Poll: AMD or Intel (for new budget PC)?

This is a serious question, not a fanboy firestarter.

I will be building a new PC in the next month or two. Should I use an Intel or AMD platform?

Things I'm weighing:
AMD- AMD's top-shelf processors will always be less expensive than Intel, while still running most every game at a reasonable pace. AM2 boards are more vetted than the new Intel 650i.
Intel- Intel's Conroe is superior in most every way to AMD, but with a price premium. It'll be awhile before AMD catches up. I'm told the 650i boards have some issues, as well as issues with Intel and SLI. Intel's not going anywhere.

What about future-proofing? Should I get an AM2 or a LGA775? I'd like to hear some real reasons; from what I've seen on this board there are some bright PC builders here.

If I do any overclocking, it will be modest at most. I am really looking for a stable, budget PC around $500-$600, so nothing pricier than an E6400 or entry-level AM2 X2. I'm probably going to use EVGA for the motherboard and GPU (less than $200), and I have a 22" 1680x1050 monitor I'd like to run native with most everything I can, if the added info matters.

Thanks all, and no fighting! 

Hey man wait for Intel's second price cut.

If you are looking for a E6600 it will be go down as 150 dollers.(Maybe less)

Hey man wait for Intel's second price cut.

If you are looking for a E6600 it will be go down as 150 dollers.(Maybe less)

LahiruD

Which is coming on July 22nd this year btw. 

ATM Intel is better to buy products from (core 2 duo series)

I would get the E4300. Then OC it to 3.0ghz. Its a great overclocker and while perform (when Oc'd) better that the insanely

expencive x6800. It will also only set you back £77. Definatly worth the extra £20 over the Amd x2 3800.

600 is very tight.while browsing egg yesterday i came up witha  900 -1000$ pc

but alot of the older duel core are still plenty fast 

Considering your budget I suggest you go with AMD. Also, AM2 Mobos are pretty futureproof as well since they will support K10. This way you won't go over your current budget and you'll have options for future upgrades.RazorGR

I thought that the new k10's were going to socket f

an E6600 intel, or AMD 5200 X2 will both be good for games, i run all my games at 1680x1050 with all max setting and usually get 60fps+ .. so those 2 processors are good enough, and they aint expencive, no need for anything much better right now unless u wanna future proof

edit : btw, i run +5200 X2 AMD .. with 8800GTX, 2gb top end ram, etc.. and the +5200 doesnt keep anything down.. so if your budget u could probably go a little lower, but id suggest a 5200 or intel equivelent. plz list al the hardware u need for that price btw

and for 500-600, youd only get a pc that run games on low or medium settings.. pcgaming is expencive what can i say 

It'd be tricky to get a proper C2D system in that price range, but a lot easier to get something nice in AMD.

And as another said, you'd be much likely to be able to buy one of those upcoming Phenom chips later and drop it in place. 

I have found that budget AMD processors are better for non overclockers.

Intel's processors are a better deal for people with a higher budget. 

I have found that budget AMD processors are better for non overclockers.

Intel's processors are a better deal for people with a higher budget.

generic_brand

why would they be better for non overclockers? A E4300 performs around a X2 4200+ and goes up from there. 

[QUOTE="RazorGR"]Considering your budget I suggest you go with AMD. Also, AM2 Mobos are pretty futureproof as well since they will support K10. This way you won't go over your current budget and you'll have options for future upgrades.04dcarraher

I thought that the new k10's were going to socket f

The new Phenom processors will use Socket F, AM2/AM2+ and AM3. I believe, either that or Socket F is for Barcelona and the Phenoms will only use AM2/AM2+ and AM3.

EDIT: I also suggest the X2s or Opterons simply because they are cheaper (though they are not better).

Intel is better for the fact of the core 2 duo motherboards !! they are built for gaming and are faster !!!Cadillac082

Its not like the socket am2 ASUS Crosshair, ASUS M2N32 Deluxe or Premium, DFI LANParty SLI-M2R and Abit Fatality are slouches. They are insane clockers and theyre great for games too.

