dual core intel

F

f U z ! o N

n00b
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
56
should i go dual core intel?
i was thinking of getting a dual core intel 820. would this be better than a venice 3200+ rig
heres what i was thinking of getting

amd 64 3200+venice
a nice mobo
1 gig of pc3500 OCZ dual channel ram
and a x850xt

or intel dual core 820
1 gig of ocz dual channel ddr2 ram
x850xt
and a nice mobo

of course i know the price differences

i love gaming but i want a fast, snappy computer. i really dont do any video editing. i want to be able to play games very well especially with battlefield 2 coming out

i also want future proofing hence why im leaning towards intel.

what do you think?
 
I think that with a x850XT either of those rigs will be great for gaming. YOu said you want a fast / snappy computer. Well, the dual core Intel would probably help more in that area. You could always go with the AMD and invest in a 10K hard drive too. Maybe get a couple and run a raid setup.
 
f U z ! o N said:
well im getting the x850xt for crossfire and i really dont want to buy a new hard drive
Click to expand...


If you're going to invest in crossfire, i would think that gaming is the top priority. In which case, AMD is always the go to.
 
yes but with dual core here its gonna be a bit better. sure games right now dont take multicore chips yet but with that on the horizon id be better equipped with the Intel dual core. not to mention ocing! can you imagine a dual core proc at like 3.6 or higher ghz! drool!
i can sacrifice a few FPS with Intel considering the x850xt will definitley be very nice
 
sipher said:
How are Intel duel cores compairing to Athlon X2's?
Click to expand...
From all the reviews I've read, the X2's had a better performance then the Intel's dual-cores.

http://hardocp.com/article.html?art=NzY2

Seems like, even if the X2's are a bit pricier they are the better choice. And the new ATi chipsets should support dual-core out of the box for AMD.
 
x2s are better. HOWEVER much pricier if you are comparing the 2.8 and 3 gig pentium d compared to the x2 4200.
(offtopic)
If someone tells me that it will make it up in the price of ddr and the motherboard, your insane. 300 verse 584 is a Huge difference. and even 400 verse 584 is still a pretty big difference. The price of dd2 has dropped dramatically (not including when you think of 1 gig modules).
 
HOWEVER much pricier if you are comparing the 2.8 and 3 gig pentium d compared to the x2 4200.
Click to expand...
Why would anyone want to compare those chips? They aren't even in the same class. The X2 4200 wipes the wall with the 820..
 
yes it wipes the floor, however, dual core slower or a faster dual core for more cash. Its all a matter of taste. If I was getting a new rig it would be a pentium d, its that simple. Of course I would get some nice cooling and the overclock it, and yes I know you could do it with the amd system I go to xtremesystems.com a couple times a week, I know the difference. Everyone has a preference mine seem to be intel based chipset motherboards :D (by the way you have to compare it to an x2 since there are no other amd dual core options available. :p
 
amd rig will cost me 1276 with x2 4400+, x850xt, dfi lanparty board, and a gig of ram
intel rig will cost me 1171 with 820, a gig of ddr2 ram, asus board, and x850xt
thats a 105 buck difference
or i can just go venice 3200+, 1 gig of ram, x850xt, and a dfi lanparty board for like 800 something?
WHAT DO I DO!
 
f U z ! o N said:
amd rig will cost me 1276 with x2 4200+, x850xt, dfi lanparty board, and a gig of ram
intel rig will cost me 1171 with 820, a gig of ddr2 ram, asus board, and x850xt
thats a 105 buck difference
or i can just go venice 3200+, 1 gig of ram, x850xt, and a dfi lanparty board for like 800 something?
WHAT DO I DO!
Click to expand...

