Dell Build AMD X2 5000 VS Intel E 6420

[anox3]

What is anyones preference between these 2 builds? The box will be used by my wife. Will mainly be used for Adobe Photo shop and Adobe Illustrator. Some gaming and some video work. I used to build all my own computers. But when seriously looking at pricing it is sometimes especially with coupons cheaper to go with Dell. on the hardware. Video card will be changed out to a 8600GTS overclocked/superclocked. It will also have 2 GB ram/2 dimms 667 mhz. It will also be running 2 LG 22" widescreen monitors. I know with Dell overclocking is really out the window. But do not plan on overclocking and really tinkering with this box. Just want to know whicj would be the most solid between the 2. I have used all AMD in the past 6 years. But from what I have been reading Intel with their duo core cpu's took the lead away from AMD.

 

[RussianSensation]

What's the price difference?

E6420 vs. 5000+ ---- audio/video + photoshop benches

E6420 will be faster at gaming, but you'll be graphics card limited anyway so it's not that material.

If she is a very heavy photoshop user, you could consider getting the cheaper one and get 4GB of ram with the price difference.

 

[anox3]

Both end up totaling $859 after the coupon. Kind of odd they ended up the same price. 2 gig ram/2 dimms in both. Onboard graphics til the new card goes in. the 859 also includes a dell 22" monitor. dual dvd drives. Will probably add another 2 gb ram to it when it arrives within 6 months.

 

[jhtrico1850]

The 5000 will be faster.

 

[anox3]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
What's the price difference?

E6420 vs. 5000+ ---- audio/video + photoshop benches

E6420 will be faster at gaming, but you'll be graphics card limited anyway so it's not that material.

If she is a very heavy photoshop user, you could consider getting the cheaper one and get 4GB of ram with the price difference.

Thanks for posting those benchmarks. I never saw those when looking up some others. It looks like the Core 2 Duo outperforms the Athlon by a good margin.

 

[RussianSensation]

If the price is the same, get the C2D without a doubt.

 

[secretanchitman]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation
If the price is the same, get the C2D without a doubt.

amen. c2d > x2.

i read somewhere on AT that a person used clockgen or another program to overclock his dell...

 

[JWade]

link to it is here, it was with the amd chip
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=1968220&enterthread=y

 

[996GT2]

yea I'd get the C2D for sure if the price is the same...especially since the CPU is a newer 4mb cache model.

 

[ObscureCaucasian]

Originally posted by: anox3
Both end up totaling $859 after the coupon. Kind of odd they ended up the same price. 2 gig ram/2 dimms in both. Onboard graphics til the new card goes in. the 859 also includes a dell 22" monitor. dual dvd drives. Will probably add another 2 gb ram to it when it arrives within 6 months.

Just beware that sometimes Dells mobos only have 2 slots for memory, so if you want to upgrade buy the minimum amount of memory from Dell and then grab 2x2gb of new egg or wherever.

I'd get the 5000

 

[anox3]

Originally posted by: BlameCanada

Originally posted by: anox3
Both end up totaling $859 after the coupon. Kind of odd they ended up the same price. 2 gig ram/2 dimms in both. Onboard graphics til the new card goes in. the 859 also includes a dell 22" monitor. dual dvd drives. Will probably add another 2 gb ram to it when it arrives within 6 months.

Just beware that sometimes Dells mobos only have 2 slots for memory, so if you want to upgrade buy the minimum amount of memory from Dell and then grab 2x2gb of new egg or wherever.

I'd get the 5000

Not a problem about the dimm slots from the looks of it. The Dimension I am looking at is upgradeable to 4Gb ram off their shopping website 4 dimms total at 1 gb each. I think the only time you run into trouble with that is when you buy their or other companies sub $400 computers.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: anox3

Not a problem about the dimm slots from the looks of it. The Dimension I am looking at is upgradeable to 4Gb ram off their shopping website 4 dimms total at 1 gb each. I think the only time you run into trouble with that is when you buy their or other companies sub $400 computers.