I went for the ASUS Crosshair SLI.  Its got the PCI slots I need for my PhysX and X-Fi, along with great overclocker and these sweet Blue LEDs that outline the board. 

I'm concerned about the 650i chipset if I go with a Conroe. Does anyone have any experience with these boards?
Thanks all, some great feedback!
Bozanimal

I got the 680i, and frankly there's no problem with it, I have a buddy who has the 650i and he's running stable as a rock and can even overclock higher than me in some cases, you have nothing to worry about with that chipset, frankly. 

[QUOTE="Bozanimal"]I'm concerned about the 650i chipset if I go with a Conroe. Does anyone have any experience with these boards?
Thanks all, some great feedback!
jfelisario

I got the 680i, and frankly there's no problem with it, I have a buddy who has the 650i and he's running stable as a rock and can even overclock higher than me in some cases, you have nothing to worry about with that chipset, frankly. 

I recently just ordered the http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813127022 abit's new 650i Nvidia board..

  Did some research on the board seems rock solid from both user reviews and a professional review

http://www.virtual-hideout.net/reviews/ABIT_FP-IN9_SLI/index.shtml

ya, get a core 2 duo probably a 6320, or 4300.  if you look in my sig, I am ordering on monday that build, and it will be $758.92 shipped.  I'm sure, that you could find somewhere to cut cash, probably on the processor and video card. 

Personaly AMD always does awesome stuff, now the Conroes are better than the AM2 cpus, but comparing price performance i think that the AM2 are better than intel C2D. Why am i saing that: i got my CPU (rig in sign) for 130$ (I live on a 3rd world country so its a great price). 1 week laiter my bro bought its E4300? (the 2.13Ghz C2D) his CPU performed better but the different wasnt such as huge as expected and his CPU was about the doble of the price than mine.

When it comes to gaming i play all games flawlessly on my rig. All games till now released almost maxed out (sometimes i need to play around the AA and Vsync config). The only game which i have problems with is SupCom that game eats my PC.

If u are plaing to spend 500$ id advice u getting a AM2 CPU with 1x1Gb stick so u have lot of upgrade space, a 7600GT which u can laiter swich for a DX10 card. Rest is well case HDD, DVD drive,... 

Personaly AMD always does awesome stuff, now the Conroes are better than the AM2 cpus, but comparing price performance i think that the AM2 are better than intel C2D. Why am i saing that: i got my CPU (rig in sign) for 130$ (I live on a 3rd world country so its a great price). 1 week laiter my bro bought its E4300? (the 2.13Ghz C2D) his CPU performed better but the different wasnt such as huge as expected and his CPU was about the doble of the price than mine.

When it comes to gaming i play all games flawlessly on my rig. All games till now released almost maxed out (sometimes i need to play around the AA and Vsync config). The only game which i have problems with is SupCom that game eats my PC.

If u are plaing to spend 500$ id advice u getting a AM2 CPU with 1x1Gb stick so u have lot of upgrade space, a 7600GT which u can laiter swich for a DX10 card. Rest is well case HDD, DVD drive,...

Antraxspore

Thing is, E4300 is like $114.50 in Newegg vs. $98 for your AMD proc, not much of a price difference now and we don't even have the July 22nd Intel price cuts in consideration here, you might as well pick up the intel setup.

Thats if he wants to wait that long.

I'm not saying the Core 2 Duos are bad processors. But again, saying the X2s are crap is a farce. The C2Ds offer premium performance but the X2s offer enough power to run games stable and flawlessly. Also keep the over clocking solutions out of your posts, the OP said he wasn't planning on doing much OCing (modest at most, then he runs the risk of ruining his system and voiding the warranty).

Thats if he wants to wait that long.

 

I'm not saying the Core 2 Duos are bad processors. But again, saying the X2s are crap is a farce. The C2Ds offer premium performance but the X2s offer enough power to run games stable and flawlessly. Also keep the over clocking solutions out of your posts, the OP said he wasn't planning on doing much OCing (modest at most, then he runs the risk of ruining his system and voiding the warranty).

sykonfc

Nope nothing wrong with the X2's at all, but seeing that prices on both sides are tumbling to all-time lows, its all formalities and personal perferences imho..... both are good choices for a budget build, though if this wasn't for a budget pc (maybe for a high-end gaming rig) i'd lean towards the C2D's.

lol intel fan-boys... stupid people thinking intel are still superior.

