if your not a big OC person, i would go with AMD. Intel is better for overclocking. right off the bat you can turn up the multiplier, wich is locked on AMD, except in the Black edition AMD cores, wich are usualy not much more expensive. if you are an overclocker, and u wanted to go with amd, i would go with the AMD Athlon 6000+ x2 black edition. even though the black edition is a touch more expensive then other AMD processors, it runs about the same price as opposing intell ones. yes, intell processors can be OCd to 4gb, BUT, you better have a prety good cooling system, otherwise yoru going to fry your processor, and lose time and money. AMD also comes with a handy program called AMD Overdrive, aka AOD, wich can be used to OC from your booted computer, without the hassle of using your bois. AMD overdrive also has a program wich manualy overclocks your system, so if your not very tech smart, you can just run that and get optimal settings for your system. AOD can be downloaded at www.amd.com (duh) some part of choosing a processor is also personal preference. my brother has always went with Intell, i have always used amd. my systems have been cheaper, and ran better. his can just be OC'd easier. the rest i leave up to youcrazydude62
I was a hardcore AMD user, from my old AMD K6 233mhz, to my Athlon XP 2600+, to my Athlon 64 3500+, to my Athlon 64 X2 4400+ (which was overclocked to over 2.6ghz). You can still build a competent gaming rig using an Athlon X2, although they are aging. However, being that his question was whether or not to get a 3.0ghz AMD dual-core, or a 3ghz Intel Core 2 (45nm Wolfdale E8400 no less), there is no competition anymore. The only thing keeping those AMD chips still alive is their low price
I don't know how many people are really aware of this, but at this point, a 3ghz AMD dual-core is not even close to as fast as an Intel Core 2 running at 3ghz. The Core 2 architecture is so much newer and more efficient than the Athlon X2, that a better comparison would be a 3.0ghz AMD X2 versus a 2.4ghz Core 2 Duo. They will perform very closely to each other. You will see some games that are not very demanding on the CPU, where the graphics card you use will be the only thing capping your performance. However, more CPU-dependant games (like many of the newer titles, or real-time strategy games in general), will show you the difference between a decently fast CPU and a really fast one.
Throw in the fact that you can definitely get a great overclock out of the E8400 (I have one, and my overclock is mild, but had a noticeable impact on my performance)... and there is no competition right now.
The real question would be.. if you can afford to spend $160-170 on an E8400, maybe you should be looking at a quad-core AMD Phenom 2. That will give you a more comparable clock-for-clock performance to the Intel chip, and you will have a quad-core, which will be handy in a year or 2.
Log in to comment