AMD processorss

hi im currently running an 1.8 ghz 2 core processor and looking to upgrade what is the best amd processor for less than £110 POUNDS NOT DOLLERS THANK YOU

can you recomend me any

and i know that intel are better at processors but i have amd mo bo so thanks

Thanksss

hi im currently running an 1.8 ghz 2 core processor and looking to upgrade what is the best amd processor for less than £110 POUNDS NOT DOLLERS THANK YOU

can you recomend me any

and i know that intel are better at processors but i have amd mo bo so thanks

Thanksss

A7X_Own

AMD Athlon 6400+ Black Edition. Around £107, Dual Core, 3.2Ghz Clock Speed, 2mb cache. Thats what I have and it has got great overclocking potential.

and i know that intel are better at processors but i have amd mo bo so thanks

Actually AMD are better, Intel just make their CPu sound better so they can make their sup-par products sell more.

Actually AMD are better, Intel just make their CPu sound better so they can make their sup-par products sell more.

snakehips57

actually, i think you don't know what you're talking about. Intels have far more OC ability than AMDs. AMDs ain't bad (i have 6000+ too), but Intels are better. atleast for now.

"Actually AMD are better, Intel just make their CPu sound better" signature material, dude! :D

[QUOTE="A7X_Own"]

hi im currently running an 1.8 ghz 2 core processor and looking to upgrade what is the best amd processor for less than £110 POUNDS NOT DOLLERS THANK YOU

can you recomend me any

and i know that intel are better at processors but i have amd mo bo so thanks

Thanksss

snakehips57

AMD Athlon 6400+ Black Edition. Around £107, Dual Core, 3.2Ghz Clock Speed, 2mb cache. Thats what I have and it has got great overclocking potential.

Great overclocking potential? :lol:

No way, mate. The 6400+ pushes AMD's 65nm SOI process and the K8 architecture to its limits in terms of clock speed.

Go for the 5000+ Black Edition, buy a good aftermarket cooler (it doesn't include one) and overclock that to 2.80-3.00GHz.

Actually AMD are better, Intel just make their CPu sound better so they can make their sup-par products sell more.

snakehips57

Oh right, you're a fanboy. :roll: Oh great...

Maybe that's why you missed a year's worth of reviews showing Intel's dominance in the CPU market space? Maybe you don't understand logic or factual information?

At least the Intel fanboys admitted that K8 was better than NetBurst, back in the day.

[QUOTE="snakehips57"]

Actually AMD are better, Intel just make their CPu sound better so they can make their sup-par products sell more.

prowler666

actually, i think you don't know what you're talking about. Intels have far more OC ability than AMDs. AMDs ain't bad (i have 6000+ too), but Intels are better. atleast for now.

"Actually AMD are better, Intel just make their CPu sound better" signature material, dude! :D

[QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="A7X_Own"]

hi im currently running an 1.8 ghz 2 core processor and looking to upgrade what is the best amd processor for less than £110 POUNDS NOT DOLLERS THANK YOU

can you recomend me any

and i know that intel are better at processors but i have amd mo bo so thanks

Thanksss

Wesker776

AMD Athlon 6400+ Black Edition. Around £107, Dual Core, 3.2Ghz Clock Speed, 2mb cache. Thats what I have and it has got great overclocking potential.

Great overclocking potential? :lol:

No way, mate. The 6400+ pushes AMD's 65nm SOI process and the K8 architecture to its limits in terms of clock speed.

Go for the 5000+ Black Edition, buy a good aftermarket cooler (it doesn't include one) and overclock that to 2.80-3.00GHz.

As I said, great overclocking potential. My 6400+ 3.2 has been OC'd to 3.6.

Intels Quad processors don't actually have true quad core technology, and the only processor so far to have a true 4 cores is...wait...AMD :O:O

But whatever, each to their own. And no Im not a fanboy, this is my first AMD and I have found it far better than Intel so far.

[QUOTE="Wesker776"][QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="A7X_Own"]

hi im currently running an 1.8 ghz 2 core processor and looking to upgrade what is the best amd processor for less than £110 POUNDS NOT DOLLERS THANK YOU

can you recomend me any

and i know that intel are better at processors but i have amd mo bo so thanks

Thanksss

snakehips57

AMD Athlon 6400+ Black Edition. Around £107, Dual Core, 3.2Ghz Clock Speed, 2mb cache. Thats what I have and it has got great overclocking potential.

Great overclocking potential? :lol:

No way, mate. The 6400+ pushes AMD's 65nm SOI process and the K8 architecture to its limits in terms of clock speed.

Go for the 5000+ Black Edition, buy a good aftermarket cooler (it doesn't include one) and overclock that to 2.80-3.00GHz.