Listen up people and listen good. Until intel price cut their items... amd is beating intel in the performance per doller/pound. The fx-60 can be bought for the same price as the e6400 at this time, giving you double the performance. The e6400 is on par with the amd 4600, and the e6600 is on par with the fx 62... however the e6600 is that little bit better.

But... even though intel are good for performance... they are deffinatly not better on bugdet, also, you are NOT considering future technology. Soon, very soon, amd will be releasing their new range of CPU's, all with l3 cache. This will also include dual cores, and they will wipe C2D off the performance meter. There will be quad cores and octo cores and better still... these new processors will be compatible with the am2 board. Intels stratagy of sticking two dual cores together will never compete, and so intel users will have to wait until 2008-2009 in order to see some kind of decent quad core. The best part is, is that all vista programs will use all the 4-8 cores and new games which use multi-tasking will use the 4 cores too. (people get confused when people say "multi-tasking". I have seen many say: "But games can only just use 2 cores" WRONG! if they can use 2 cores, they can use 4 or 8. Its just sharing data out and sperating them equally between cores, and it doesnt matter how many cores there are (to an extent) 

lol intel fan-boys... stupid people thinking intel are still superior.

Listen up people and listen good. Until intel price cut their items... amd is beating intel in the performance per doller/pound. The fx-60 can be bought for the same price as the e6400 at this time, giving you double the performance. The e6400 is on par with the amd 4600, and the e6600 is on par with the fx 62... however the e6600 is that little bit better.

But... even though intel are good for performance... they are deffinatly not better on bugdet, also, you are NOT considering future technology. Soon, very soon, amd will be releasing their new range of CPU's, all with l3 cache. This will also include dual cores, and they will wipe C2D off the performance meter. There will be quad cores and octo cores and better still... these new processors will be compatible with the am2 board. Intels stratagy of sticking two dual cores together will never compete, and so intel users will have to wait until 2008-2009 in order to see some kind of decent quad core. The best part is, is that all vista programs will use all the 4-8 cores and new games which use multi-tasking will use the 4 cores too. (people get confused when people say "multi-tasking". I have seen many say: "But games can only just use 2 cores" WRONG! if they can use 2 cores, they can use 4 or 8. Its just sharing data out and sperating them equally between cores, and it doesnt matter how many cores there are (to an extent)

mdcw9

Meh, I'll wait for Penyrn and Nehalem... and people are already enjoying quad-cores through Supreme Commander, so there is no disputing the future viability of it. I'm just wondering, where are you basing this doubled performance of the FX-60 vs. the E6400? How much does an FX-60 run for nowadays.

[QUOTE="LahiruD"]

Hey man wait for Intel's second price cut.

If you are looking for a E6600 it will be go down as 150 dollers.(Maybe less)

jfelisario

Which is coming on July 22nd this year btw. 

looool hahahah, i pity the guys who bought it before, hahahaha.

One final question then before I make my decision: Does Intel or AMD have the better product pipeline for existing motherboards?

If I buy an AM2 or 680i motherboard, will both firms be issuing new processors for those boards into the foreseeable future? I remember when the Socket 939 was supposed to be future proof only 2-3 years ago.

I'd suggest AMD, simply because at those prices, you're going to want cheaper even if it's a slightly slower CPU.

Tom's Hardware just did an article and their budget PC was $525. You can read what they came up with here: http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/05/08/system_builder_marathon/ 

well i can tell you that an am2 board will last you a while due to the compatibility of quad cores, as quad core should last about 1-2 years for you extreme gamers XD... but quite a bit longer for those not too bothered. Im not sure on the intel side... i havnt heard any news on their new quad core, released early 2008.

well i can tell you that an am2 board will last you a while due to the compatibility of quad cores, as quad core should last about 1-2 years for you extreme gamers XD... but quite a bit longer for those not too bothered. Im not sure on the intel side... i havnt heard any news on their new quad core, released early 2008.

