Huge processor confusion. PLEASE HELP :(

[Persocom]

Hey folks. This is incredibly sad. I consider myself pretty well educated when it comes to pcs, but this is doing my nut in.

I'm planning on selling off my current system (asus T3 AIO, amd 4600+ cpu, 2gb ram, 7900gt graphics card) and I've been researching all the best bits for my new build.

Have been looking at intels new 45nm range. Either the E5200, or the E7400 to plop into a nice new P5Q-EM mobo.

Here's the problem. I can't understand why these newer intel models will be better than my dual core x2 4600+, which it claims runs at 2.4ghz per core, and I'm COMPLETELY lost on the whole FSB, L1, L2 thing as well.

Can someone give me an explanation (be as rude as you want to be lol) to clear me up and tell me why I should buy a processor thats much more expensive than what I have :P

thanks

[smouty]

You must have a reason to sell? Although I prefer Intel I would look at real world benchmarks before making my choice of CPU.

[sj33]

Quite simply, they are more efficient processors, and can do more 'per Mhz' than an AMD processor at the same clock speed.

[MattyD]

Intel processors are leagues ahead of anything AMD have to offer at the moment. The only reason to consider AMD at all these days is price, but only then if you're not looking for heavy performance - just everyday web browsing and office work really.

One massive advantage Intel chips have these days is their better floating point capability. They can crunch numbers like nobody's business so anything that relies on lots of math - all kinds of graphics, 3D stuff, simulation and number modelling etc - always performs a lot better on Intel.

[smouty]

One massive advantage Intel chips have these days is their better floating point capability. They can crunch numbers like nobody's business so anything that relies on lots of math - all kinds of graphics, 3D stuff, simulation and number modelling etc - always performs a lot better on Intel.

Add to that list video or audio encoding/transcoding.

[Matt]

If I was buying now, I'd only be looking at the i7. Quad core ensures it will last longer, and the i7 architecture is the best out there by quite a margin. It whips the last gen Intel chips, and laughs at the AMDs By moving the memory controller onboard, Intel have finally taken away the only advantage AMD had left.

Sure it's an expensive CPU, but the lowest spec 920 will overclock nicely and get up to speeds of i7s costing 4 times as much. Motherboards are expensive.

If you're looking to spend less, the Quad Q6600 is still the best around in the price range, and clocks to 3ghz+ on air.

Look around for benchmarks online, but only compare the charts showing what you'll be doing. Yes, as has been pointed out, Intel CPUs are great at video and audio encoding - but speaking as someone who does actually use their PC for film making, I can safely say I spend less that 0.001% of my total PC usage on encoding So shaving 5 seconds off a minute encode would mean absolutely nothing to me. Likewise, if you're just looking for something to use just for the internet, email, and office applications, I don't think it's even worth you upgrading TBH.

If it's gaming, i7 all the way, with a nice powerful single GPU card in it

Worth considering what OS you want as well. If you're looking at Win7 (and who isn't ) then again, I'd go i7, with 6gig RAM.

[Persocom]

Not gaming, but thankfully, some clear answers from all of you

My pc is a work tool. I don't need anything processor heavy, so a good dual core is plenty for me. I never, repeat, never game on a pc ever. I just need something fast, silent and impressive

[abigsmurf]

To be honest, if ultra high performance isn't a priority you could build yourself an Matx (small form factor motherboard) based AMD system and put an energy efficient phenom /Phenom II cpu on it.

Will save money (£60 for a decent motherboard, £80-100 for the CPU) and if you pick the right case and coolers well, will be very quiet

[Persocom]

thats what I'm doing abigsmurf cept, I'm going down the intel route. The processor I got in mind is only 45nm. The motherboard is also nice and green too (and its an matx.)

Small, silent and efficient. Case will probably be an antec cube of some sort. Unless someone can suggest something smaller that will accomodate a microatx, one 1tb samsung spinpoint f1 and a dvd writer

I'm gonna stick away from amd now... they've had their day. With the motherboard I'm after, I won't even need a graphics card I'm sure. Its all pretty well thought out

[eastyy]

have to say i was always with amd....every new motherboard i got...always had problems

But recently got a intel quad core with new motherboard...was quite shocked when after fitting everything it booted and worked first Time Lol

Have to say i think my set up with last a while now...geforce 8800 and quad core....the newer graphics cards dont Seem a big leap at all though i think a dual core would be enough to play most games decently

[Matt]

I'd been AMD for years - for a while, they were both best price and performance, particularly with the first 64 bit CPUs. Moved back to Intel a few years back because the C2D is an amazing chip, far better than the overheating POS P4d

AMD are playing catchup now. They'll come back eventually, look at what they pulled off through ATI when nVidia had trounced them last generation.

Persocom, look for the SUGO SG case range. That's what I use. It's not the smaller mini HTPC case around, but it's the most functional for my money, and can take full size cards and PSUs.

[abigsmurf]

AMD are currently ruling the low end of the market, you can build a 1080p capable media center PC that runs cool and quiet for £300 (£350 if you want a blu ray drive). The big advantages they have is their low ends are better, cheaper and cooler than intel (celerons are horrible and the low end core 2s run hot).

AMD are in trouble because they fell asleep and are a generation of CPU behind Intel. When the mainstream core i7s hit in the winter, there will be a vast gulf between the companies. They have a brilliant budget graphics card coming out though: the 4770. Offers performance roughly on the same level at the 4870 but for £70-ish. Runs cooler (die shrink) so should overclock like a beast.

[Persocom]

Persocom, look for the SUGO SG case range. That's what I use. It's not the smaller mini HTPC case around, but it's the most functional for my money, and can take full size cards and PSUs.

Absolutely perfect. The Sg05 is just what I'm after. If my plans for the antec fall through, I'll order this from scan. I'll grab a wee slot loading dvd writer as well. This is gonna be cool. I'm gonna get a pico psu as well. Have a truly silent system

Ah... dicknipples. It's for a mini-itx mobo. Looks like I'm stickin avec le antec.

[smouty]

A bit more expensive but I've always used Shuttles. They are tiny, quiet and so reliable.

My HTPC Shuttle

[abigsmurf]

You typically pay a £50-£100 premium for a shuttle barebones system. It's what's put me off getting one in the past.