Best Desktop system out there?

crackdaddy said:
So your saying, the the INTEL is better at every price point, and AMD offers no value whatsoever at any budget when compared to Intel?

Guys you need to focus a bit better on the question. I asked at what price point is that?

I'm going to start calling you guys Repo since you share the exact same distorted view.

Tell you what, I'll bet you a coke the average user will not tell the difference performance wise from an I5 system and an phenom x6.

Are you claiming that they will?
Click to expand...

No, but in the current situation, intel does offer better performance for the price.

It is a fact that the 2500k performs better than any X6. (unless all you do all day is encode videos, which the OP has not indicated that they do)

AMD does offer significant value in the sub $100 range, but really anything higher than that is eclipsed by the i3 2100 and i5 series.

Maybe when bulldozer comes out, they will be competitive again, but for now, it is an indisputable fact they Intel performs better for the money.

Here are some professional reviews showing how the X6 does not compete with the 2500K in much other than encoding. The X6's lose almost every time in games:
http://guru3d.com/article/core-i5-2500k-and-core-i7-2600k-review/13
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/14


Just to clear your notions of fanboyism:
processors i have owned/own (desktop): Pentium4, Celeron D, AMD 550 BE, AMD 1055T, intel i5 650, intel i7 920, intel i7 860 (in use), AMD athlon II 240 (in use)

(mobile): AMD 3200+ (in use) , AMD RM-70, Intel T6400 (inuse), intel i5 460m (inuse)


5 AMD 7 intel. (only 5 if you don't count stuff that wasn't my decision (Penium4 and the T6400)

pretty even split if you ask me.
 
crackdaddy said:
Is there any point where you will suggest an AMD system?
At what price point exactly?





You did. In the post just before the last one.



But keep trolling.
Click to expand...

That was an ambiguous statement. That was not referencing any processor in specific.

You're starting to get on my nerves. Stop trolling.

crackdaddy said:
So your saying, the the INTEL is better at every price point, and AMD offers no value whatsoever at any budget when compared to Intel?

Guys you need to focus a bit better on the question. I asked at what price point is that?

I'm going to start calling you guys Repo since you share the exact same distorted view.

Tell you what, I'll bet you a coke the average user will not tell the difference performance wise from an I5 system and an phenom x6.

Are you claiming that they will?
Click to expand...

Actually, no, we never claimed that. AMD holds the crown for <$200 processors, sans the i5 750.

The price point is <= $700 in my opinion. But, if you don't need a bunch of GPU power, then getting a superior processor isn't a bad idea.

I don't get that reference, but okay. If you want to play that game, I'll just report your posts.

It depends entirely on what you define as the average user. For someone who plays the eGO games, probably not, unless it's BC2. If they do anything that isn't very well multithreaded, they aren't that different. If it's a single threaded thing such as gaming, the stronger/superior architecture will win. If the end user can tell the difference or not is dependent on what game they're running.

Now stop trolling.
 
Report my post for what?
For pointing out what you said?
Sorry.


http://guru3d.com/article/core-i5-2500k-and-core-i7-2600k-review/21

Please see this, by your post in games like BF2 that take advantage of multi cores. The Difference between the 17 and the X4 at resolution above 1024 is clearly absent. I suspect the price is not.

So for the average user here and the most demanding thing they run on their pc, is BF2, you think the i5 still offers the best bang for the buck? I'd rather see them save the extra money and get the i7.

I'm saying for the guy/girl that checks email, write a paper in word, games a little bit, they won't be able to tell the difference between ANY quad core by any manufacturer. That's what I'm saying, its not until you get into the power users do you see or more importantly "feel" any difference in one and the other.

BTW the benchmarks for the sandy bridge memory bandwidth is awesome and impressive. Too bad it doesn't really help the avg gamer here.
 
Last edited:
No, for spamming and starting arguments based off false information.
 
crackdaddy said:
Report my post for what?
For pointing out what you said?
Sorry.


http://guru3d.com/article/core-i5-2500k-and-core-i7-2600k-review/21

Please see this, by your post in games like BF2 that take advantage of multi cores. The Difference between the 17 and the X4 at resolution above 1024 is clearly absent. I suspect the price is not.

