AMD vs Intel - dual

Hello,

Witch one is better;

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ 

OR

Intel Core 2 Duo E6400?

I've looked at benchmarks and Core 2 Duo does kick AMD's ass, HOWEVER, E6400 is never on the benchmarks, and I can't afford anything better.
Does it still kick AMD's ass?

Your logic is retarded amd is better

Fuck this guy. Intel > AMD any day of the week.

It's over. AMD is finished.

amd = INSTANT 64 BIT WIN OMG TWO PROCSESORS WRYYYYYYYY SO FFAST FAPFAPFAP MAN AMD IS COOL!!!!!!!

Intel = fail.

Core 2 Duo sucks sure it's fast but it comes from a less desirable company and most importantly it's MORE EXPENSIVE for the same performance, which means it's LESS CONVENIENT.

Don't take this as a joke, I mean that. Benchmarks where you see a bunch of bars like:

My cock  ████████████████
KOS-MOS' ███████████████
Yours    ███████
etc. mean little to me if we don't divide that by their price. I don't care if there's a $10000 processor that runs faster than mine, because I have a fixed budget. I do care, however, for what runs fastest for the bucks I'm going to spend.

Fuck you guys. Intel is up here.

-
-
-Intel
-
-
-
-
-
-
-AMD
-

and AMD is down there. FACT.

You AMD clowns are really sad.

OP, I apologize for the others here:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html

It will let you benchmark the E6400 against all other AMD/Intel offerings.

The E6400 is built off of the Allendale core, so it's not really a true "Conroe".
However, it beats the pants off of the X2 4600+, here's a sample;
Time to RAR a 300 pack of files:
E6400: 2:40
4600+: 3.23
Only the FX-62 from AMD beat it.

JUST GO BUY A P4 DUO SO FAGGOTS WILL STOP SPOUTING STUPID SHIT LIKE "CONROE" AND CPU

>>9
I see this fucking idiocy one more time. Without prices, who gives a fuck? Next time I need a processor I'll set a budget, say $300, and buy the fastest I can find for that price, problem solved. Stop circle-jerking to OMG DUAL CORE SUPER MEGAHERTZ EXTREME EDITION ZA WARUDO, and get some common sense.

[aa]　　                 ∧＿∧　　 ／￣￣￣￣￣￣￣￣
  　　　　　　　　　 （　´∀｀）　＜ Your logic is retarded amd is better   　　　　　　　　／　　　　|　　　 ＼＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿
  　　　　　　　/ 　　　 　 .|　　　　　
  　　　　　　 / "⌒ヽ |.ｲ |
  　　　＿＿ |　　　.ノ | || |＿＿
  　 .　　　 ノく＿＿つ∪∪　　 ＼
  　　　＿（（＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿_＼
  　　 ￣￣ヽつ￣￣￣￣￣￣ | |￣
  　　　＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿＿__| |

>>11
Troll harder!

>>13
What troll? That was not a troll, that was common sense. If I wanted to troll I'd be posting like some stupid omg 348 giga hurtz in my rig 7 cores lolol noob.

>>14
OP asked a question. >>9 answers it. You get pissy, ergo I assume you are trolling. I still contend that you are trolling.

>"Without prices, who gives a fuck?" - You mean those numbers with dollar signs next to them that you see on newegg, zipzoomfly, tigerdirect, and a million other sites?

>>1

Answer to all stupid AMD vs Intel questions:

1) Depends on what you use the computer for
2) AMD has been shown to be better for gaming than Intel
3) Intel has been shown to be better for video editing and image processing than AMD.
4) Otherwise, both competing processors' speed in software execution is shown to have an negligible difference when compared.

The only arguement I can supply to side with AMD is that I trust them more as a company than Intel. Otherwise, any other arguement is pretty much on that negligible difference.

>>17
Fail
1) Conroe is superior, though a bit pricey
2) Not anymore, see 1)
3) That was due to hyperthreading, before AMD made dual core chips. GB2/2003. (Your logic is retarded.  Dual Core is better.)
4) See 1) again.

>>16
Yes, divided by them, stupid. Performance alone is useless. Price alone is useless. You divide performance by price, and obtain a ratio of how good you are using your money. Sum processor and required fan, motherboard and RAM for proper comparison.

>>17
Truth, but again, please introduce price in the equation, otherwise you're wasting your time.

>>18
The ricer idiot is back:
1. It may be the fastest, but it's useless if it doesn't have a competitive price, because unless you want the very very best, you just set a budget and get the fastest processor FOR THAT BUDGET FOR FUCKING GOD'S DAMN SAKE. And for a fixed budget, last time I compared them, AMD was still doing better, even though I must point out that I don't care if it's AMD or Intel, all I care for is who does it better for the buck.
2. Your logic is retarded. Performance alone is of little relevance.
3. Your logic is retarded. Performance alone is of little relevance.
4. Your logic is retarded. Performance alone is of little relevance.

BROKE PEOPLE SHOULDN'T BUY NEW COMPUTERS LOL.

WHEN YOU COMBINE THE WORDS "can't afford" AND "<newest rIcE cpu>" IN THE SAME SENTE-- THREAD OVER.

>>19
How do I failed thinking?

1. OP said "better" - VAGUE. The better performer was listed. No criterion as to establishing superiority was given. ESAD. If performance is of little relevance, OP would have bought a $47 Sempron 64, on maybe overclicked it to like 2.8GHz

Again, you can look up the prices yourself. Also, cooling and RAM would be identical, since both are recent DDR2 chips. LGA 775 boards are more expensive on average, but if cost is all that matters, why is this discussion taking place, troll?

>>20
I probably have more money in my bank accounts than you. And one of the reasons is I use it efficiently. BTW, never said I can't afford the fastest Core 2 Duo. Only it'd be unreasonable.

>>21
Memory and fans can be the same for this time, but it doesn't always happen, so they're better taken in consideration as a general rule. Motherboards for Intel processors tend to be more expensive, which one can't ignore. And no, cost is not all that matters because if it were I wouldn't buy new computers. Like I said, performance / cost, constrained to what you want to run (minimum performance) and what you want to spend (maximum cost), is what matters.

It's true though, that OP said "better" and it's vague. If we're talking just performance, assuming you fool your rich dad into buying it for studies, then Intel's got the fastest high-end desktop processors right now (although I don't know about Xeons vs. Opterons, hard to find benchmarks).