Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Diablo III
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="drothgery" data-source="post: 4391846" data-attributes="member: 360"><p>No, they just don't have competitive CPUs outside of low-end desktops and multi-socket servers right now. Intel was in a similar situation a few years ago when the Athlon 64 (and especially the Athlon 64 X2) came out and started stomping all over Pentium 4 derivatives (the only place where Intel was clearly better was in notebook chips, where they used the Pentium M family rather than the Pentium 4 family), except that AMD couldn't come close to meeting all the CPU demand out there so Intel sold tons of desktop and server CPUs anyway (not enough manufacturing capacity, and building it up took too long).</p><p></p><p>I mean, if you're going to spend $100-$150 on a CPU, what makes sense to buy right now? From Intel, it's a Core 2 Duo E7200 for $130 (they have a few other things in the price range, but they're all worse). From AMD, it's either an Athlon 64 X2 6000+ for $115 (a 6400+ is $150, and 200 MHz is not worth $35 on the margins) or a Phenom X3 8450 for $125 (same deal, an 8650 is $145). The E7200 is going to win pretty much every benchmark against either (even the highly multithreaded ones vs. the tri-core, because it's a better architecture). </p><p></p><p>For $150-$200 on the Intel side, you're clearly looking at an Core 2 Duo E8400 for $180 (a Core 2 Quad Q6600 for $185 is sort of interesting, but not worth giving up 600 MHz and the advantages of Intel's 45nm chips over their 65nm versions). And the E8400 is faster than any dual-core or tri-core AMD makes. Except where multi-threading helps a lot, it's faster than any quad-core AMD makes -- and there the Q6600 is almost always better. And beyond that you're comparing Q9xxx quads with the top-end Phenoms, and that just doesn't look good for AMD.</p><p></p><p>Now, if you're spending under $100, then AMD's CPUs look pretty good (unless you're one of those crazy overclockers; Intel's current low-end chips overclock quite well), though the Pentium and Celeron dual-cores aren't bad at all (and the E5xxx Pentiums coming in the next few months may pretty much end the budget case for AMD).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="drothgery, post: 4391846, member: 360"] No, they just don't have competitive CPUs outside of low-end desktops and multi-socket servers right now. Intel was in a similar situation a few years ago when the Athlon 64 (and especially the Athlon 64 X2) came out and started stomping all over Pentium 4 derivatives (the only place where Intel was clearly better was in notebook chips, where they used the Pentium M family rather than the Pentium 4 family), except that AMD couldn't come close to meeting all the CPU demand out there so Intel sold tons of desktop and server CPUs anyway (not enough manufacturing capacity, and building it up took too long). I mean, if you're going to spend $100-$150 on a CPU, what makes sense to buy right now? From Intel, it's a Core 2 Duo E7200 for $130 (they have a few other things in the price range, but they're all worse). From AMD, it's either an Athlon 64 X2 6000+ for $115 (a 6400+ is $150, and 200 MHz is not worth $35 on the margins) or a Phenom X3 8450 for $125 (same deal, an 8650 is $145). The E7200 is going to win pretty much every benchmark against either (even the highly multithreaded ones vs. the tri-core, because it's a better architecture). For $150-$200 on the Intel side, you're clearly looking at an Core 2 Duo E8400 for $180 (a Core 2 Quad Q6600 for $185 is sort of interesting, but not worth giving up 600 MHz and the advantages of Intel's 45nm chips over their 65nm versions). And the E8400 is faster than any dual-core or tri-core AMD makes. Except where multi-threading helps a lot, it's faster than any quad-core AMD makes -- and there the Q6600 is almost always better. And beyond that you're comparing Q9xxx quads with the top-end Phenoms, and that just doesn't look good for AMD. Now, if you're spending under $100, then AMD's CPUs look pretty good (unless you're one of those crazy overclockers; Intel's current low-end chips overclock quite well), though the Pentium and Celeron dual-cores aren't bad at all (and the E5xxx Pentiums coming in the next few months may pretty much end the budget case for AMD). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
Diablo III
Top