As I said, great overclocking potential. My 6400+ 3.2 has been OC'd to 3.6.

Intels Quad processors don't actually have true quad core technology, and the only processor so far to have a true 4 cores is...wait...AMD :O:O

But whatever, each to their own. And no Im not a fanboy, this is my first AMD and I have found it far better than Intel so far.

A 400MHz increase on the 6400+ is paled in comparison by Intel CPU's getting roughly an extra 1000MHz overclock. In this case, an extra 400MHz doesn't sound like "great overclocking potential".

It would make more sense to buy the 5000+ Black Edition and get a higher overclock than what's possible on the 6400+.

Define "true" quad core technology--I don't want AMD marketing lines, either. Also, I find it funny that K10, the "true quad core", can't even beat Intel's "fake quad core" clock for clock. Intel's quad core doesn't even have an integrated memory controller and still uses an outdated system bus, yet it still outperforms K10.

I wonder how many end users care about "true quad core", when "fake quad cores" perform better.

[QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="Wesker776"][QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="A7X_Own"]

hi im currently running an 1.8 ghz 2 core processor and looking to upgrade what is the best amd processor for less than £110 POUNDS NOT DOLLERS THANK YOU

can you recomend me any

and i know that intel are better at processors but i have amd mo bo so thanks

Thanksss

Wesker776

AMD Athlon 6400+ Black Edition. Around £107, Dual Core, 3.2Ghz Clock Speed, 2mb cache. Thats what I have and it has got great overclocking potential.

Great overclocking potential? :lol:

No way, mate. The 6400+ pushes AMD's 65nm SOI process and the K8 architecture to its limits in terms of clock speed.

Go for the 5000+ Black Edition, buy a good aftermarket cooler (it doesn't include one) and overclock that to 2.80-3.00GHz.

As I said, great overclocking potential. My 6400+ 3.2 has been OC'd to 3.6.

Intels Quad processors don't actually have true quad core technology, and the only processor so far to have a true 4 cores is...wait...AMD :O:O

But whatever, each to their own. And no Im not a fanboy, this is my first AMD and I have found it far better than Intel so far.

A 400MHz increase on the 6400+ is paled in comparison by Intel CPU's getting roughly an extra 1000MHz overclock. In this case, an extra 400MHz doesn't sound like "great overclocking potential".

It would make more sense to buy the 5000+ Black Edition and get a higher overclock than what's possible on the 6400+.

Define "true" quad core technology--I don't want AMD marketing lines, either. Also, I find it funny that K10, the "true quad core", can't even beat Intel's "fake quad core" clock for clock. Intel's quad core doesn't even have an integrated memory controller and still uses an outdated system bus, yet it still outperforms K10.

I wonder how many end users care about "true quad core", when "fake quad cores" perform better.

Congratulations, you can read the specification from Intels website. But you said it yourself in your last post, without evn realizing it. It sounds like an intel quad core "fake" as it may be is going to outperform the "true" quad core of the AMD, however while the Intel doesn't have and doesn't use 4 cores together, you are getting a higher multiple of power from the AMD all at once.

AMD will kick intel soon, i will always buy AMD, best for gaming ever.xsqmko

Thankyou man, you get the Idea :D

[QUOTE="xsqmko"]AMD will kick intel soon, i will always buy AMD, best for gaming ever.snakehips57

Thankyou man, you get the Idea :D

AMD will kick intel soon, i will always buy AMD, best for gaming ever.xsqmko

It is just the same as saying that a 512mb graphics card is always better than a 256mb graphics card. It isnt. Clock memory on a Graphics card today means **** all. As I said before, in the long run AMDs are always going to out-perform an Intel that is going to **** up after half a years usage.snakehips57

haven't heard of Intels dying anymore than AMDs. have any proof on this?

as an AMD user, i also had my hopes up for the Phenoms they released cos it was "true quad core", but whadda you know! Intels still beat them. Phenom 9900 is on par with Intel Q6600, but what about overclocking? Phenom 9900 = none with stock voltages (from what i've read). Intel Q6600 = from the stock 2,4Ghz to 3,0Ghz EASILY with stock cooler and without voltage changes.

[QUOTE="xsqmko"]AMD will kick intel soon, i will always buy AMD, best for gaming ever.yoyo462001

[QUOTE="snakehips57"]It is just the same as saying that a 512mb graphics card is always better than a 256mb graphics card. It isnt. Clock memory on a Graphics card today means **** all. As I said before, in the long run AMDs are always going to out-perform an Intel that is going to **** up after half a years usage.prowler666

haven't heard of Intels dying anymore than AMDs. have any proof on this?

as an AMD user, i also had my hopes up for the Phenoms they released cos it was "true quad core", but whadda you know! Intels still beat them. Phenom 9900 is on par with Intel Q6600, but what about overclocking? Phenom 9900 = none (from what i've read). Intel Q6600 = from the stock 2,4Ghz to 3,0Ghz EASILY with stock cooler and without voltage chances.