$105 dollars more on the AMD system and you'll have performance that just slaughters that intel system in everything, including video encoding, heh.
 
well the only thing im worried about AMD wise is the eventual fading of DDR . im scared that it would be a waste of money to continue with DDR. i was thinking that intel would be the better choice even though i know it cannot beat an x2 4200+. only cuz of ddr2. but then i was reading that ddr2 was a waste of money and is eventually gonna be phased out too. so now im wondering how long will DDR 1 last?
 
if you just want a snappy computer, an a64 will be fine. if you do lots of photoshop, media encoding, and gaming at the same time, a dual core or HT solution will be better. just my $.02. for my typical uses, my single core winchester is great. opening PDF's is a breeze with the OMC (and yes, it does help A LOT. my old aXP feels like a dinosaur compared to this thing with big PDF's) and everything is snappy and very responsive. of course, when i start encoding DVD's, ripping CD's, and trying to use the system all at the same time, it gets sluggish. which is why i have a p4 HT too :) it doesnt get a sluggish, and i can set both machines up to do different things. its also cheaper than an X2 system for hte moment, but ill go that way in a few months anyway.

i wouldnt worry about DDR1/2. DDR gives the A64 more than enough bandwidth, it isnt starved like the p4 is. everything will be phased out eventually, AMD is going DDR2 next year with M2. DDR is so cheap now though, who cares? its less than 100 dollars for a gig.

edit: future proofing is stupid. you cant always be prepared for the future, just get some money, decide what you want, and get it, and be happy with it. something new will always come out, and normally a new motherboard will be in order whe nthat new thing comes out anyway due to new chipsets and new features. dual core isnt made for the future. its made for NOW which is why its avaliable NOW.
 
i just want future proofing. thats the reason i was looking at the dual core. i really dont do that much multitasking, no video encoding or anything. i just liked it because it was made for the future. heck if i go the venice route and oc it it will still be nice. having that extra cash means i can get a nice sound system from klipsch as well
 
If you are going to be doing gaming, you want an Athlon 64, no question. If you are going to be doing a lot of gaming AND heavy multitasking, go with an Athlon 64 X2 if you can afford to. At this point in time, Intel's dual-core solution is purely stopgap and will not get you the performance you pay for. Remember that dual cores will NOT help with modern games yet-- so you can save some cash and just get a good Venice 3200+ for ~$150, an A64-X2 4200+ or 4400+ for $530-580ish, or wait out for Intel's (probably) more capable Dual Core solutions in 2006/7.
 
Epicenter said:
If you are going to be doing gaming, you want an Athlon 64, no question. If you are going to be doing a lot of gaming AND heavy multitasking, go with an Athlon 64 X2 if you can afford to. At this point in time, Intel's dual-core solution is purely stopgap and will not get you the performance you pay for. Remember that dual cores will NOT help with modern games yet-- so you can save some cash and just get a good Venice 3200+ for ~$150, an A64-X2 4200+ or 4400+ for $530-580ish, or wait out for Intel's (probably) more capable Dual Core solutions in 2006/7.
Click to expand...

Or use the savings for the likely AMD Quad cores of 1H next year, haha.

Though only quad-core Opterons are spoken of at this time.
 
robberbaron said:
Or use the savings for the likely AMD Quad cores of 1H next year, haha.

Though only quad-core Opterons are spoken of at this time.
Click to expand...

Desktop versions surely won't be far behind. Personally, 2 cores is enough for me. I intend to get a 4400+ since I do a good bit of cache-heavy work too like video re-encoding and audio conversion, but this will definitely cover my gaming needs well too.
 
Epicenter said:
Desktop versions surely won't be far behind. Personally, 2 cores is enough for me. I intend to get a 4400+ since I do a good bit of cache-heavy work too like video re-encoding and audio conversion, but this will definitely cover my gaming needs well too.
Click to expand...

We see eye to eye. The 4400+ is what I percieve as the price/performance sweet spot, much like it's single core counterparts the Newark/San Diego/Mighty and Immortal Clawhammer
 
There's no amazing selection of boards. The only chipsets that support the dual-core P4s just came out. Speaking of which, that's another reason I'm in no hurry to buy a Pentium-D, the socket will need to be phased out soon to accomodate Intel's REAL dual core offerings down the line, while with Socket 939 I don't need to even upgrade my board NOW.
 
There's no such thing as future-proofing. That is a ludicrous idea, and especially so in computer technology. However, that being said, buying the most recent technology ensures a longer usable life-span. In computer technology, that is a matter of years, 2, 3 at the most. In canal lock-gate technology, that is like 100 years.
 
you picked a 23x motherboard.......... which makes it a 955x motherboard. There are 945 motherboards for alot less. Also what kind of ram did you pick, actually better yet post all of your options and parts, then we can all make a better assessment.
 