 

mdcw9

just some info for ya with intel's apparent "late" roadmap,,,

Intel Core 2 Quad (Yorkfield) CPU is expected to be released in Q3 and is expected to be based on a 45nm process. Yorkfield will be the successor to Kentsfield and feature two 6MB L2 caches (one cache for two cores), making a total of 12MB L2 (2x6MB). Yorkfield is also expected to feature the 50 additional Penryn New Instructions (SSE4) and feature a clock speed of 3.46 to 3.73Ghz. Yorkfield will be paired with the Bearlake chipset family and will feature a 1333Mhz or 1066Mhz FSB speed.

Intel Core 2 Duo (Wolfdale) desktop CPU is expected to be released in Q3. Wolfdale is the Dual Core version of Yorkfield based on the Penryn core and featuring 6MB of shared L2 cache running on a 45nm process. Wolfdale is expected to feature clock speeds of up to 4Ghz and can run on a 1333Mhz or 1066Mhz FSB speed. The TDP of Wolfdale is expected to be 57W.

Also, initial samples are coming to the press late June, and NDA will be lifted July 15th, so we can see some benchies by then. Yep, 45nm, SSE4, yummy clocks and 1333 MHz FSB and low TDP, seemingly ahead of the curve Intel is.

Courtesy of Mike's Hardware and corroborated through other sources. 

AMD is best for gaming.sabru8

No way.

Intel is best for Gaming 

[QUOTE="sabru8"]AMD is best for gaming.LahiruD

No way.

Intel is best for Gaming

Shh.... IBM is, 'nuff said... lol. 

[QUOTE="sabru8"]AMD is best for gaming.LahiruD

No way.

Intel is best for Gaming 

No, Cyrix!

He started it... No, he started it!

LOL

lol intel fan-boys... stupid people thinking intel are still superior.

Listen up people and listen good. Until intel price cut their items... amd is beating intel in the performance per doller/pound. The fx-60 can be bought for the same price as the e6400 at this time, giving you double the performance. The e6400 is on par with the amd 4600, and the e6600 is on par with the fx 62... however the e6600 is that little bit better.

But... even though intel are good for performance... they are deffinatly not better on bugdet, also, you are NOT considering future technology. Soon, very soon, amd will be releasing their new range of CPU's, all with l3 cache. This will also include dual cores, and they will wipe C2D off the performance meter. There will be quad cores and octo cores and better still... these new processors will be compatible with the am2 board. Intels stratagy of sticking two dual cores together will never compete, and so intel users will have to wait until 2008-2009 in order to see some kind of decent quad core. The best part is, is that all vista programs will use all the 4-8 cores and new games which use multi-tasking will use the 4 cores too. (people get confused when people say "multi-tasking". I have seen many say: "But games can only just use 2 cores" WRONG! if they can use 2 cores, they can use 4 or 8. Its just sharing data out and sperating them equally between cores, and it doesnt matter how many cores there are (to an extent) 

mdcw9

  WTH are you talking about, why don't you actually look up reviews?  the e4300 THE LOWEST intel dual core processor out does the 4600 in multiple tests...

  ATM like I said earlier the intel systems are the biggest bang for the buck.  With the e4300 alone you can easilly overclock it to levels that out due top AMD picks.

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_2_duo_e6400_review/ and here is proof of your bs your spewing.. the e6400 easilly matchs and some time over powers the FX 62 a chip far more expensive then the 6400.. Not to mention the chip can overclock to insane rates..

  Now not sure for future tech we will have to wait till it comes out. But as of right now the Intel duo chips have the biggest bang for the bucks..

AMD- AMD's top-shelf processors will always be less expensive than Intel, while still running most every game at a reasonable pace. AM2 boards are more vetted than the new Intel 650i.

Not true until the recent price wars. AMD's average prices have always been more expensive than Intel's prices because of the lower yeild rate on the silicon wafers (among other factors).

Also, NVIDIA made the 650i. Intel chipsets are the P965, 975X, P35 and upcoming 38X. 

