MJCRO Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 I mean the chip is, good in most benchies, the old C2Q's are still beating it by a good amount, these chips seems well suited for the budget builders, but like cmon, where is Intel going with this LGA 1156? 1366 is obivously more suitable, they should of just stuck by one socket, and lower the prices for X58's. I'd def. upgrade then. At this rate, Intel's gonna lose me a customer, probably my next build will be a 890GX board with the new Phenom II X6 chip! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 Hey ccokeman, have you played WoW at all since you did your testing? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 Hey ccokeman, have you played WoW at all since you did your testing? Snickers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Smith Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 Pros: Price I would like to see what this thing can do with a decent motherboard. Great review as always, 3.33ghz for $200 is quite the chip. What? For $200 I'd certainly grab either an i5-750 or a Phenom II X4. Both just own it in almost every benchmark. If you wanted an IGP, there are quite a few 785G motherboards under the $100 mark. Besides the power consumption, I can't see any reason to grab this setup. The lower-end i3s are greatly priced though. Ccoke, does the ASUS board allow overclocking the IGP? If it can't be overclocked and the HD4200 can, I'd still go with AMD's offerings. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
werty316 Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 The price wouldn't be a plus in my book when there are far superior chips in the same price point. What? For $200 I'd certainly grab either an i5-750 or a Phenom II X4. Both just own it in almost every benchmark. +1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 What? For $200 I'd certainly grab either an i5-750 or a Phenom II X4. Both just own it in almost every benchmark. If you wanted an IGP, there are quite a few 785G motherboards under the $100 mark. Besides the power consumption, I can't see any reason to grab this setup. The lower-end i3s are greatly priced though. I asked him the very same question last night. You answered the question within your question, price. What you just listed is close to $300 performance aside. For $200 you get decent performance better power consumption and you don't need a video card. That is his reasoning for it. I am sure he will clarify it more when he sees this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Smith Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 (edited) I asked him the very same question last night. You answered the question within your question, price. What you just listed is close to $300 performance aside. For $200 you get decent performance better power consumption and you don't need a video card. That is his reasoning for it. I am sure he will clarify it more when he sees this. Bosco, for $200 you only have the i5 661. You still need to get a motherboard, which also brings you around the $300 mark. Edited January 4, 2010 by The Smith Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted January 4, 2010 Posted January 4, 2010 Doh I was looking at another CPU my bad. I didn't agree with as a pro either but ccokeman justified it based on power consumption and on board graphics. Now another pro to it is that this is a new platform where is AMD is not. I can see both sides of the picture but personally I lean toward a con. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkrow21 Posted January 5, 2010 Posted January 5, 2010 whts the difference in this if its 32nm,65nm etc?? nm = nanometers (very small measure of length). If the processor is built on a 65nm fabrication process (?), it consumes more power (less efficient, releases more heat) whereas if the same processor was built on a 45nm fabrication process (?), it consumes less power, and in turn becomes more efficient and releases less heat than the same processor built on a 65nm fabrication process (?). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted January 5, 2010 Posted January 5, 2010 I am intrested to see if the prices are going to drop on these once AMD's CPU's are launched. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Smith Posted January 5, 2010 Posted January 5, 2010 I am intrested to see if the prices are going to drop on these once AMD's CPU's are launched. Oh. I wasn't even aware until you mentioned them. I've just read the news post. I would not be surprised if Intel did not touch its prices. We'll see how they compare when the CPUs get to OCC's labs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted January 5, 2010 Posted January 5, 2010 Oh. I wasn't even aware until you mentioned them. I've just read the news post. I would not be surprised if Intel did not touch its prices. We'll see how they compare when the CPUs get to OCC's labs. Agreed everything will come into play once we see the performance from AMD. I for one am hoping for some nice performance Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts