My $1,400 gaming build
Forum Homebuilt Systems : General Homebuilt - My $1,400 gaming build
Generally speaking, these forums favor horsepower, performance, and speed......which is the C2D systems for sure.
HOWEVER, there is some truth that some people here are often blind to the fact that an AM2 system is a very good option for systems that will be primarily gaming rigs. An AMD gaming rig will be cheaper overall, and will still perform very well. So if people can get an AMD at a good price, then it's a very worthwhile purchase. Not as fast as a comparable C2D, but still a very good system.
That fact can often be lost on people around here who push for the most horsepower and speed, but seem to overlook pricing. And especially if someone ISN'T overclocking, then AM2 can be a very attractive product. On the other hand, when you look at the price increase for a C2D over an AM2 on the total cost of a $1,500 system for example, the price difference isn't as significant.
Pros and cons to each, neither is wrong. It really depends on budget available and what the system will be used for/how much horsepower is actually needed realistically.
I've owned both, and I prefer C2D simply because of the speed, but I need that speed as well for the work I do. If someone were mostly doing gaming, surfing the net, playing some mp3's, and doing some light Photoshop......then an AM2 is a very good buy.
Trying to be objective here........I'm no C2D or AMD fanboy. I'm a bang-for-the-buck and specs-for-what-you-need-to-do-the-job fanboy 
Good build
Post some pics when you're done!
AMD is still the gamer's best friend when it comes to a low budget.
Intel is the best when it comes to larger sums of money.
P.A. Semi is the best when it comes to energy efficient dual-cores.
Kobayashi is the best at eating .
Right now, everyone has their strengths. 
| Quote : I'm sure someone will find something to nit-pick about, but overall it looks like a solid build.
|
Well his fanboyism is overriding his basic logic skills. Seriously, I will never understand supporting a company no matter what they do or don't do. You want to waste your money on inferior technology, go ahead - to each their own. But I only paid slightly higher for my C2D and it rocks the poop out of anything AMD has to offer.
If one day, AMD chips rule again, I'll go back to those. I consider myself a smart consumer who uses common sense, not a blind fanboy who supports a company no matter what.
And we could call you a blind bandwagon jumper if you wish. A smart consumer, as mentioned above, takes price into account. It's ironic you mention logic and fanboyism when price is a big factor when considering which is a better buy. Bandwagon jumping is still fanboyism but in a flippant kind of way.
OK, OK, so maybe I spoke a little too soon. Many of you here have made a good point about AMD and price vs. performance, so I was probably wrong in saying the processor that was chosen was flawed logic. I apologize. I guess what I mean to say is fanboyism can be flawed logic. If a Ford fanboy passes on a Toyota that's equally priced, that might be flawed logic. It's well known that Toyota makes much better cars (albeit boring ones) than Ford. Yada, yada, you get the point.
Now, however, I propose this question. Let's say AMD comes out with a new line of chips that smoke the C2D's and AMD's price goes up, will the fanboy still choose AMD because it's the best processor even though it costs a lot more? Because if so, then his argument of buying AMD because it offers great performance for the price will be hypocritical. Unless, of course, he's just a fanboy of buying the best performance for the price. 
Me, I'd buy the AMD even though it costs more because it would be the best processor, period. And yes, it that makes me a bandwagon fanboy, then so be it.
Takes a big person to admit a mistake like that in a public forum, so I commend you on that Pong. Please understand, I wasn't knocking you, just questioning your argument.
However, here's the interesting thing: For you, what you chose makes good sense, and you're happy with it. But for someone else, it might not make sense. Maybe AMD makes good sense for another scenario. And on and on. So it depends on the individual wants, needs, budget, expectations, etc, etc. Everyone's different, and no 2 situations are exactly alike. My requirements and want are different from yours, for example. I'm happy with my setup, does what I need......you're happy with yours, does what you need. I'd call that 2 success stories
As to your question about AMD, pricing going up, performance, etc. Here's my quick take on it:
I would switch back to AMD for better performance IF it was worth the pricetag. That's the key. A 20% performance increase, for example, isn't worth $200 to me. But it might be for alot of people. Again, depends on the individual. It's really all about PRIORITIES. And that's what keeps these forums interesting.......some people's number 1 priority is budget, so it is our DUTY to recommend something that fits their budget, not say "get C2D". Someone else wants hardcore performance as Priority #1, so we tell them Quad and GTX's in SLI.
So, all of us here that offer advice and volunteer our time need to remember that in addition to being objective and factual, we also need to be MINDFUL of what people NEED and WANT for their systems. They come here for our help, and we owe it to them to give them the optimal solution........not the perfect solution, but the BEST one given their budget, wants, needs, abilities, timing, and attitude.
Sorry to sound preachy people, but it's why I'm here. Certainly not for the glory LOL. It's because we are in a position to help others, and we owe it to them and ourselves to be honest in our advice, and thorough in our recommendations. There's alot at stake.......ALOT of money being spent on systems, alot of anxious feelings by rookies, alot of egos on the line, alot of time invested around here.
It is our collective responsibility to be patient, informative, unbiased, factual, thorough, intelligent, fair, and even witty at times to defuse certain tensions. It is not an easy job, and it is all done voluntarily. So I commend everyone here who helps out, who gives their time and knowledge for free, even if it is sometimes a thankless task. So to the AMD fanboys I say Thank You. And to the Intel fanboys I say Thank You. Just try to keep the posters' interests in mind, we're here for them, not ourselves...........
~Skyguy.
Nice post, Skyguy, I agree.
Back on the topic of the thread though: I got my monitor in today, the processor on Saturday. The rest arrives the day after tomorrow
LOL, no prob. I'm sure we can help you OC that 6700 and make 'er run like a cheetah And you got an 8800GTX? I wouldn't worry at all about cranking up resolutions or settings, you'll be good to go. 22" LCDs are where it's at now.....excellent size and performance at great prices. To simply move up to a 24" it's a huge price jump....not worth it.....just move up to a 30" and then plan on paying for it a long time though....tough on the bank account.
AeroB, post an update about your rig when you get it going. And post some pics!!! Let's see that baby! 
Well, it's not that bad playing on lower than native resolution on an LCD... just makes things a little blurry. I've heard people say it's like a poor man's antialiasing
I'll definitely report my experience with the Acer though, I've heard good things so I'm looking forward to using it.
Edit: Will do, Skyguy, you can count on it!
| Quote : Me, I'd buy the AMD even though it costs more because it would be the best processor, period. And yes, it that makes me a bandwagon fanboy, then so be it. |
Why not the X6800 or QX6700 then? 
I know you're not flaming, I wasn't trying to start an argument or anything, just explaining my choices
| Quote : Me, I'd buy the AMD even though it costs more because it would be the best processor, period. And yes, it that makes me a bandwagon fanboy, then so be it. |
Why not the X6800 or QX6700 then?
There's no proof that they're the best processor currently. You can overclock C2D's to perform better than overclocked quads. Quads don't have much room to overclock.
The e6600 is probably the sweetspot, actually, when it comes to C2D's. Fast enough not to bottleneck 8800's and just as fast or faster than the quads.
I was probably part of that hijacking. Mea Culpa. But I'll say something positive about AMD's. They used to make the best processors. Kidding, kidding.
Please mind
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.
