Page 1 of 3
Upgrade of PC
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:33 pm
by Gandelf
I'm considering upgrading to a dual core processor. Either Athlon 64 X2, or Intel Duo. I hear the Intel's processor is the best available, but it's more expensive. Just wondering if anyone might know if it's really worth paying extra for Intel's processor. Does the AMD processor compare favourably?
Thanks
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:01 pm
by <ankh>
Do you plan on using vista or x64? Else the dual core's wont really be incredible.
Intel is actually best atm, incredible good cpu's. But as Im a die hard amd fan Ill stick to those for now (I can't be arsed to buy new ram/motherboard/cpu anyway).
/Ankh
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:09 pm
by Gandelf
I don't intend to use Vista until it becomes necessary. Games manufacturers have already said that they won't be supporting Vista for a while at least. I basically want to get ready for LotRO, because I suspect that the recommended specs for the game will require a dual core processor and pci-express graphics card. I've always been an AMD person, but if the Intel Duo is siginificantly better I may well switch.
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:10 pm
by <ankh>
Actually, your not 100% right - there are already dx10 games inc and Vista is the only one who support dx10
I know several games which will have dx10.
/Ankh
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:15 pm
by <ankh>
There are still quite good AGP cards btw
/Ankh
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:09 pm
by Gandelf
OK thanks Ankh, but can you enlighten me any further regarding the processor please? AMD X2 or Intel Duo? Is it worth shelling out extra for the Duo?
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 9:25 pm
by <ankh>
Indeed it is - it has way better benchmark score than amd x2
/Ankh
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:22 pm
by Gandelf
OK, you've convinced me. Duo is the one for me. Cheers!
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:51 pm
by Ovi
I wouldn't be surprised if Intel is now cheaper than AMD for the same performance CPU. There wasn't much difference when I upgraded a few months ago, and when I had the discussion with Xest on the other thread then it was probably in Intels favour, although I didn't check for exact stats etc.
If you have no reason to hold on to AMD then I would probably look at Intel.
I am not sure why Vista or XP64 help with the performance of a Dual Core? The AMD Dual core CPUs are 64-bit CPUs which you won't benefit from without the 64bit OS. Windows XP is Multiprocessor aware (Windows has been since NT) and will make full use of the Cores, whether your applications do is another matter. Having 2 cores will make things run smoother, more than 2 is probably a waste though.
Posted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 11:26 pm
by <ankh>
Ovi wrote:
I am not sure why Vista or XP64 help with the performance of a Dual Core? The AMD Dual core CPUs are 64-bit CPUs which you won't benefit from without the 64bit OS.
Thats why I asked him if he planned on using Vista or x64. Tbh I should have said Vista 64bit as there will be a 32bit version too.
/Ankh