Just dont upgrade from Dell's site to 4GB when 2GB of ram can be picked up for $80-90

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: jhtrico1850
The 5000 will be faster.

There should be some system of forum demerits when someone states something so obviously false. The 5000+ x2 is a fine cpu, but the 4mb L2 6420 wins the majority of benchmarks with ease. Hell, even the top-end 6000+ barely keeps up with the midrange E6600 in most apps.

I'd take the 6420, if nothing else, you will surely be able to drop in a Q6600 when prices come down to human levels. The AM2 may or may not be able to support quad-core, so caveat emptor. Both are great systems

 

[anox3]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: anox3

Not a problem about the dimm slots from the looks of it. The Dimension I am looking at is upgradeable to 4Gb ram off their shopping website 4 dimms total at 1 gb each. I think the only time you run into trouble with that is when you buy their or other companies sub $400 computers.

Just dont upgrade from Dell's site to 4GB when 2GB of ram can be picked up for $80-90

Yeah Dell is outrageous when it comes to that extra 2 gig of ram. They want $270 for 2 extra gig to make it 4 gig total. That is just outrageous pricing. Because if i am not mistaken they still use regular crucial ram. And 2 gig can be obtained for well under $100 from newegg. Guess they figure it is worth close to $200 for their tech to take 30 seconds of their time to plug in 2 dimms.

 

[anox3]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: jhtrico1850
The 5000 will be faster.

There should be some system of forum demerits when someone states something so obviously false. The 5000+ x2 is a fine cpu, but the 4mb L2 6420 wins the majority of benchmarks with ease. Hell, even the top-end 6000+ barely keeps up with the midrange E6600 in most apps.

I'd take the 6420, if nothing else, you will surely be able to drop in a Q6600 when prices come down to human levels. The AM2 may or may not be able to support quad-core, so caveat emptor. Both are great systems

Thats exactly what I was trying to avoid when i created this thread by saying i used all AMD the past 6 years for all my builds. Did not want to seem partial to Intel when this thread was created. By by alll intensive purposes it looks like intel bested AMD this trip. I am just after the best performance for the money. And it looks like it is Intel this go around.

 

[GeezerMan]

They must rely upon a certain number of people who choose the greatly inflated parts prices, like the ram, to make the deal profitable for them. Would be shocking to see how many people get the $270.00 ram upgrade.

 

[sayNOtoFSB]

You are not overclocking-Get the AM2 5000 it's better deal and @ stock it will outperform The E6420. Besides that you can upgrade it to Phenom (K10) later on. Anyone says that The E6420 @ 2.13gh outperforms AMD's 5000 @ 2.6 GHz need to provide the proof for you. Even if you consider C2D 15% better performer (10% on the average) you will get 2.45 GHz (2.13*1.15%=2.45 GHz) which is still lower than 2.6 GHz. If E6420 was better performer than the 5000 that would put it > 23% faster clock: clock which is ridiculous claim. Even if this outrageous claim was to be true, you are still better off w/ the AMD 5000. It's much cooler CPU, consume about 40% less power than C2D (do your independent research and don?t believe the Intel marketer thugs here), and AM2 motherboard is future proof (you can just drop in the new AMD's 2x or 4x K10).
Good luck with it.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: sayNOtoFSB
You are not overclocking-Get the AM2 5000 it's better deal and @ stock it will outperform The E6420. Besides that you can upgrade it to Phenom (K10) later on. Anyone says that The E6420 @ 2.13gh outperforms AMD's 5000 @ 2.6 GHz need to provide the proof for you. Even if you consider C2D 15% better performer (10% on the average) you will get 2.45 GHz (2.13*1.15%=2.45 GHz) which is still lower than 2.6 GHz. If E6420 was better performer than the 5000 that would put it > 23% faster clock: clock which is ridiculous claim. Even if this outrageous claim was to be true, you are still better off w/ the AMD 5000. It's much cooler CPU, consume about 40% less power than C2D (do your independent research and don?t believe the Intel marketer thugs here), and AM2 motherboard is future proof (you can just drop in the new AMD's 2x or 4x K10).
Good luck with it.