Intel Rig

CORSAIR XMS 1GB (2 x 512MB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 675 (PC2 5400) Unbuffered Dual Channel Kit System Memory Model TWIN2X1024-5400C4 - Retail
$186.00

SAPPHIRE 100103SR-RD Radeon X850XT 256MB GDDR3 PCI-Express x16 Video Card - Retail
$459.00

intel Pentium D 820 Smithfield 800MHz FSB LGA 775 Dual Core, EM64T Processor
ASUS P5WD2 Premium Socket T (LGA 775) Intel 955X ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail
$528.99 Combo

total price for intel rig is $1173.99

AMD RIG
OCZ Peroformance 1GB (2 x 512MB) 184-Pin DDR SDRAM DDR 433 (PC 3500) Unbuffered Dual Channel Kit System Memory Model -$137

SAPPHIRE 100103SR-RD Radeon X850XT 256MB GDDR3 PCI-Express x16 Video Card - Retail-$459.00

AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Venice Integrated into Chip FSB Socket 939 Processor
DFI LANPARTY UT nF4 Ultra-D Socket 939 NVIDIA nForce4 Ultra ATX AMD Motherboard - OEM-$317

total price for AMD rig is $913

or keep AMD rig throw in an x2 4400+ for $565 and take the venice out and im at $1282

right now i have no real need for dual core. i was attracted to the intel one due to price. if id like this rig to last a while thats why im considering dual core. also, any money i save can go to a nice klipsch sound system or some video games. as i said, i want good general performance. ill mostly be playing games and thats it. no hard multitasking other than gaming with like ventrilo running along with aim, firefox, weatherbug, and Norton AV
 
for the things you are going to do with your machine I say get the Venice. Maybe when x2's get cheaper and they come out with lower speads, then look into them.

(I know the latest and greatest is just around the corner... aka grass is greener on the other side, but I would either wait for the cards to come out, or get an x800 xl... Just some food for thought, also have you thought of twinmos sp.
 
people who are preaching about socket 939 are going to be shocked when M2 comes out early next year I'm assuming. I'm probably going dual intel myself, the cost cant be beat. ($500+ amd? who are you kidding?)
 
If you plan on doing a lot of gaming and paying that much for an 850XT, don't skimp on the processor. The 820 is quite frankly a horrible gamer, and if the price difference is only $105 and you're getting near top of the line stuff, definitely get the X2. You can read as many reviews as you wish, but the one agreement among all of them is how bad the Pentium-D is for games. The X2 will blow it away for current and future games, and pretty much everything else. $105 difference for a $1200+ system is worth it for X2 versus 820 performance. You're looking at a 9% price difference for a MUCH more than 9% CPU performance difference.
 
meelk said:
people who are preaching about socket 939 are going to be shocked when M2 comes out early next year I'm assuming. I'm probably going dual intel myself, the cost cant be beat. ($500+ amd? who are you kidding?)
Click to expand...

The cost of a Pentium-D can't be beat ? That depends on what your primary purpose is for the machine. If you're a gamer, the Pentium-D can be beat by an $80 NForce s754 mobo with a $120 Athlon 64 versus $280 + $230 955X mobo. If you do a lot of video work and multitask every other second, then the Pentium-D is the cheapest solution, however if you do this in addition to gaming, the extra price for the X2 is worth it. When you take motherboard and RAM price differences into account, the price difference isn't as high as you think. The top single video X2 solution is currently an NF4 ultra motherboard for $90-$150. The top Pentium-D solution is a 955 board ($220-$270) with DDR2.

For anyone who does a decent amount of gaming the cost of a Pentium-D solution is horrible. It is only good for a certain niche of people who don't emphasize gaming and use applications specifically targetted at the Pentium-D. And who would get an x850xt and not game ?
 
The Pentium-D is really a good processor.... Ive seen alot of negative feedback due to reviews and what not but the actual performance in multitasking is damned impressive and my games run wonderfully too.. 945P/G boards are much cheaper than 955x boards if thats really an issue, some go for as low as 130 dollars... Also I imagine games will be optimized for dual core processors shortly... And I also imagine the 945/955 platforms will be top of the line for a while. All in all Im happy with my purchased but I had DDR2 already handy so I didnt need to purchase memory as well.

