Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
sure there is always that but i'm talking new stuff, the q6600 is nice and clocks well but i wouldn't spend my money on it, simply put i hate intel, and a pure blooded amd fanboy plus there is not much future proofing with intel setups. as seen with the mountain load of new chipsets they keep releasing not to mention the chipset alone for the x48 is $70. cost wise and future proofing i would recommend amd as for the best performance for your cash i would recommend intel. being a system builder thats how i see things. unless i see major price cuts on the Q9650 i doubt i will recommend it. as the same performance can be achieved from a chip costing 1/3 as much with a nice O/C. those days are coming back again were u want the performance of a >$1000 chip u buy a cheaper one and O/C it.
yes intel, start getting cocky so AMD can get back on their feet
If intel raises their prices would that not curb some ppl to buy more AMD products ?
Intel has 45nm E7XXX procs to replace the E4XXX line for around 130$ and E3XXX to replace the E2XXX for 75$, both seem to be really good oc deal.
The former gives AMD's triplcecores a run for the money for half the power consuption and you can expect 3.5G-4G oc from those chips, with the latter K8 won't be able to keep up.
AMD is down right now, but they will survive.
I'm still trying to figure out why people keep claiming Intel will refuse to innovate and raise prices ridiculously. They've had a huge lead over AMD for over a year and a half and they've slashed prices drastically and both cut die sizes and will be coming out with a new architecture soon. How is this anything but the exact opposite?