| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 98036 | 2009-03-08 23:25:00 | Which would you choose?? | stormdragon (6013) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 754848 | 2009-03-09 06:44:00 | Yea that's the point of Vista Business x64. XP Pro x64 is just a bit buggie for me atm. But that could just be the current install and or hardware. |
stormdragon (6013) | ||
| 754849 | 2009-03-09 07:27:00 | The performance difference between the 9850 and the Q6700/Q8200 isn't very much, but if you can in terms of overclockability IMO, the Q6700 would be a better choice. But, if amd sticks to the am2+ platform with newer cpus, upgrading will be quite cheap. |
Blam (54) | ||
| 754850 | 2009-03-09 08:56:00 | I would go for E8400 myself if it is general use. If the main use is specific software ie., not general use, I woudl go for Quad Core. AFAIK the Intel are a bit faster than AMD. I got a Quad Core a month ago approx. But these days I may wait a bit more and get iCore if most is for specialised work. $600cpu + $400 mobo. I think some Quad Cores are already $400+ for the CPU and the motherboard can be $250+. |
Nomad (952) | ||
| 754851 | 2009-03-09 09:01:00 | I may just get 4GB, 8GB will be much more $$ since if you get 4x2GB you run out of slots. Quad Cores are 4 slots I think if you don't get micro ATX motherboards which has 2. iCore has 6 I think if not mistaken. If you wanna have some building potential, you look at 2x4GB sticks that is quite expensive. I use photoshop, if I take 10 or more digital SLR RAW images (6MP file) and stitch them into a panorama, it may use up 2GB RAM. 500Gb windows and other bits. If you are editing pictures normally, it may only use 1 or 1.5GB. |
Nomad (952) | ||
| 754852 | 2009-03-09 11:12:00 | Storm I can't really comment on the Phenoms - as haven't seen one in action. But if you google Q6700 vs 9950, most reviewers back the Intel for pure performance. As far as the Intels you listed - assuming from original post that you are talking about mutiple running VM's, a quad is the way to go. That leaves you with the Q6700 and the Q8200. The Q8200 has half the cache and only 7 x multiplier (vs 9 on the Q6700) - so it's not going to be a great choice for an OC. It's really the bottom of the barrel for the intel quads. The Phenoms would be better than the 8200. The Q6700 would be a great choice for what you indicated. You can get a very easy OC - and with decent cooling you have the choice of pushing harder or prolonging the life of the chip (even with the OC). I'm running a Q6600 @ a very modest 3Ghz with a Xig HDT1283 and it idles @ mid/late 20's, and even under load with Prime95 won't go above 55C. And my OC is not even tweaked really - all I did was increase the FSB and up the vcore by a small amount. Dead easy. With decent air cooling, 3.6 should be achievable on my Q6600 (400x9) if I wanted it - but I'm pretty happy with my temps, it handles multiple vm's with ease, and just runs really well. Q6700 no question. |
Brooko (8444) | ||
| 754853 | 2009-03-09 22:04:00 | I may just get 4GB, 8GB will be much more $$ since if you get 4x2GB you run out of slots. Quad Cores are 4 slots I think if you don't get micro ATX motherboards which has 2. iCore has 6 I think if not mistaken. If you wanna have some building potential, you look at 2x4GB sticks that is quite expensive. Nomad I already have 4GB of good quality DDR2-800 RAM so would rather keep that and possible add another 4GB later. An i7 would require a more expensive mobo and all new DDR3 RAM, which I don't really have the money for atm. Might go for a 6700 if the budget allows. |
stormdragon (6013) | ||
| 754854 | 2009-03-09 22:48:00 | One thing to bear in mind is if you get a graphics card then that'll knock back the amount of addressable RAM in 32-bit Windows, so stick with a low-MB onboard solution unless gaming. Also, this may be of interest: www.anandtech.com |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 754855 | 2009-03-10 02:01:00 | Cheers Chilly I'm aware of the 32bit limitations Primary OS would be Vista Business x64. The only point of keeping Windows XP possibly 32bit was in case something didn't run correctly with Vista |
stormdragon (6013) | ||
| 754856 | 2009-03-24 02:57:00 | Couldn't source a Q6700, so ended up with a Q9400, bit more then I anticipated speeding but I'm happy with the way its running. Supposedly Intel disabled their virtualisation technology in the Q8200 which was part of the whole point of the upgrade. |
stormdragon (6013) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||