Well guys I think I need a HTPC and I am having trouble picking my CPU, I have always loved AMD but the new Core 2 Duo's are out proforming even the AMD FX. So here is what I am looking at, I found an AMD Athlon FX-62 for $200, which need less to say is a great price. My other chose is the Intel core 2 duo E6600 which I found for $200 which is also a great price.

Heres how they stack up...
AMD- 2.8 GHz dual core 1000 MHz Bus speed
Intel - 2.4 GHz dual core 1066 MHz Bus speed

The proformance test say the core 2 duo is the way to go, but the AMD FX is top of line when it comes to AMD CPU's. I really love AMD so I don't think that I could decide, becuase ever since the FX has come out I have wanted one, and now that its in my price range I don't know if the best way to go! Any help at all would be appreciate.

Take a look at heat output & power usage.

I think the core2duo has better ratings.

I'm an AMD guy also, but this is a no-brainer for me.

the only reason I would get another AMD right now from their present line is if I was upgrading my present system & wanted to save on a motherboard.

If you can't wait, build one with the Celeron Conroe-L core, or a $84 Allendale Core2 Duo.

Personally, I am waiting for the next-gen AMD right now.

If you absolutely must build one, and you can overclock (or at least properly follow any one of the hundreds of OC guides), then Intel leaves a lot on the table for you, I would expect a healthy 1-1.5Ghz overclock on that CPU with a stock HS/Fan. Whereas AMD doesn't really overclock unless you have an Opteron Chip.

The ceiling on Intel seems to be 3.8-3.9 ghz with the best heatpipe cooler ($60-80), needless to say that is a great deal, I recommend the 650i nforce motherboard, it has posted at more than double it's rated FSB (how you overclock the Core2), has tons of features, and is only $100.

Basically if you care about overclocking at all go Intel, if you like AMD, then get one. I wouldn't get the FX, the only benefit is unlocked multiplier, correct?

See this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16819103773

Basically the same thing (Windsor, 90nm, 2x1MB lvl2 cache) with a "locked" multiplier for $170, and a stock speed of 3.0Ghz, so you don't need to overclock it either. Since the multiplier is only locked on higher multiples, and you likely wouldn't get much past 3.0ghz on the FX-62, this is a fair trade-off. Most overclocking is done with a reduced multiplier (fully supported by the 6000+), and a raised FSB to get a better ratio between FSB and Core clock speeds.

So that is what you have, I like AMD, but since I am into overclocking they have disappointed me on my last build (4600+ x2, can't overclock, but I might not have the right HS/Fan combo, Zalman doesn't make a "flower" for the AM2 socket , and that is what let my San Diego core 939 hit 3.0Ghz stable)

As far as I know the only difference between the FX and the Athlon 64 X2 is the multipliers being unlocked. When I was looking at the combos on newegg I noticed that the 6000+ was only $4 less with the same motherboard as the FX-62 combo, so which of the two is better? I don't really what motherboards are good and can overclock well, so does anyone know of a good AM2 motherboard? I am also looking at 775 motherboards for intel. I'm still not sure which way to go but intel might be in the lead right now. I have heard about AMD's new CPU's that should be faster than anything intel has right now, and its going to be AM2 like most of the Athlon 64 X2's and FX, so I need to look at that as well.

I really like the 6000+ it is $170 and 200mhz faster guaranteed.

The DFI Infinity is an awesome board, the SLI version was only $4 more when I bought it. The overclocking options are the most complete I have ever seen. It is here, and the price is down to $80: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16813136021

The non-SLI version is $10 cheaper if you don't care about SLI (and who would with $280 8800GTS cards available?), it is the exact same board without the SLI bridge and an "enable sli" resistor on the northbridge missing. I tried SLI, any single video card will deliver 50% more performance for the same price as a pair of lesser cards, I only got it for experimentation purposes with multiple video cards (3+ pci-e)

The best board really depends on what you need, I have never been let down by nvidia boards.

Do you overclock? Are you experienced at overclocking? Can you afford to spend $50-60 on a heatsink to hit 3+ Ghz with an $84-100 Intel processor?

Basically Intel is only worth it if you overclock, the way that AMD is slashing prices means that they are the better deal at stock speeds right now.

I would choose one of these boards for oc'ing an intel, they got rave reviews at vr-zone.com: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList....=%2475+-+%24100

For cooling read this: http://www.anandtech.com/casecoolingpsus/showdoc.aspx?i=2981 Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme seems to allow overclocks up to close to 4Ghz.