The benchmarks already provided by Xbit labs show the 6420 to be faster than the 5000+ in almost every test. The link has already been posted in this thread.

EDIT : Here it is, read and learn :

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...ay/core2duo-e6420.html

 

[Arkaign]

Oh yeah, and if you think that C2D only outperforms an X2 by 10% clock-to-clock, then you're insane. This is particularly true when you ramp higher, as a 3ghz C2D annihilates a 3Ghz X2.

I'm posting this from an X2 4600+, btw

 

[Arkaign]

C2D 6420 wins against X2 5000 in :

Quake4
Unreal Tournament 2k4
F.E.A.R.
Company of Heroes
Valve Vrad Map
Fritz 9 Chess
Word 2007
Excel 2007
7Zip
Mpeg4
mp3-iTunes
Photoshop CS3
Windows Photo Gallery
Windows Movie Maker
Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0
3d Studio Max 8


5000 wins in :

Valve Source Particle Test
h.264
Cinebench 9.5
POVRay 3.7

Need I say more?

 

[anox3]

Originally posted by: sayNOtoFSB
You are not overclocking-Get the AM2 5000 it's better deal and @ stock it will outperform The E6420. Besides that you can upgrade it to Phenom (K10) later on. Anyone says that The E6420 @ 2.13gh outperforms AMD's 5000 @ 2.6 GHz need to provide the proof for you. Even if you consider C2D 15% better performer (10% on the average) you will get 2.45 GHz (2.13*1.15%=2.45 GHz) which is still lower than 2.6 GHz. If E6420 was better performer than the 5000 that would put it > 23% faster clock: clock which is ridiculous claim. Even if this outrageous claim was to be true, you are still better off w/ the AMD 5000. It's much cooler CPU, consume about 40% less power than C2D (do your independent research and don?t believe the Intel marketer thugs here), and AM2 motherboard is future proof (you can just drop in the new AMD's 2x or 4x K10).
Good luck with it.

I gave thought to the AM2 socket when i was phrasing this question. But here is the thing. When the quad cores hit they are going to be unaffordable for the time being. It will take 6-8 months before prices come down and they are available to us. Than AMD is gonna see bugs in their first batches. I will also gamble after the first batch AMD is gonna change the socket away from AM2 again. i,e, socket 754, 939, AM2. I just wish AMD would show a little consistency on their products. This is while typing this message on a 3200+ socket 939 mobo.

 

[sayNOtoFSB]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: sayNOtoFSB
You are not overclocking-Get the AM2 5000 it's better deal and @ stock it will outperform The E6420. Besides that you can upgrade it to Phenom (K10) later on. Anyone says that The E6420 @ 2.13gh outperforms AMD's 5000 @ 2.6 GHz need to provide the proof for you. Even if you consider C2D 15% better performer (10% on the average) you will get 2.45 GHz (2.13*1.15%=2.45 GHz) which is still lower than 2.6 GHz. If E6420 was better performer than the 5000 that would put it > 23% faster clock: clock which is ridiculous claim. Even if this outrageous claim was to be true, you are still better off w/ the AMD 5000. It's much cooler CPU, consume about 40% less power than C2D (do your independent research and don?t believe the Intel marketer thugs here), and AM2 motherboard is future proof (you can just drop in the new AMD's 2x or 4x K10).
Good luck with it.

The benchmarks already provided by Xbit labs show the 6420 to be faster than the 5000+ in almost every test. The link has already been posted in this thread.