No I don't have proof of my statement, but neither have you to back up your statement either. Forums are full of no fact, opinion based post, and now, it seems, hypocrites.
snakehips57

dude, you take computing WAY too seriosly if you start calling me a hypocrite cos i use AMD, but say Intels are better. reason i bought AMD was cos it's cheap. i wasn't aware of Intels high overclocking abilities back then.

you can search the internet for numerous forums/reviews about Q6600 overclocking. same thing goes for Phenom 9900 overclocking. ofcourse you won't believe any of this until someone does it under your nose...

AMD 6400+Black Edition aint bad at all i got at 3.66ghz stable right now im sure i can push it a little more but its fine like this.

Edit: and the price on newegg.com is sweet only $159.99

[QUOTE="snakehips57"]No I don't have proof of my statement, but neither have you to back up your statement either. Forums are full of no fact, opinion based post, and now, it seems, hypocrites.
prowler666

dude, you take computing WAY too seriosly if you start calling me a hypocrite cos i use AMD, but say Intels are better. reason i bought AMD was cos it's cheap. i wasn't aware of Intels high overclocking abilities back then.

you can search the internet for numerous forums/reviews about Q6600 overclocking. same thing goes for Phenom 9900 overclocking. ofcourse you won't believe any of this until someone does it under your nose...

AMD 6400+Black Editionaint bad at all i got at 3.66ghz stable right now im surei can push it a little more but its fine like this.

Edit: and the price on newegg.com is sweet only $159.99

telefanatic

Nice one man, Im in UK so I paid around £107 for mine, dunno how you work out the £ - $ though :D

There was a guy earlier telling me you cannot overclock the 6400+ so that proves him wrong.

AMD 6400+Black Editionaint bad at all i got at 3.66ghz stable right now im surei can push it a little more but its fine like this.

Edit: and the price on newegg.com is sweet only $159.99

telefanatic

i was getting that baby too, but it wasn't available with cooler anywhere, so i got 6000+.

i just wanna make this clear: AMDs ain't bad by any means, but Intel leads right now in the means of pure performance.

[QUOTE="telefanatic"]

AMD 6400+Black Editionaint bad at all i got at 3.66ghz stable right now im surei can push it a little more but its fine like this.

Edit: and the price on newegg.com is sweet only $159.99

prowler666

i was getting that baby too, but it wasn't available with cooler anywhere, so i got 6000+.

i just wanna make this clear: AMDs ain't bad by any means, but Intel leads right now in the means of pure performance.

I got the Artic Freezer cooler from Ebuyer for a tenner with it.

[QUOTE="telefanatic"]

AMD 6400+Black Editionaint bad at all i got at 3.66ghz stable right now im surei can push it a little more but its fine like this.

Edit: and the price on newegg.com is sweet only $159.99

snakehips57

Nice one man, Im in UK so I paid around £107 for mine, dunno how you work out the £ - $ though :D

There was a guy earlier telling me you cannot overclock the 6400+ so that proves him wrong.

Im using a nice cooler "Cooler Master GeminiII", stays at 38C idle in my Thermaltake Armor case. When the 9900 comes out ill give it to my sister.

[QUOTE="prowler666"][QUOTE="telefanatic"]

AMD 6400+Black Editionaint bad at all i got at 3.66ghz stable right now im surei can push it a little more but its fine like this.

Edit: and the price on newegg.com is sweet only $159.99

snakehips57

i was getting that baby too, but it wasn't available with cooler anywhere, so i got 6000+.

i just wanna make this clear: AMDs ain't bad by any means, but Intel leads right now in the means of pure performance.

I got the Artic Freezer cooler from Ebuyer for a tenner with it.

i thought of getting a 3rd party cooler for it, but what the heck, it's no big difference for me, cos i have M2N-E mobo wich is a total crap for overclocking, so i would've have to run that 6400+ with stock clocks...

[QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="prowler666"][QUOTE="telefanatic"]

AMD 6400+Black Editionaint bad at all i got at 3.66ghz stable right now im surei can push it a little more but its fine like this.

Edit: and the price on newegg.com is sweet only $159.99

prowler666

i was getting that baby too, but it wasn't available with cooler anywhere, so i got 6000+.

i just wanna make this clear: AMDs ain't bad by any means, but Intel leads right now in the means of pure performance.