Intel- Intel's Conroe is superior in most every way to AMD, but with a price premium. It'll be awhile before AMD catches up. I'm told the 650i boards have some issues, as well as issues with Intel and SLI. Intel's not going anywhere.

Intel will be cutting prices on July the 22nd. Just to give you an idea on these prices cuts, a Q6600 will drop to around $300!

There are no issues with Intel CPUs and NVIDIA's SLi (or ATi/AMD's CrossFire). There is a problem with SLi and Vista, however, and that's not limited to Intel CPUs. 

What about future-proofing? Should I get an AM2 or a LGA775? I'd like to hear some real reasons; from what I've seen on this board there are some bright PC builders here.

Right now, AM2 is more future proof as it will allow you to upgrade to quad/dual core Agena. However, don't expect Agena/Barcelona to be cheap.  You may as well get an E6600 with a healthy LGA775 mobo and upgrade to a Q6600 later on down the track.

If I do any overclocking, it will be modest at most. I am really looking for a stable, budget PC around $500-$600, so nothing pricier than an E6400 or entry-level AM2 X2.

AMD is looking really rosy at your price range. Otherwise, I suggest starting off with an E4300 and a DFI P965-S board or Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3.

I'm probably going to use EVGA for the motherboard and GPU (less than $200), and I have a 22" 1680x1050 monitor I'd like to run native with most everything I can, if the added info matters.

With that budget, I wouldn't expect to play on a 22". You'll need a $300 GPU like the 8800GTS 320MB if you want to play at that resolution, and that's half your budget gone.

Furthermore, eVGA only make pretty high end motherboards. 

Intel platform:
Core 2 Duo E4300
Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 or DFI Infinity 965-S motherboard
2GB of Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 RAM
Radeon X1950 PRO or GeForce 7900GS (do not expect to be able to play at that resolution)
Corsair 520w PSU
250GB SATAII 7200RPM HDD
DVD Burner
Case of your choice
Tuniq Tower 120 (a lot more cheaper than a Thermalright Ultra 120 w/ fan)

AMD Platform:
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (AM2)
ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe or MSI K9N Platnium
[Same as Above]

[QUOTE="mdcw9"]

well i can tell you that an am2 board will last you a while due to the compatibility of quad cores, as quad core should last about 1-2 years for you extreme gamers XD... but quite a bit longer for those not too bothered. Im not sure on the intel side... i havnt heard any news on their new quad core, released early 2008.

 

jfelisario

just some info for ya with intel's apparent "late" roadmap,,,

Intel Core 2 Quad (Yorkfield) CPU is expected to be released in Q3 and is expected to be based on a 45nm process. Yorkfield will be the successor to Kentsfield and feature two 6MB L2 caches (one cache for two cores), making a total of 12MB L2 (2x6MB). Yorkfield is also expected to feature the 50 additional Penryn New Instructions (SSE4) and feature a clock speed of 3.46 to 3.73Ghz. Yorkfield will be paired with the Bearlake chipset family and will feature a 1333Mhz or 1066Mhz FSB speed.

Intel Core 2 Duo (Wolfdale) desktop CPU is expected to be released in Q3. Wolfdale is the Dual Core version of Yorkfield based on the Penryn core and featuring 6MB of shared L2 cache running on a 45nm process. Wolfdale is expected to feature clock speeds of up to 4Ghz and can run on a 1333Mhz or 1066Mhz FSB speed. The TDP of Wolfdale is expected to be 57W.

Also, initial samples are coming to the press late June, and NDA will be lifted July 15th, so we can see some benchies by then. Yep, 45nm, SSE4, yummy clocks and 1333 MHz FSB and low TDP, seemingly ahead of the curve Intel is.

Courtesy of Mike's Hardware and corroborated through other sources.

But what motherboard will they run on? Will they be compatible with the current generation of motherboards? If not, I might as well go AMD because of the AM2 and its (potentially) longer life span that the socket 775.

[QUOTE="mdcw9"]

lol intel fan-boys... stupid people thinking intel are still superior.

Listen up people and listen good. Until intel price cut their items... amd is beating intel in the performance per doller/pound. The fx-60 can be bought for the same price as the e6400 at this time, giving you double the performance. The e6400 is on par with the amd 4600, and the e6600 is on par with the fx 62... however the e6600 is that little bit better.