EDIT : Here it is, read and learn :

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...ay/core2duo-e6420.html

Xbitlab will cook their review anyway they please.
Notice the review below by xbitlab that shows AMD's 5000 and 3800x2 with higher 3Dmark06 scores than the one you linked to. It is a known fact that XbitLab has a rocky relation with AMD and are Intel's Maketer thugs.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...ium-e2160_8.html#sect1

 

[sayNOtoFSB]

Originally posted by: anox3

Originally posted by: sayNOtoFSB
You are not overclocking-Get the AM2 5000 it's better deal and @ stock it will outperform The E6420. Besides that you can upgrade it to Phenom (K10) later on. Anyone says that The E6420 @ 2.13gh outperforms AMD's 5000 @ 2.6 GHz need to provide the proof for you. Even if you consider C2D 15% better performer (10% on the average) you will get 2.45 GHz (2.13*1.15%=2.45 GHz) which is still lower than 2.6 GHz. If E6420 was better performer than the 5000 that would put it > 23% faster clock: clock which is ridiculous claim. Even if this outrageous claim was to be true, you are still better off w/ the AMD 5000. It's much cooler CPU, consume about 40% less power than C2D (do your independent research and don?t believe the Intel marketer thugs here), and AM2 motherboard is future proof (you can just drop in the new AMD's 2x or 4x K10).
Good luck with it.

I gave thought to the AM2 socket when i was phrasing this question. But here is the thing. When the quad cores hit they are going to be unaffordable for the time being. It will take 6-8 months before prices come down and they are available to us. Than AMD is gonna see bugs in their first batches. I will also gamble after the first batch AMD is gonna change the socket away from AM2 again. i,e, socket 754, 939, AM2. I just wish AMD would show a little consistency on their products. This is while typing this message on a 3200+ socket 939 mobo.

Well rest assures that Am2 motherboard will work on K10 chip. You know, you don?t have to buy the quad core K10. The dual core (agena) will demolish anything Intel can offer and much cheaper (consider that you have to change platform if deciding to go w/ C2D).
Anyway, it?s up to you. I have seen many AMD users changing to C2D and regret it (chip too hot, lucks up when multitasking, and the overclocking is not as they expected). Don?t make the same mistake. Good luck on your endeavors.

 

[shadowofthesun]

According to Anandtech's review of the original e6400, the 2MB e6400 and the 5000+ are roughly tied, depending on the circumstance. However, with the 4MB fully capable Conroe core's cache, the e6420 pulls ahead of the 5000+ in many benchmarks and applications. The 5000+ X2 is a very capable chip, and you should have sufficient and satisfactory performance with either. However, seeing as the two are the same price, the C2D is the better choice.
In addition, upgrade considerations are irrelevant for two reasons:
1) AM2+ is not fully backwards compatable with AM2, so your HTT bus will run at the lower AM2 speed. AFAIK, AM3 is not backwards compatable with AM2 at all.
2) Dell systems are notoriously upgrade-unfriendly. Whether you go with Intel or AMD, plan on sticking with that chip for a long time.
Best of luck with your system purchase.

@sayNOtoFSB: It is not a "known fact" that x-bit labs is in line with Intel. Also, it is absolutely misleading to compare 3DMark scores, or any other benchmark scores, across multiple reviews. Different test beds, different quality drivers, and different Windows installs (relative levels of cleanliness) will all create an unacceptable margin of error across mutiple reviews. Even ignoring that, it seems odd that "Intel's Marketer thugs" would purposely release a review with high 3DMark scores associated with an AMD chip. Please support your claims with facts, instead of suspicion and opinion.

Link to AT's review of the original 2MB cache e6400:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...ts/showdoc.aspx?i=2802

 

[anox3]

Do you see a difference with these athlon x2's by going over 2 gig memory? If you remember the old athlon single cores with their memory controller on the cpu actually sometimes slowed down with over 1 gig memory. Has this been corrected with the dual cores? where it would be beneficial with this cpu to go all the way up to 4 gb ram? from the pre installed 2 gb ram.