Mostly I've been working with this article, http://www.legitreviews.com/article/226/2/ to compare the slightly higher 3800+ to a lower processor.
But Intel's Presley and the Athlon 3600+ are right now around the same price. They aren't compared directly in the article, but from what I gather AMD's is more energy-efficient and heat dissipates better making it somewhat more ideal for overclocking, though the OC tests I've seen done with the 3600+ aren't that great. Not sure if there are any I missed around here.
But the Intel seems to be a slightly more powerful processor, though I haven't seen these two processors compared directly.
Anyone have any ideas on which would be a better?
AMD vs. Intel, low-end Athlon 64 X2 3600+ or Pentium D 925?
Is your budget really tight or is it because you already compatible motherboards for those processors?
Because you can get a pretty cheap E4300 with a decent motherboard for 200$ and since you we're talking about those processors, I'm assuming you're using, or planning to get, DDR2 memory. So basically, if you can spend a few more bucks, I'd leave the Pentium D and X2 on the shelves and get something that can be easily overclocked and easily outperforms those 2 processors.
Because you can get a pretty cheap E4300 with a decent motherboard for 200$ and since you we're talking about those processors, I'm assuming you're using, or planning to get, DDR2 memory. So basically, if you can spend a few more bucks, I'd leave the Pentium D and X2 on the shelves and get something that can be easily overclocked and easily outperforms those 2 processors.
-
Bio-Hazard
- Legit Extremist
- Posts: 2302
- Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 9:48 pm
- Location: Back Woods Of MO.
I have no offical numbers on which one is the better anymore but I used to have a AMD X2 4200 not to long ago and now I'm running a Intel E4300 and the Intel performs mush better overall as well as OC's much much better. I gained sever hundred points in 3D Mark just by switching over to the E4300, my video card and drives all stayed the same. I'm not sure what the E4300's are running these days, but my MoBo only ran me a little over $100 (MSI P6N SLi-Fi) and the combo OC's great, I'm up to 3.6 stable, but I only run it at 3.2 24/7. So if I were you, I'd opt for a Intel C2D system at this time for a budget system.
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=201765
http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=201765
Well the reason I'm asking is because I can get a system with the DDR2 RAM, video card (ATI X1300), and a SATA hard drive for under 350. And it already has Vista on it, another expense I don't have to worry about. And it has a few other things.
However, there are two options for motherboard/cpu, the AMD and the Intel. I'm leaning on the AMD, I know the E4300 is better than both of them and not too expensive. To swap the mobo/cpu will cost an extra 150 with the package, but it'd be much cheaper if I did it myself.
However, there are two options for motherboard/cpu, the AMD and the Intel. I'm leaning on the AMD, I know the E4300 is better than both of them and not too expensive. To swap the mobo/cpu will cost an extra 150 with the package, but it'd be much cheaper if I did it myself.
What version of Vista? Because hardware-wise it doesn't look like such a great deal. IMO if you can build it yourself, buy the parts and you'll get more for your money. Those 2 processors are pretty much outdated.Nobahar wrote:Well the reason I'm asking is because I can get a system with the DDR2 RAM, video card (ATI X1300), and a SATA hard drive for under 350. And it already has Vista on it, another expense I don't have to worry about. And it has a few other things.
However, there are two options for motherboard/cpu, the AMD and the Intel. I'm leaning on the AMD, I know the E4300 is better than both of them and not too expensive. To swap the mobo/cpu will cost an extra 150 with the package, but it'd be much cheaper if I did it myself.
It's just vista basic. Everything gets outdated, even if I threw down for a better computer.
But really the only need I have for anything better than a low-end computer is for gaming. However, gaming isn't any priority of mine. I just need a computer to work on and prefer a desktop over a laptop.
For those purposes the package is advantageous. I know how to build and have built my past two pieces, but with this cheap computer I don't have to bother building, ordering separate components, making sure everything is in working order, or installing the OS.
Look at your own post with the parts for the 300$ computer. 274.47+shipping- add Vista Basic, a video card equivalent to the X1300, a DVD-ROM/CD-R combo drive, and some extra peripherals (optical mouse/keyboard) and I guarantee it passes ~350. And I have to build it myself, the pre-made is a good deal.
But really the only need I have for anything better than a low-end computer is for gaming. However, gaming isn't any priority of mine. I just need a computer to work on and prefer a desktop over a laptop.
For those purposes the package is advantageous. I know how to build and have built my past two pieces, but with this cheap computer I don't have to bother building, ordering separate components, making sure everything is in working order, or installing the OS.
Look at your own post with the parts for the 300$ computer. 274.47+shipping- add Vista Basic, a video card equivalent to the X1300, a DVD-ROM/CD-R combo drive, and some extra peripherals (optical mouse/keyboard) and I guarantee it passes ~350. And I have to build it myself, the pre-made is a good deal.