So for the average user here and the most demanding thing they run on their pc, is BF2, you think the i5 still offers the best bang for the buck? I'd rather see them save the extra money and get the i7.

I'm saying for the guy/girl that checks email, write a paper in word, games a little bit, they won't be able to tell the difference between ANY quad core by any manufacturer. That's what I'm saying, its not until you get into the power users do you see or more importantly "feel" any difference in one and the other.

BTW the benchmarks for the sandy bridge memory bandwidth is awesome and impressive. Too bad it doesn't really help the avg gamer here.
Click to expand...

If you bench, memory badwidth is appreciated, and notably lacking from amd parts :thumbup:

the 2500K and the X6 cost the same though, and it is pretty apparent that the 2500k is faster in most tasks.


BFBC2 is one of the few games that can take advantage of 6 cores (mostly because AMD paid them, but that is another story)

if you look at real benches, the SB parts win by a fair margin.

http://guru3d.com/article/core-i5-2500k-and-core-i7-2600k-review/22
 
Po, Wait so if you respond its a post? If I respond its spam?
What did I state that was false, exactly?

RE, Yea, I got a bunch of Intel's, they are great chips.
Why do you think tomshardware use a AMD for a $500 build?
 
crackdaddy said:
Po, Wait so if you respond its a post? If I respond its spam?
What did I state that was false, exactly?

RE, Yea, I got a bunch of Intel's, they are great chips.
Why do you think tomshardware use a AMD for a $500 build?
Click to expand...

crackdaddy said:
Re,
Unfortunately, users do far more with our pc's than run benchmarks.
Click to expand...

BC2 is a horrible measure for overall performance is the point i was trying to make.

3DM11 is a bit more evenly balanced.


(you can pretty much ignore vantage, it is pretty intel biased too)


used AMD in their $500 build because SB wasn't out yet, or they coundn't fit intel into the budget without making too many sacrafices.


I don't disagree with you. AMD is great for low budget builds, but at the present time, for enthusiast builds, there is nothing that beats the price/performance of the 2500k
 
Yeah, seriously guys. Chill out? I mean, I'm just as passionate about computer parts, but there is no point in like having a full out argument about it...especially when you could've been arguing about this like in PM'ing? You know?

I didn't think my thread would cause a full on argument over chips >.<
 
Urgh. I would do a build right now, but my internet is being so fail. It won't even load the pages.
 
Ph?bus said:
Urgh. I would do a build right now, but my internet is being so fail. It won't even load the pages.
Click to expand...

Aw. I feel your pain. My internet doesn't like to do anything. I think its download and uploading speed is in the decimals, actually.
 
Actually the more I look into a intel, the more likely I would be to recommend one based on memory bandwidth alone if they were building a workstation.

But I would love to see a gaming system based on an AMD where people put all the money they saved and put it towards a killer graphics card and psu and say Ok. I built this for $700 now build me the best intel rig you can and spend no more than this and lets run 3 of the most popular game titles and see how they fare head to head. Its ok, this debate has been going on for like 10 years now. I'm not mad :)


BTW- Just to be clear, for most people here looking to build a pc. (Gamers) The cpu does not matter NEAR as much as the GPU/Video card. So for people to say this cpu is better than this and all you do is play Left For Dead or BF2 or whatever. Its kinda nonsense. Now maybe I'm being silly for suggesting to go with a $60 mobo and a $125 cpu and go crazy on the video card, but considering where your at and what your asking, I can't help but think crazy like that.
 
Last edited:
especially because low end biostar boards (i think that is what you suggested origionally) are not known for their stability
 
Last edited:
Re,

l've used these biostars for 10 years+ on budget builds, on at least, 30 pc's. They are horrible, If you don't like rock solid boards.

BTW my son has that exact same board I suggested, for $50 it might be the best motherboard value ever. It has more features than My ASrock board that I spend $30 more dollars on and just as stable. It has ACC/core unlocking, FSB overclocking, more features than it should have for a $50 board.

I've got to start reading more, and less of this actually using stuff, because it's really keeping me in the dark about these stability issues. Thanks for that, because I would have never have known that if you didnt tell me because he's had his machine for a month now and its never gave him a problem of any type. It just works. Not sure what else its supposed to do.