I got the Artic Freezer cooler from Ebuyer for a tenner with it.

i thought of getting a 3rd party cooler for it, but what the heck, it's no big difference for me, cos i have M2N-E mobo wich is a total crap for overclocking, so i would've have to run that 6400+ with stock clocks...

However, even without overclocking it has the fastest clock speed to date. And that is a FACT.

However, even without overclocking it has the fastest clock speed to date. And that is a FACT.

snakehips57

yeah you're right... i just thought that extra 200Mhz was not gonna be that big deal, and the most important reason was that 6000+ was available right away at my local retailer.

[QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="prowler666"][QUOTE="telefanatic"]

AMD 6400+Black Editionaint bad at all i got at 3.66ghz stable right now im surei can push it a little more but its fine like this.

Edit: and the price on newegg.com is sweet only $159.99

prowler666

i was getting that baby too, but it wasn't available with cooler anywhere, so i got 6000+.

i just wanna make this clear: AMDs ain't bad by any means, but Intel leads right now in the means of pure performance.

I got the Artic Freezer cooler from Ebuyer for a tenner with it.

i thought of getting a 3rd party cooler for it, but what the heck, it's no big difference for me, cos i have M2N-E mobo wich is a total crap for overclocking, so i would've have to run that 6400+ with stock clocks...

O boy that Mobo is crap i had a M2N-E SLI lol i could overclock for **** with that thing.

that is true, AMD are better in gereral, but intel makes their proccesser sound cooler, much faster but in my opinion, there the same thing (u know what i mean)

ROFL. The amount of 'information' that the misinformed fanboys are spewing is ridiculous. The only thing AMD has on Intel is that their processors are cheaper. OblivionXII

fanboy much

[QUOTE="Wesker776"][QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="Wesker776"][QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="A7X_Own"]

hi im currently running an 1.8 ghz 2 core processor and looking to upgrade what is the best amd processor for less than £110 POUNDS NOT DOLLERS THANK YOU

can you recomend me any

and i know that intel are better at processors but i have amd mo bo so thanks

Thanksss

snakehips57

AMD Athlon 6400+ Black Edition. Around £107, Dual Core, 3.2Ghz Clock Speed, 2mb cache. Thats what I have and it has got great overclocking potential.

Great overclocking potential? :lol:

No way, mate. The 6400+ pushes AMD's 65nm SOI process and the K8 architecture to its limits in terms of clock speed.

Go for the 5000+ Black Edition, buy a good aftermarket cooler (it doesn't include one) and overclock that to 2.80-3.00GHz.

As I said, great overclocking potential. My 6400+ 3.2 has been OC'd to 3.6.

Intels Quad processors don't actually have true quad core technology, and the only processor so far to have a true 4 cores is...wait...AMD :O:O

But whatever, each to their own. And no Im not a fanboy, this is my first AMD and I have found it far better than Intel so far.

A 400MHz increase on the 6400+ is paled in comparison by Intel CPU's getting roughly an extra 1000MHz overclock. In this case, an extra 400MHz doesn't sound like "great overclocking potential".

It would make more sense to buy the 5000+ Black Edition and get a higher overclock than what's possible on the 6400+.

Define "true" quad core technology--I don't want AMD marketing lines, either. Also, I find it funny that K10, the "true quad core", can't even beat Intel's "fake quad core" clock for clock. Intel's quad core doesn't even have an integrated memory controller and still uses an outdated system bus, yet it still outperforms K10.

I wonder how many end users care about "true quad core", when "fake quad cores" perform better.

Congratulations, you can read the specification from Intels website. But you said it yourself in your last post, without evn realizing it. It sounds like an intel quad core "fake" as it may be is going to outperform the "true" quad core of the AMD, however while the Intel doesn't have and doesn't use 4 cores together, you are getting a higher multiple of power from the AMD all at once.

Wierd, thats not what the reviews say.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2226947,00.asp

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3153&p=6

Not to mention C2D overclock better and intel has their new chips coming out soon.

@ snakehips57:

Dude, you're not going to convince anyone of your point. You're a fanboy, big deal, we have plenty of them here, but they keep their fanboyism to themselves. You're basing your argument on opinion, not facts. Benchmarks don't lie, go look at them before you get flamed for stating what is obviously wrong. Also, there is no point in arguing with Wesker, he is one of the most knowledgable people on these forums when it comes to PC hardware: if you argue with him about PC hardware, you will lose.

AMD 6400+Black Edition aint bad at all i got at 3.66ghz stable right now im sure i can push it a little more but its fine like this.