But... even though intel are good for performance... they are deffinatly not better on bugdet, also, you are NOT considering future technology. Soon, very soon, amd will be releasing their new range of CPU's, all with l3 cache. This will also include dual cores, and they will wipe C2D off the performance meter. There will be quad cores and octo cores and better still... these new processors will be compatible with the am2 board. Intels stratagy of sticking two dual cores together will never compete, and so intel users will have to wait until 2008-2009 in order to see some kind of decent quad core. The best part is, is that all vista programs will use all the 4-8 cores and new games which use multi-tasking will use the 4 cores too. (people get confused when people say "multi-tasking". I have seen many say: "But games can only just use 2 cores" WRONG! if they can use 2 cores, they can use 4 or 8. Its just sharing data out and sperating them equally between cores, and it doesnt matter how many cores there are (to an extent)

sSubZerOo

WTH are you talking about, why don't you actually look up reviews? the e4300 THE LOWEST intel dual core processor out does the 4600 in multiple tests...

ATM like I said earlier the intel systems are the biggest bang for the buck. With the e4300 alone you can easilly overclock it to levels that out due top AMD picks.

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/intel_core_2_duo_e6400_review/ and here is proof of your bs your spewing.. the e6400 easilly matchs and some time over powers the FX 62 a chip far more expensive then the 6400.. Not to mention the chip can overclock to insane rates..

Now not sure for future tech we will have to wait till it comes out. But as of right now the Intel duo chips have the biggest bang for the bucks..

Woah, sSubZerOo, you generally make a good point, but you could be nicer about it to mdcw9. I agree that the Intel chips outperform today, but my current PC has lasted eight years because I've been able to upgrade the processor, RAM, hard drive, etc. I'd like my next PC to be as upgradable, and that means a solid motherboard. Unfortunately, it means I have to pick between AMD and Intel, the crux of the issue!

Keep in mind, my wife and I have a house and (hopefully) a child on the way in the next year or so. :oops: This is a budget system that needs to be budget upgradable.

Does any of this even matter? Is the CPU even a bottleneck versus the graphics card? If so, I'll just go AMD for purposes of budget. 

Thanks everyone!

Problem is, it's a lot harder to find a quality motherboard if you're trying to assemble a whole system within that price.

To the TC, what is it that you're looking to buy within that $500-600 ? barebones? full tower?

For example, it's not hard at all to find sub-$100 AM2 boards that perform and work great, but I have a hard time recommending to anyone any intel C2D-supporting motherboards for no less than $180 or even $200+. Couple this with the fact that you can get a fairly high-rated X2 for much cheaper than just about any C2D processor, and really, you can stretch that money a lot farther if you do go with AMD than if you tried to make a C2D system, and that's the fiscal reality of the situation.

Yes, Intel's stuff may perform better now, but that doesn't mean that AM2-based chips suddenly stopped performing as great as they used to either. 

If you're building a budget gaming system, the best option right now is the AMD X2 3600+ Brisbane for $69 at newegg. An E4300 will be faster, but it's also $50 more, and to overclock it well you will need a $100+ motherboard. AMD is much cheaper because not only are their processors cheaper, but a decent AM2 motherboard is much cheaper than a decent LGA775 mobo.

 I went with an X2 3600, Biostar tForce 550, and 2GB DDR2-667 for my new PC and I'm happy with it. The 3600+ overclocks to 2.8GHz without issue and if you're mostly gaming I can pretty much guarantee you won't tell a difference in gameplay between an X2 3600+ @ 2.8GHz and any Core 2 Duo processor. Supreme Commander might be an exception, but that's one game.

 For $600 you could buy:

 X2 3600+ Brisbane - $69

2GB DDR2-667 - $80~

Biostar tForce 550 Motherboard - $70

8800GTS 320MB - $275~

FSP 450W PSU - $58

You'd have money leftover for a case and whatever else you need. If you get C2D the E4300 is $110, and then you're going to want a P965 board for $110-120, for a total of $220-230. The X2 + 550 combo costs you only $140.