I'll wait for that then rather than spending 400 quid now.

amd are very good cpu's. but the new core duo amd cant touch. intel has the better high end cpu's atm.

i'd wait till quad core in the new year though personally

Flatmate has just got an intel 805, 60 quid chip thats 2.66GHz stock...but is running it at 3.6GHz (aftermarket fan) and its keeping up with cpus that are about five times the price! Maybe AMDs aren't so value for money as people first thought ;)

[Edited on 20-10-2006 by Dom]

yup AMD, plus when the AM3 and Quad core hits end of 2007 i shall be upgrading to them. Not a fan of Intel.

value for money, as Drunkenfool said, AMD every time.

If I was upgrading, I'd have to buy a new motherboard anyway (current one doesn't support PCi-E), so I'm free to choose between the two...

Am veering more towards Intel, having heard a few decent reviews of the Core2Duo chips and their clockability.

So far I'm swaying towards the Intel but buying a new Mobo would mean purchasing new RAM, probably going for something like http://www.ebuyer.com/UK/product/113951/rb/22545703240

and DDR 667 RAM.

I just don't want to spend all this money knowing the AMD would have been a sufficient upgrade.

quote:

---

Originally posted by --Dave--

quote:

---

Originally posted by John
I'll buy depending on whether the performance diffrence is worth the extra you pay for the intel.

If the % increase in performance doesn't tally with the increase in price i'll stick with amd.

---

i heard a figure of 25% for the most expensive chips in terms of difference in performance between the two (Intel being more powerful) That's quite a lot...

---

The new intels are far more advanced than and AMD

Core. 2. DUO!!! Look on overclockers, look on any review sites. The Intel's are wayyyyy in front right now

quote:

---

Originally posted by John
I'll buy depending on whether the performance diffrence is worth the extra you pay for the intel.

If the % increase in performance doesn't tally with the increase in price i'll stick with amd.

---

AMD

AMD all the way!

I'll buy depending on whether the performance diffrence is worth the extra you pay for the intel.

If the % increase in performance doesn't tally with the increase in price i'll stick with amd.

The new dual-core AM2 is supposed to be pretty good, and AMD's have always had a good reputation for overclocking. However, Intel have played a trump card with the Conroe/Core2Duo ships, as they are absolutely rock-solid for overclocking.

Someone on another forums, who has the E6700 chip, managed to overclock his cores from 2.67GHz to 4GHz, keeping it stable, using water-cooling.

So, my allegiance seems to be moving back towards Intel again...

new dual core is meant to be the bollocks. never experienced em myself though

yeh well it will have 2mb cache with it being dual core but the Intel has 4mb.

AMD always. get the 4400+ with 1mb cache, it flys!!!

AMD!! No contest!

I was under the impression that AMD was the better of the two.

Ive always gone AMD and never had a problem so I'm a bit biased, but they always seem to be the best value for money.

Yeah considering the 4400+ has the 1mb and 1mb cache compared to the 512.

WHAT TO DOOOO

im also in the same situation.
The X2 chips are soo cheap at the moment is ridiclous!

but if your after the best of the best at the moment, the intel dual cores are the way forward.. but you will pay more for them.
Overclockers are selling the X2 4400 for about £170 if i remember. thats very cheap.

Atm I am in 2 minds!!!

I can either change Mobo and get a Intel dual core E6600

My current mobo is also compatable with AMD X2

What would you do?