This is the board I am considering. The only downside I have seen so far is the single IDE port... so I guess I'm going to have to make the conversion over to SATA.

Links:

Newegg:
http://www.newegg.com/product/product.asp?item=N82E16813131593
Some review:
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=285&type=expert

Anyone have this? or any experience with it... I love Asus, had the same Asus board (A7N8X Deluxe) for almost 4 years with no problems.

Uh the biggest downside is it's expensive and AMD.

Haha, everyone is bashing AMD right now. The chip I'm putting in this is only going to run me $150, and I didn't see an intel chip to beat it for the price so.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115029

Costs $40 more, but you can make that up by getting a far cheaper motherboard. Plus, the performance difference is not even comparable.

If you absolutely must match the $150 pricepoint, there's also this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115032

It's not nearly as awesome as the other chip ($40 really does make a huge difference), but it's still better than AMD.

It's not a matter of bashing, it's just hard honest truth. AMD is in a world of pain at the moment.

Okay... so what im seeing is... $40 more for 2 more mb of cache on a chip...

Both dual core, both same size chips, both have pretty much the same things, except the intel is 200mhz slower and has 2 more mb of cache... for $40 more...?

blah blah overclock... don't start that game with me. I rarely overclock and if i do its in the later years of a machine when it starts to show its age and needs a boost.

maybe I am missing something? I have been out of the tech loop for a while. The only area I see AMD suffering in these days is trying to keep ATI from going under... ATIs latest/greatest (HD 3870) card cant even hold its own against a 8800GT....

You're looking at hardware specs instead of what really makes it better, the architecture.

The E6750 is an order of magnitude faster than the AMD chip. A quick search for benchmarks will reveal this to you. Remember when AMD stopped going up in mhz and changed their architecture instead, to boost performance? They would beat Intels that were a whole ghz faster.

Now the tables have turned. Intel optimized their chips, and they did it really well.

Yes, they also overclock insanely well, but that doesn't mean they still don't kick AMD's rear right now.

An order of magnitude faster? what base are you working in?

Base 2.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3012&p=4

And there's some benchmarks for you KOP.

hmmm, i'll check it out, thanks for the heads up.

Hahah...he was exaggerating, Detty.

CM is right. Right now there is almost no reason to buy from AMD. The Core 2 Duos may have lower clock speeds, but they accomplish more per clock cycle, so it doesn't matter.

i'm an amd fanboy and even i know intel is kicking their *** right now. jsut depends on what you want to do with it. if you're not gaming latest games or rendering massive graphics and video, get amd, you can't beat the price for performance.

I don't see how $40 is a bank-breaking jump. It's not like the chips cost $800 or something.

Yeah... overall performance in the intel is a $40 gap closer... I think I'll make a switch, if i can find a board i like now

Okay, advice on this one?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131142
paired with the E6750, 2gb DDR2 800, and a 8800GTS. Thats the plan... anything else I should know???

Unless you absolutely must have SLI I'd get a mobo with an intel chipset, not nvidia.

Also, get the 8800GT, not GTS. It's cheaper and faster.

nevermind... thanks!

AMD caused competition, which made Intel got their act together.

When Intel got their act together, it wins.

The market works?

More like ANUS CROTCHHAIR.

Yeah, I've been building AMD systems exclusively since 2000 because they had a better bang-for-the-buck ratio, but Intel is absolutely the way to go now.

As for the IDE thing, yeah, it's pretty much just used for optical drives now.

There are SATA optical drives too for the same price now.

i'm really more of an amd fanboy because they own ati and ati is canadian.

sometimes $40 does make a difference. not all the time but sometimes. the first comp i built this year it mattered.
if you don't have to for the reasons i mentioned earlier, then you don't need to either.

I'm AMD fanboy too. Though I try to be impartial when recommending stuff for others. Everyone has to remember that competition in the marketplace has lead to increased performance and decreased pricing. Even Intel fanboys should NOT be wishing for a bankrupt AMD.

Eh, I don't know. Asus' products have kinda gone downhill...the A7n8x is great and all...but eh.

Also, wait for the phenom to drop in price a bit, it'll be worth it.


Kinda...processors have also stayed fairly ****ing expensive for a while too. There needs to be real competition to drive the prices down again. I don't want to pay 200 bucks for a processor--I shouldn't have to pay over 100 for a good one. That's how it was in the XP v P4 days.

I remember paying $165 for the Barton 2500 chip I have now, when it was 'cutting edge'.... this chip, a gig of ram, and a 9800 Pro got me FAR.

Phenom has a major flaw in the TLB causing a race condition when the processor is operating above 2.3 GHz and under load (for instance, if you are playing a multithreaded game). The BIOS fix for the processor results in a 1-20% performance drop depending on the situation; a game would be on the worse side of things.

Don't buy a Phenom.

Uhh.. no it wasn't. If you wasn't anything decent, you were looking at 200-300$, and that was just a bottom rung CPU with the full cache that you could overclock. If anything CPUs are cheaper now, due to the price war.




Didn't they recently fix the big with out the performance drop?

Didn't know about that. Thanks for the info.

Means the overclockability of them isn't worth a damn.


Uh, yes it was. The highest end chips were 200 or so, at the beginning of the Athlon XP era. After being out for a while they dropped to 150 (a while being 3-4 months if that), and then to 100 shortly thereafter. I remember that era as it was when I first got into computers hardcore...trust me, I remember it well. CPUs are definitely more expensive than they used to be. The INTEL side of things was definitely 2-300, if not more, but nobody who knew what they were doing bought Intel period. Nowadays both sides are priced the same, and it sucks.


The Barton 2500's were definitely the cream of the crop if you got an unlocked one and pushed it. If you didn't overclock it, having the barton was pretty much pointless...it didn't matter which chip you got, you'd still be looking at the same performance.

No. AMD is releasing a new stepping of Phenom in late 1Q2008 that doesn't have the flaw, but every Phenom chip until then will have it. New motherboards are already being shipped with the microcode patch to fix the problem, performance degradation and everything.

This is a moot point anyway, since Phenom still isn't on par with Core 2 even without bugs. Hopefully it'll be worth buying when it gets a die shrink. Of course Intel has been shipping 45nm parts since the start of November so it's probably not going to be too interesting.