Processor for basic tasks?

Question

I'm leaning on either Intel Core 2 Duos or AMD Athlon 64 X2. I hear Intels are much more better but when I check them up, they are more expensive.

So far the low-ends are

Intel Core 2 Duo 4300

vs

AMD Athlon 64 X2 3600+

is the 4300 REALLY that much different to justify it's extra $50 (really tight budget here).

If anyone has any other budget processor suggestions (multi-core preferred), please say it

Answer 1

The Core 2 Duo 4300 is considerably faster than an X2 3600+ but for basic tasks like word processing, e-mail, spreadsheets and viewing photos there isn't any point in spending extra $$$. In fact, an older Pentium-D chip would work just as well for that.

The advantages of dual-core chips are evident if you're doing things like encoding DVDs or compiling programs at the same time as other work, but if you primarily do one thing at a time, even a single-core Athlon or Pentium 4 is fine...

The other advantage to Pentium-D or Athlon X2 is that more motherboard options are available, so you're likely to save money there, as well. With Core 2 Duo, you choices of motherboard are more limited so you may be stuck paying a higher price for both the mobo and RAM.

Answer 2

Hi there, the problem absolutely lies on what tasks you want to accomplish with your desktop computer. If you're not much into the video editing stuff which means your more into games, internet browsing and office work, then an Athlon 64 works just right for you. But if you're more into the latter then The Intel Core Duo would be the best processor for you. There are rumors that Athlon Processors has a lesser trend performance than Intel Processors, but with my little experience with both of these processors, they work just fine and you couldnt actually feel the difference unless youre doing video editing. so to make it short, go for the one that will most benefit you and will become what we call long term investments.

Answer 3

Ok, Considering that you are ONLY looking for low-end chips, I am assuming that you are not going to be doing any intense video editing or some quantam caculations on your PC.

So, Why not just buy a low-end PC from dell or HP and pay almost the same amount that you will pay for that CPU.

For internet surfing, spreadsheets, word docs and some minor photo editing this would be the best choice! Save money and just get the package for under 500 dollars.

It's like buying a Porsche when you only want to drive it at 65 mph. It is a waste of money unless you plan to really make use of it's speed.

Cheers!

Answer 4

Dual Cores (Core2Duo and AM Athlon) is useless for basic task.
On some review I saw, Pentium 4 works better than core duo when running non-intensive programs.
You can also try lower-end processor than that. Try Pentium D or Pentium 4. ( on what I have noticed Pentium 4 with Hyperthreading is much more expensive than other core duo pcs)
ofcourse even AMD accepts that Core2Duo is better than theirs

Answer 5

What do you consider to be "basic tasks?" If you mean word processing, spreadsheets, web, email, etc., don't even look at a dual core processor. Buy the cheapest processor you can find. Even it will be more than enough to run these kinds of applications.

Answer 6

1. second time you are asking this question !

2. you sure know > how to 'add detail'

3. participation:
questions asked: 6
questions resolved: 0

answers received: 25 , in all

DO YOU EVEN CARE TO READ THE ANSWERS

sure, plenty many were good answers & checked them all up
do you expect decent answers anymore ?
do you deserve decent answers ?

"CHOOSE BEST ANSWER"
use this option
indicates your participation

** in case you are not satisfied with the answers
post details, as in your very first question
many of us do follow-up

most of all your answers can be answered here itself, in one go
PROVIDED YOU PARTICIPATE !

Answer 7

I would wait a bit to get vista just so that they sort out the bugs and stuff get the 8500gt n in like 4 months ungrade to vista