Mike
 
lawrence131 said:
The cost of a Pentium-D can't be beat ? That depends on what your primary purpose is for the machine. If you're a gamer, the Pentium-D can be beat by an $80 NForce s754 mobo with a $120 Athlon 64 versus $280 + $230 955X mobo. If you do a lot of video work and multitask every other second, then the Pentium-D is the cheapest solution, however if you do this in addition to gaming, the extra price for the X2 is worth it. When you take motherboard and RAM price differences into account, the price difference isn't as high as you think. The top single video X2 solution is currently an NF4 ultra motherboard for $90-$150. The top Pentium-D solution is a 955 board ($220-$270) with DDR2.

For anyone who does a decent amount of gaming the cost of a Pentium-D solution is horrible. It is only good for a certain niche of people who don't emphasize gaming and use applications specifically targetted at the Pentium-D. And who would get an x850xt and not game ?
Click to expand...

actually the sub $100 dfi 865 board I'm looking at currently has had a bios update for D support, and I can use my current gig of corsair pc3200, and buy only the board and processor and be set. I could really give a damn about games anymore. I've played games since wolf 3d, played with some of the top tier people in the world in various games, and still have a lot of friends in the community in general. PC gaming has degenerated into a cesspool of cheating since the first real bots arrived in Quake 1, and its to the point now that its just not enjoyable anymore. I know many respected people who are simply leaving gaming because they dont want to devote time into something and get raped by someone who downloads a hack in 30 seconds. I'll have enough of a video card to play the few single player games that interest me, aside from that I want windows and application performance, which the D has at a great price.
 
meelk said:
you found that awful fast :p
I would assume it does dual fine. I really doubt DFI would add support that didnt work, they are DFI, after all.
Click to expand...

But... whether or not both cores are active is another issue. The nForce4 can recognize all dual core chips, but only the 830 and up have the 2nd core on due to some flaw in the architecture of the chipset.
 
robberbaron said:
But... whether or not both cores are active is another issue. The nForce4 can recognize all dual core chips, but only the 830 and up have the 2nd core on due to some flaw in the architecture of the chipset.
Click to expand...

I *REALLY* doubt "Support Dual Core CPU" means "well one core works the other doesnt".
 
I've fired off an email to a [H] editor, maybe someone will be kind enough to test it for us.
 
meelk said:
actually the sub $100 dfi 865 board I'm looking at currently has had a bios update for D support, and I can use my current gig of corsair pc3200, and buy only the board and processor and be set. I could really give a damn about games anymore. I've played games since wolf 3d, played with some of the top tier people in the world in various games, and still have a lot of friends in the community in general. PC gaming has degenerated into a cesspool of cheating since the first real bots arrived in Quake 1, and its to the point now that its just not enjoyable anymore. I know many respected people who are simply leaving gaming because they dont want to devote time into something and get raped by someone who downloads a hack in 30 seconds. I'll have enough of a video card to play the few single player games that interest me, aside from that I want windows and application performance, which the D has at a great price.
Click to expand...

You're part of that niche who would benefit from a Pentium-D :) but the original poster is buying a $500 gaming card, and we'll have to wait and see if that board actually and truely supports dual core. I think robber is right about the second core not being active also in 865 solutions.
 
f U z ! o N said:
should i go dual core intel?
i was thinking of getting a dual core intel 820. would this be better than a venice 3200+ rig
heres what i was thinking of getting

amd 64 3200+venice
a nice mobo
1 gig of pc3500 OCZ dual channel ram
and a x850xt

or intel dual core 820
1 gig of ocz dual channel ddr2 ram
x850xt
and a nice mobo

of course i know the price differences

i love gaming but i want a fast, snappy computer. i really dont do any video editing. i want to be able to play games very well especially with battlefield 2 coming out

i also want future proofing hence why im leaning towards intel.

what do you think?
Click to expand...

Wait for the 9xx series Pentium D processors (Presler). They will be 65nm chips and they should run a hell of a lot cooler then the 8xx series (Smithfield) and they will more then likely overclock beter too. If I were you I would grab a cheap 5xx series chip and overclock it until the newer Pentium D processors come out. Go 5xx series over 6xx series because they tend to overclock better since they have less cache (more cache = more latency).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top