# Few CPU questions

## Dralnu

Ok. I've asked this before, I know, but search hates me to no end -.-

I'm looking through CPUs, trying to see if I can find one that will not only be pretty much bleeding edge for awhile (or close to), but will perform consitently. Intel has made a few CPUs that, from what I know, are not very good at math, while some are good. Athalons have a hard time with DDR2 RAM (something dealing with memory managment in the proccessor not liking how the DDR2 RAM is set up speed/size wise I think), plus I have NO experiance with any CPU other then Intels.

Ok, what I'm wondering is: What Intel CPUs perform consistently? I'm not asking about like, the P4 2.53GHz, but more like just P4, or Core 2, or something such as that.

A few I'm looking at:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115002

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E1681911624

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116247

I'm looking at Athalons also, but my biggest concern with them is programs (I understand this isn't much of a problem, but still), as well as being able to make the most out of my RAM.

----------

## Dlareh

Just get the best Core 2 Duo you can afford.  If they're too expensive for you, get a Core Duo.

Intel has outpaced AMD; one or 2 years ago Athlon64s were the best buy, but they're behind now.

----------

## Mike46

From what I'm seeing an E6300 Core 2 Duo is about the same speed as the AMD X2 4200. I'm currenly working on trying to build a system around the 6300. Price wise in this area at least the Core 2 Duo is about $20 - $30 less too.

----------

## glowworm

I have just completed building the Core2Duo E6300 upgrade. You need to be very careful of your M/B most of the C2 motherboards have Marvell or JMicron SATA/PATA chips which can cause some problems.

For some real world compile times.

```
# genlop -t kdelibs

 * kde-base/kdelibs

     Fri Oct 20 11:06:35 2006 >>> kde-base/kdelibs-3.5.5-r2

       merge time: 27 minutes and 39 seconds.

# genlop -t mozilla-firefox

 * www-client/mozilla-firefox

     Thu Oct 26 19:39:43 2006 >>> www-client/mozilla-firefox-2.0

       merge time: 10 minutes and 27 seconds.
```

----------

## Mike46

@glowworm nice compile times there, and thanks for the MB tip.

 I'm shopping around some now, I know what CPU I want the MB is the only question been kind of sitting back and watching to see what comes out.  :Razz:  I'm betting when I get this thing built I should see a tad bit of improvement over this KT266 system.  :Smile: 

----------

## Dralnu

 *Mike46 wrote:*   

> @glowworm nice compile times there, and thanks for the MB tip.
> 
>  I'm shopping around some now, I know what CPU I want the MB is the only question been kind of sitting back and watching to see what comes out.  I'm betting when I get this thing built I should see a tad bit of improvement over this KT266 system. 

 Ditto. They have dual-cores out now that outpace my single-core, core-for-core. Its kind of sad, really.

----------

## Dralnu

In general: Thanks for the info guys. I think I'll save any athalons for maybe a system later, for just playing around possibly.

Next big thing to look for: Try to decide on keeping this P4 and use it for a server, or look at a new system to make into a compiling server (because, well, it sounds cool), and keep this P4 for a file server....

Choices choices.

----------

## Dlareh

 *Dralnu wrote:*   

> hey have dual-cores out now that outpace my single-core, core-for-core. Its kind of sad, really.

 

How is it sad?

 *Quote:*   

> or look at a new system to make into a compiling server (because, well, it sounds cool)

 

It does sound cool.  But it really isn't, don't waste your time.

----------

## Dralnu

 *Dlareh wrote:*   

>  *Dralnu wrote:*   hey have dual-cores out now that outpace my single-core, core-for-core. Its kind of sad, really. 
> 
> How is it sad?

  Considering they are usually slower, rating-wise then single-cores. Thats sad.

 *Quote:*   

> or look at a new system to make into a compiling server (because, well, it sounds cool)

 

It does sound cool.  But it really isn't, don't waste your time.[/quote]Yeah, I know.

----------

