Am I a fool to wait for AMD Barcelona 4-core?

[n00bzor]

Is anybody else out there waiting to buy a new Phenom (FX?) quad-core chip from AMD, instead of the Intel QX6700 (which is not a true quad-core, but is really just a dual dual-core)?

 

Am I fool to wait?

 

I could be enjoying (quasi) quad-core goodness right now, at this very moment, from Intel, with delicious DDR2 RAM, and all things spicy and juicy, and super high frame rates and a sky-high 3dMark06 score, and all the while knowing that I got Intel on the inside (which is sweet, no?).

 

Or will my self-denial be rewarded with true AMD @ss-whooping performance, the likes of which my simple self has never conceived of, even with 100% of my brain?

 

Or should I wait even longer, and not slake my hunger for power on the first scrappy little chips that AMD fobs off on us desperate nerds, until possibly until December, '07 , when AMD will possibly unveil the fabulous Barcelona chip, which is supposed to be AMD's new server-grade quad-core CPU, which I guess will be the successor to the Opteron line, and the promise of sweet sweet quad-core overclocking reminiscent of the Opterons?

 

I have never built a computer with an intel chip, should I go over to the dark side? Help me, you Obi-wan Kenobi's of DIY Stret, you are my only hope.

[Praz]

You need to fix your sig.

 

Signatures may not be larger than 650x300 pixels total.

[red930]

I guess the first thing I'd ask is do you really think you need a quad-core chip?

 

I mean seriously - if you're just gaming you don't need a quad-core. Might as well at least wait until the Q6600 drop in price before considering going that route.

[Kingfisher]

I donno, I think the AMD dual cores(socket939) and of course Intel's C2Ds are pretty well fast enough for all of today's tasks as it is.

Going up to quad core is foolish!! unless of course you have money burning a hole in your fool-butt pocket.

[CPDMF]

I wouldn't wait for Barcelona, I would just grab a Q6600 when they drop in price on July 22nd.

 

I really don't think it's foolish to go quad core, we are mainly enthusiasts here, so what is actually necessary shouldn't even be involved in the conversation. That would be like asking if overclocking is really necessary. For the most part it is not necessary but we enjoy it and that's all that counts.

 

Would it be enjoyable to have a quad core CPU? Hell Yes it would and that is why I will buy one at the price drop. I have a decent amount of disposable income, a few apps that will benifit from quad core and it will be a blast to clock. Doesn't sound foolish to me.

[Guest Gir]

Unless u absolutely have to have a quad core, the cpu u have now is great. But it's always fun to upgrade and if you can afford it upgrade and when the barcelona's come out upgrade again if u want. It's not like anyone is eveer done anyways

[Kingfisher]

There is a time and place for everything folks, but as I said, if you have money burning a hole in your pocket go nuts, enjoy.

A guy I work with won $250k on a scratch off lottery ticket game. If I was him I'd go to vegas and buy the best damn looking women I could find and live it up a bit.

If you live in a trailer park and work at wal-mart you'd be foolish, all I am sayin.

[cull]

Yes, I am waiting. I saw a tech demo and it seemed pretty cool. No benchmark apps where allowed to be ran. If your just doing gaming, you don't NEED it, you just 'need' it. Unless you are doing 1080p video editing, a dual core will do you just fine.

 

BTW -- Never built intel either(except for customers)

[n00bzor]

Thanks for the Responses!

 

First off - I do not work at Walmart or live in a trailer park, but I am not rich either. Basically I have some disposable income to indulge my "hobby", as my wife calls it, but I do not have unlimited funds.

 

Second - I want more cores, and I want them to be fast as freakin' h3ll. I don't want fair to middling performance, I want the best.

 

Third - I guess in the ever-present up-grade cycle of computers, and when you are on a budget like me, you are always guessing is this a high enough performance/$ ratio for me right now, or should I wait a little longer, when the performance/$ will be even higher.

 

Given that quandary, I was just wondering if you guys think it is better to go with the known performance of the Intel quad-core right now, or wait for the promise of super quad core performance this fall from AMD?

 

Right now, I can't decide.

 

Extra Credit Question - does anybody believe the hype that AMD is putting out that the new Barcelona chips will be at least 40% faster than anything Intel has now?

 

Extra Anxiety Detail - 8-cores are due to come out in 2008!

[Kingfisher]

It's all up to you. You probably already decided.

Waiting for the "next best thing" is a cop out imo.

There always is the next best thing around the corner.

[Thasp]

If you buy now, don't buy AMD.. they're so bad compared to current Intel. a 3.6 GHz quad core vs 2.8-3 GHz dual core AMD is even bigger difference than P4-D vs AMD X2.

 

If barcelona is big I'm buying it and throwing these annoying intel chipsets out the window, but until then, there's nothing to look at with AMD. You're not a fool to wait for AMD to come out with something that can compete.

 

However, if you want to buy now, waiting for a quad core to drop to $266 is a great idea.. it's in the middle. Great performance, but less wait than barcelona. By the time AMD has a competing quad core they'll be SOL if Intel's quad that goes to 3.2-3.6 GHz costs $266, and once they come out with better Intel'll have an 8core.. these aren't the days of the P4 getting owned anymore.

[cull]

40%? No. A noticeable increase in CPU intensive tasks? Yes.