I have to buy a new computer and want to know
what kind of CPU you guys would recommend.
I use it mostly for office-work, internet and looking movies
Occassionally playing an older game - nothing fancy.
Actually I use an Athlon XP 1800 which is ok as long as you
dont do to many things at the same time.
You most likely don't want a superfast CPU but the one with the best performance/price-ratio, which is actually quite fast as well so don't worry :P.
I believe low cost range of AMD Athlon's have the best ratio's. Buy a cpu that cost about 100 and I think it will suit your needs ;).
Just get one of the new intel's they are still rocking AMDs and have a ton of OC overhead if you want to in the future.
hey can anyone tell me which cpu to buy
i went to a shop nearby and heard that amd semptron and an asus motherboard will cost about 100$
i actually use it for games,internet and for watching movies
is amd semptron a good processor or is it a crappy one
please anyone tell me thanks in advance
Buy Intel, it's really better than AMD at the moment, unless you are buying low-end processor.
if me, i'll suggest intel. till now, amd temperature still 10c to 20c more than intel cpu. and intel is much more easier to identify it generation, grade and so on. but it was more expensive than amd. This is the reality, you pay for more, you get the better.
Answer is simple: E2160
Best value for money, even if isn't overclocked.
How much are you willing to spend?
i would choose for an E8200 or an E6650 if you like great price/performance in high prices, but if you want a cheaper CPU that is also with good price/performance i would choose AMD Athlon 64 X2, but it's just what you prefer
You should consider buying a CPU with dual core (if wou want to use it for games).
Give us a price and we will tell you a CPU...
It depends what you using it for.
I recommend you to buy the best one.
Get the newly release 45nm Intel dual core E5200.
If you're still looking at what CPU to get, a) get an Intel, as they're pretty far ahead of AMD right now, and b) consider quad-core if your motherboard will allow it. Not a *lot* of software will take advantage of all 4 cores right now, but the price difference between dual- and quad-core CPUs of similar clock speed/cache levels is small, compared to the performance bump you'd get.
| FrankBKK wrote: |
I have to buy a new computer and want to know
what kind of CPU you guys would recommend.
I use it mostly for office-work, internet and looking movies
Occassionally playing an older game - nothing fancy.
Actually I use an Athlon XP 1800 which is ok as long as you
dont do to many things at the same time. |
AMD with integrated graphics by AMD too is the cheapest and most practical for office use
I would go for Phenom x3 e seriesIf you're getting dirt-cheap, yeah, AMD is the way to go. They had a good idea with the 3-core thing -- take quad-cores with one bum core and disable the bad one. Bam, increased yield! I wonder what Intel does with their failed quad-core chips...?
Destroys them, because it is incredibly ghetto to run with a gimped core.
Intel's failure rate is much lower than AMD's anyways, so it wouldn't make any economical sense to produce tri-cores from Intel.
I think that your best option is Intel right now. You really don't want integrated graphics, they are REALLY slow.
| psycosquirrel wrote: |
Destroys them, because it is incredibly ghetto to run with a gimped core.
Intel's failure rate is much lower than AMD's anyways, so it wouldn't make any economical sense to produce tri-cores from Intel.
I think that your best option is Intel right now. You really don't want integrated graphics, they are REALLY slow. |
aaah read the reviews for integrated graphics provided by AMD!!!!
http://www.techamok.com/?pid=4440
also if you really want to be silent especially good solution for an office skip the phenom x3 and get the AMD Athlon 64 2000+
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/Atom-Athlon-Efficient,1997.html
you can run that without any fans also uses less power
STOP SPENDING TOO MUCH MONEY ON OFFICE PCs it's unnecessary!!!...But I don't have to pay for my office PC.
My company will.
And you can't do CAD on integrated, sorry. It just won't work.
You can't do CUDA either.
Or multitask as much as I do.
| psycosquirrel wrote: |
...But I don't have to pay for my office PC.
My company will.
And you can't do CAD on integrated, sorry. It just won't work.
You can't do CUDA either.
Or multitask as much as I do. |
read the dude what he is asking for!!!
for CAD you can't even use gaming cards there are pro cards for this kinda stuff!!!!
also depends on the software some work better with AMD/ATi and some work better with nVidia
my point is to answer user's request is very important i do agree if you want to game you need to buy the expensive intel stuff | fadirocks wrote: |
| psycosquirrel wrote: | ...But I don't have to pay for my office PC.
My company will.
And you can't do CAD on integrated, sorry. It just won't work.
You can't do CUDA either.
Or multitask as much as I do. |
read the dude what he is asking for!!!
for CAD you can't even use gaming cards there are pro cards for this kinda stuff!!!!
also depends on the software some work better with AMD/ATi and some work better with nVidia
my point is to answer user's request is very important i do agree if you want to game you need to buy the expensive intel stuff |
CUDA works far better on gaming cards, as does most of my applications. I prefer a GeForce to a Quadro any day.
All the software works better with NVIDIA, and Intel.
For his needs, Intel is just as good, and just as expensive. AMD has no corner on the market right now.http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-4870,1964.html
I don't have money grow on trees so umm staying with AMD the 4850 will do me well!! Well, a GeForce 9800 GTX is almost exactly the same price for similar performance, so if you have a strong preference of one side of the "war", you can take your pick. I like that NVidia is patching in PhysX support for all their higher-end cards, but I like the *idea* of ATI's AVIVO hardware video decoding. It looks like the NVidia thing is actually happening, though, while AVIVO has been a promise/tech demo for a couple years without much concrete action.
For desktop go for AMD Athlon dual series.
For Laptop go for Intel Dual Core and Core2Duo. If you can afford Centrino2, go for it. Well I have heard AMD Turion is also good for Laptops.
Everything I read suggests that AMD has really just lost this generation on both sides. I have a Turion laptop, and an Intel one -- the Turion one runs hot and slow, while the Core 2 Duo runs cool and fast. It's an extra couple bucks, but absolutely worth it in the long run. There were times when it didn't matter, but frankly the AMD is inferior this time around.
| Ghengis wrote: |
| Everything I read suggests that AMD has really just lost this generation on both sides. I have a Turion laptop, and an Intel one -- the Turion one runs hot and slow, while the Core 2 Duo runs cool and fast. It's an extra couple bucks, but absolutely worth it in the long run. There were times when it didn't matter, but frankly the AMD is inferior this time around. |
that all depends on design!!!
I can tell you my sister laptop that has Turion x2 runs pretty fast and cool but then my friend's umm Single core Centrino runs hot and slow!
and then again Mac Book Pro runs like furnace!!!
but I didn't even mention which generation each one is from! so I'm making unfair comparison again but then you made an unfair comparison too!!!
anyways what's this has to do with anything??? also here is something
THE DUDE IS GONE!!! HE IS NOT RESPONDING TO ANY POSTS AND PROBABLY NOT READING THEM | Quote: |
| Just get one of the new intel's they are still rocking AMDs and have a ton of OC overhead if you want to in the future. |
LOL