Edit: and the price on newegg.com is sweet only $159.99

telefanatic

How did you get it 3.66 stable i can not get mine past 3.40 stable lots of crashes. Let me know will ya

[QUOTE="OblivionXII"]ROFL. The amount of 'information' that the misinformed fanboys are spewing is ridiculous. The only thing AMD has on Intel is that their processors are cheaper. sabbath2gamer

fanboy much

No, just truth.

[QUOTE="sabbath2gamer"]

[QUOTE="OblivionXII"]ROFL. The amount of 'information' that the misinformed fanboys are spewing is ridiculous. The only thing AMD has on Intel is that their processors are cheaper. OblivionXII

fanboy much

No, just truth.

QFT

wow. this is one heated discussion :lol:. the only reason i have amd is because thier processors are cheaper than most of the intel ones. please dont bite my head off for saying that:roll:

wow. this is one heated discussion :lol:. the only reason i have amd is because thier processors are cheaper than most of the intel ones. please dont bite my head off for saying that:roll:

geo888

That's why most people have them. The argument here is over which company has more powerful processors, and anyone with any knowledge knows that intel has faster processors.

Its quite tempting to switch to intel, with their fast processors. I will always stick with AMD though, their proccesors are QUALITY HARDWARE. They have never failed me. Their processors are fast enough to handle what the gaming industry throws at us. I have a 2 year old AMD proccessor and it still lets me play crysis on Very High settings. Plus the gaming industry is more GPU intensive, as long as you dont have a REALLY WEAK proccesor your fine. Personaly I have a AMD X2 64 4800 2.4 GHz @ 2.5 GHz. Once I learn more about OC'ing I will get it higher. Haven't even increased the voltage. Anyway LONG LIVE AMD. TheHARDWARE SUPERPOWERWILL RETURN! This is madness you say? THIS IS AMMMMDDDDDD!!!

[QUOTE="Wesker776"][QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="Wesker776"][QUOTE="snakehips57"][QUOTE="A7X_Own"]

hi im currently running an 1.8 ghz 2 core processor and looking to upgrade what is the best amd processor for less than £110 POUNDS NOT DOLLERS THANK YOU

can you recomend me any

and i know that intel are better at processors but i have amd mo bo so thanks

Thanksss

snakehips57

AMD Athlon 6400+ Black Edition. Around £107, Dual Core, 3.2Ghz Clock Speed, 2mb cache. Thats what I have and it has got great overclocking potential.

Great overclocking potential? :lol:

No way, mate. The 6400+ pushes AMD's 65nm SOI process and the K8 architecture to its limits in terms of clock speed.

Go for the 5000+ Black Edition, buy a good aftermarket cooler (it doesn't include one) and overclock that to 2.80-3.00GHz.

As I said, great overclocking potential. My 6400+ 3.2 has been OC'd to 3.6.

Intels Quad processors don't actually have true quad core technology, and the only processor so far to have a true 4 cores is...wait...AMD :O:O

But whatever, each to their own. And no Im not a fanboy, this is my first AMD and I have found it far better than Intel so far.

A 400MHz increase on the 6400+ is paled in comparison by Intel CPU's getting roughly an extra 1000MHz overclock. In this case, an extra 400MHz doesn't sound like "great overclocking potential".

It would make more sense to buy the 5000+ Black Edition and get a higher overclock than what's possible on the 6400+.

Define "true" quad core technology--I don't want AMD marketing lines, either. Also, I find it funny that K10, the "true quad core", can't even beat Intel's "fake quad core" clock for clock. Intel's quad core doesn't even have an integrated memory controller and still uses an outdated system bus, yet it still outperforms K10.

I wonder how many end users care about "true quad core", when "fake quad cores" perform better.

Congratulations, you can read the specification from Intels website. But you said it yourself in your last post, without evn realizing it. It sounds like an intel quad core "fake" as it may be is going to outperform the "true" quad core of the AMD, however while the Intel doesn't have and doesn't use 4 cores together, you are getting a higher multiple of power from the AMD all at once.

I suggest you read the specifications too, instead of the marketing lines. :roll:

I don't know if you're just blind or stupid: The Intel "fake quad core" outperforms AMD's "real quad core" CLOCK FOR CLOCK! i.e. If they're both at 2.40GHz, the Intel will outperform the AMD.

It is just the same as saying that a 512mb graphics card is always better than a 256mb graphics card. It isnt. Clock memory on a Graphics card today means **** all. As I said before, in the long run AMDs are always going to out-perform an Intel that is going to **** up after half a years usage.snakehips57

What the hell are you drabbling on about?

How is it anything comparable to graphics memory?

You're digging yourself deeper with every single line you post...