where they're gonna go now.

only 800?? jesus. my intel 6300 will smash that chip and it still runs at 38C.

although ive had an intel since the first pentium. P1, P2, celeron (during the p3 generation) p4 and now my duo. always happy :)
 
only 800?? jesus. my intel 6300 will smash that chip and it still runs at 38C.

although ive had an intel since the first pentium. P1, P2, celeron (during the p3 generation) p4 and now my duo. always happy :)

whatever floats your boat man, I've just always been an AMD guy, I'm getting a dangerden liquid system for it and the nvidia card, then im gonna OC a bit and call it a day.
 
360 VS PS3 oh wait... wrong thread.

I'm an AMD guy I've been for like 10 years now.

The main thing that turned me onto AMD was bang for the buck. Not sure about right now but before AMD was way cheaper then the intels.
 
Im a scrub, I go for whatever provides the best bang for the buck. And right now, its an Intel, however by small marigins since AMD has dramatically slashed prices to match Intel's offerings. So a $300 Intel chip would mariginally beat a $300 AMD chip. But when you start overclocking, AMD has no way to catch up. Its normal to see Intels exceed 3.5ghz, but AMD needs extreme cooling like LN2 to even see those speeds.

Anyway, what does an AMD do better than an Intel at the moment, excluding their Opterons?? Just curious as all the info Ive read, Core Duo leads X2 in everything.

FYI, I have 2 AMD rigs (XP and 64) and an Intel rig (Northwood), so Im not fanboying any brand, just "facts."
 
as far as processing power go, I see both brands as currently being even, with OC capabilities being the only marginal difference besides price, I chose AMD because I stick with what I know, not to downplay Intel, it's just that I am more familiar with AMD.
 
Im a scrub, I go for whatever provides the best bang for the buck. And right now, its an Intel, however by small marigins since AMD has dramatically slashed prices to match Intel's offerings. So a $300 Intel chip would mariginally beat a $300 AMD chip. But when you start overclocking, AMD has no way to catch up. Its normal to see Intels exceed 3.5ghz, but AMD needs extreme cooling like LN2 to even see those speeds.

Anyway, what does an AMD do better than an Intel at the moment, excluding their Opterons?? Just curious as all the info Ive read, Core Duo leads X2 in everything.

FYI, I have 2 AMD rigs (XP and 64) and an Intel rig (Northwood), so Im not fanboying any brand, just "facts."


AMD has the advantage in floating point mathmatics, so a lot of CAD designers stick with AMD. They generally arent benchmarked for CAD, so not everyone knows about that.
 
Back
Top