So, do you disagree about quad core CPU power differences being a bogus issue for a gaming machine or not?

Not sure what your saying, sounds like your just looking for something else to point out wrong.
 
Lady, I'm sorry, but I can't find your budget in this thread. Can you repost that for us so we can whip up some more builds to throw your way?

Also:
1. Is the chipset manufacturer for your GPU (i.e. AMD/'ATi' or nVidia or Intel or AMD for CPU) a deal breaker or should we just go for whatever is the best bang for your buck?
2. Any other limitations/enhancements we should keep in mind like how much storage space you need, etc.?
3. You mentioned gaming and Photoshop, right? Do you Photoshop extensively or is this more of a gaming rig?

If I missed any of that, sorry! I just wanna double check.
 
crackdaddy said:
Re,

l've used these biostars for 10 years+ on budget builds, on at least, 30 pc's. They are horrible, If you don't like rock solid boards.

BTW my son has that exact same board I suggested, for $50 it might be the best motherboard value ever. It has more features than My ASrock board that I spend $30 more dollars on and just as stable. It has ACC/core unlocking, FSB overclocking, more features than it should have for a $50 board.

I've got to start reading more, and less of this actually using stuff, because it's really keeping me in the dark about these stability issues. Thanks for that, because I would have never have known that if you didnt tell me because he's had his machine for a month now and its never gave him a problem of any type. It just works. Not sure what else its supposed to do.

So, do you disagree about quad core CPU power differences being a bogus issue for a gaming machine or not?

Not sure what your saying, sounds like your just looking for something else to point out wrong.
Click to expand...

It is a good value, and a generally a good board, but with a 125w quad (Phenom 955 makes a lot more sense than the 840 since it has l3 cache), it is not a good a good match for a 3+1 phase board. Especially knowing the quality of the mosfets on lower-end Biostar boards, it is probably not so great.

It is probably reasonably safe with a 95w processor, but i really would not recommend overclocking at all.

Not trying to diss biostar. Just low end power delivery designs. I love biostar. My current board is a TA890FXE, and it is a beast of a board.
 
runo said:
Lady, I'm sorry, but I can't find your budget in this thread. Can you repost that for us so we can whip up some more builds to throw your way?

Also:
1. Is the chipset manufacturer for your GPU (i.e. AMD/'ATi' or nVidia or Intel or AMD for CPU) a deal breaker or should we just go for whatever is the best bang for your buck?
2. Any other limitations/enhancements we should keep in mind like how much storage space you need, etc.?
3. You mentioned gaming and Photoshop, right? Do you Photoshop extensively or is this more of a gaming rig?

If I missed any of that, sorry! I just wanna double check.
Click to expand...

Main Idea of what I need in a Rig

-I need TONS of storage space. I've taken up to 10,000 photos in the past 7 years. Most of it has been lost due to unreliable systems. Some of it is stored on a friends External hard drive.

-I need a rig that can game. I play Counter Strike Source, Braid, Team Fortress 2, and any other games I may even buy like Killing Floor.

-When I have photoshop, I use it extensively for most of photography and even for sketching up ideas. I save lots of copies and scrap work.

-It's got to multitask; I like to have many programs open at once for different uses. I'm sick of compromising my needs for the sake of the CPU usage of my system.

-I also have TONS of music and run music programs. Its gotta handle basically all of that at once! Hahaha.
 
ok, given those criteria, i reworked it a bit:

ikq61A.png


changes:
1. went with 2 hdd's. that way you can set up a raid1 array, and if one were to fail, the other would be a perfect copy of it and you would not lose any data.

2. went with 8GB of ram. Helps with multi tasking and photoshop

3. to accommodate the above additions, i had to make some sacrifices.
-Went with 955 instead of the 2500K. But, i did go with a AM3+ ready motherboard, so you will be able to drop in AM3+ cpus when they are released
-knocked it down to a GTS 450. Given the games you listed, none of them are that graphically intensive, so the 450 will be more than adequate. Went with the 450 over something like a 6850, or 5770 because PS supports cuda acceleration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top