I wouldn't just jump into overclocking without experience, and a HTPC is an area that you don't want to have a hot and unstable processor for sure.

AMD is still a more economical processor at idle, because Cool n quiet can throttle more than speedstep, and in a HTPC you won't be maxing it all the time, so the AMD might run cooler and cost you less on electricity.

Any way you slice it you should get an 8400GS for $48 ( http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16814127296 ), that card can do full Purevideo HD-DVD/Blu-ray decoding (you could get by with a Lima Manila core[AMD] or a Celeron Conroe-L most likely[$30-50] if all you wanted was HD decoding), and VR-Zone.com shows how to overclock that into 8500GT territory Stock for free!

Edit: I just realized you put up the FSB, you cannot compare the AMD and Intel FSB. AMD uses Hypertransport technology which moves a lot more information. AMD also has an integrated memory controller with low latencies on the CPU, this means that Memory does not travel on the FSB. (Intel has the memory controller on the motherboard, meaning that the memory has to transfer on their pitiful FSB pipe, further clogging it. In reality this has next to no bearing on consumer use, just Server uses, but I mention it because you were comparing the FSB, which shouldn't be done.)

Not true. An AMD X2 6000+, thats runs at 3 GHZ is as fast as a core2 that runs at 2.13. A core 2 has more ops/cycle, which makes it more efficient.

For a CPU I would definitely suggest the E6420. it is the exact same as the E6600 with a lower clock speed and a lower price. I have the E6420 and I've easily OC'd it to about 3.2Ghz. It would smash the pants off of anything AMD has made to date.

For a motherboard the GIGABYTE P35 LGA 775 Intel ATX Motherboard its a well made board from a quality company.

Ram, this is what I have and its fast. 4-4-3-5. bad ass stock timings. G.Skill 2GB DDR2 800Mhz

I just went off... so what else would you need?

Ok I think I'm going to go with the E6750 I found it for $200 which seems like a great price. I don't know which motherboard to go with yet so if you know of a good intel board let me know. Thanks for the help guys!

Not debating that, but the fact is that AMD has a much wider FSB and an integrated Memory controller, so usable ops/cycle isn't that much different (what can the c2d do through the little pipe? Intel knows this, which is why they have sped up to 1333mhz in an attempt to keep data moving)

Basically he hasn't said what type of HTPC he needs, if he is going to leave it transcoding all the time then he probably wants dual-core, but if not then he might as well get a Conroe-L Celeron and save his money, they clock to 3Ghz on stock cooling and will play his media just fine.

What does the P35 mobo offer that the Nforce 650i doesn't?? Is it worth the extra $40-50? See these reviews and judge for yourself. The nforce can overclock really well.

http://www.vr-zone.com/index.php?i=4939 "Without any mods at all, I took this motherboard up to 520MHz FSB!!"

http://www.vr-zone.com/index.php?i=4874

I wouldn't spend more money on a P35 if the 650i will do that!!

Edit:nvm, it is about the same price: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16813128044

Basically I don't know right now all that I want this HTPC to do but I don't want to be limited, which is why I am opting for dual core. Also I just read the the core 2 duo's don't do hyper threading, why is that? I like the
Abit Fatal1ty motherboard alot it looks like it can handle any thing I can throw at it. For the graphics card I like the 7900GT (found for 130), 7600GT, and the 7300GT.

most 650/680 chipsets I've seen have really bad overheating northbridge problems. The OC like mad, but aren't always rock stable at high overclocks.

Hyperthreading is, in a nutshell, fake dual cores.


a 7600GT should be fine if he's going to watch some HDtv and everything.

Mine handles everything I throw at it. It even plays Oblivion at 1440x900 with EVERYthing maxxed out + lots of visual mods at about 20-30fps, which is playable for me.

OK, if he wants to do HD as I said the 8400, 8500, and 8600 series have Pure HD decoding, the others Do Not (including 7600, 7900 and 8800)

The 8600GT would be about the same as the 7600GT, Be sure if you game that you are getting a card with GDDR3 RAM.

I have a 7900GS and It OC's to 700Mhz on the core, basically I would get a 7900 series card with 512MB of RAM if you want to Game at all, it is faster than the 8600 series because it has a wider memory bus-width.

Hyperthreading is crap, that is why it is dropped, it is one of the Intel "buzzwords" that they overhyped, it is just garbage, you don't want it. (Since the Core2 Duo is already got more than one core, why would it need "fake" multi-core??)

Yes the northbridges get hot, I have never had a problem, they are rated for the heat, and any PC builder worth his salt will make sure that there is enough airflow through the case that it is a non-issue.

If you don't know what you want to do, I would pick up the 8600 Series card with GDDR-3, preferably 512MB of it, that way you can game (They are really close to the 7900 series for gaming, and offer full HD-DVD decoding, even if you have a Celeron or Sempron). If you build it, make sure to have an exhuast fan, and I always add a front fan in the case to ensure good airflow. I use Arctic Silencer 92mm and 120mm fans when I can, they are cheap and really quiet. Be sure you get a case with a nice fan spot in the front.

I like you.



Another PC guy I can talk to...

Ha ha, that is cool.

It is such a tough choice because the minimum level to run just about any program is 2.0Ghz on an AMD, and 1.6Ghz on a Core2. Anything else is mostly icing on the cake.

It is amazing to see how much excess processing power is out there, and people still with 256MB and 512MB of ram and a couple dozen spyware progs bogging down the PC and complaining that it is slow.

Worse yet is the Ghz and mhz wars, a 1.6 Core2 is better than a 2.4Ghz P4, and a 1000mhz Hypertransport bus can handle more than a 1333mhz FSB, and has less to carry because the memory controller doesn't communicate over it. I have been using a 500Mhz Mobile P3 in this laptop for dial-up internet the last month, and the only thing I would like is more than 120mb of RAM and a proper video card (It doesn't even have an SiS, Trident, Via, or Intel ), but I am running Win2000 Pro SP4 (it is just like XP but needs less resources), and running Firefox on it.

I have been a AMD man from the 386 40mhz came out. It was painfull but I weighed all options and came to the conclusion that the best bang for your buck (back in January) is the core 2duo. This is what I used to build my HTPC and it is blazing fast.

I would just like to comment that the 8500 and 8600 series cards from nvidia can do full h.264 decoding. I don't think that's true of the 8400, and I know that's not the case for the 8800. The 2400 and 2500 series from ATI are similar. They do H.264 and VC1 decoding. The issue here is that at the moment, both vendors only support this decoding under Vista at the moment. It's not supported in the drivers for the other operating systems.

The 8400 is the same core as the 8500 and 8600, it can do full decoding. And look at the spec sheet here, it is obviously an 8500GT with a 64-bit memory interface: http://www.nvidia.com/page/geforce8.html

See this page (I put the bold in): http://www.nvidia.com/page/purevideo_hd.html


I thought I mentioned Vista support (sorry if I didn't), it will still accelerate in XP, just not full decode.

Yeah I'm going to get the 8400GT I think. To me it looks like there all almost the exact same but the 8500 and 8600 are much more than the 8400. I am also going to go with an intel core 2 duo 6750, for some odd reason its cheaper than the 6600, and the 6700, anyone know why??

Yea I thought that was weird also about the E6750, but kinda cool at the same time.

I got an e6750 about 2 months ago when they came out, and it is an amazing proc. It is at 3.3GHZ EASY on stock air and thermal paste. I really don't see any competition when it comes to AMD vs Intel right now, Intel has it. I use an Asus p5k-vm, which is a micro board, which is perfect for htpc's and it's relatively cheap for such a good overclocker. It doesn't have RAID but it pretty much has everything else.

The e6750 is cheaper because most online companies got them for cheaper then they got their e6600's and their e6700's. Since they don't want to take a loss they still have them as more expensive. You also need a 1333Mhz compatible motherboard to use the new e6x50's, which means people with a 1066mhz board will still want to pick up the e6x00's. The e6750 is a much better chip than both the e6600 and the e6700, but since the supply of the e6600's and the e6700's are low, they can still charge a premium. If you want a cool efficient chip for your computer, you defiantly want the e6750, or at least the e6550.

As for the video card, you can get 7900gs's for pretty cheap now most places I shop (about 100) and they are waaay better than an 8400, it would be like night and day for gaming, but it doesn't have the hi-def features you are probably looking for. In this case, I would personally look towards ATI/AMD.

I just want to reinforce that the e6750 is a better cheap in EVERY aspect than the e6700 and the e6600, it doesn't really make sense that it is cheaper, but it's because it's a newer model. It is better, way better.