AMD Phenom Gaming Benchmarks
Today AMD revealed their new Spider platform, and along with it their new series of CPU’s called Phenom. AMD hopes Phenom will compete with Intels “Core 2″ processors, but how well does Phenom perform? Here are some Gaming Performance benchmarks that were revealed today. To see other benchmarks such as General Application and Media Encoding Performance, click the link at the bottom of this article to read the entire review.
Gaming Performance
To highlight CPU performance differences, all of our 3D gaming benchmarks were run at 1024 x 768, so keep in mind that real world gameplay will most likely be at more GPU bound resolutions with CPU differences mattering less. That being said, this is a CPU review, so we do want to know which of these chips runs game-code the best.
It turns out that gaming performance is really a mixed bag; there are a couple of benchmarks where AMD really falls behind (e.g. Half Life 2 and Unreal Tournament 3), while in other tests AMD is actually quite competitive (Oblivion & Crysis).
While Phenom suffers greatly in video encoding and 3D rendering tests, there is hope for it as the 9700 can actually compete clock-for-clock with Core 2 in some games. If all you do is game on your machine, with the right video cards you’d be hard pressed to notice the difference between a Phenom and a Core 2 system - that being said, if you’re looking at quad-core, chances are that you’re doing something else with your system other than game.
Source: AnandTech
“To highlight CPU performance differences, all of our 3D gaming benchmarks were run at 1024 x 768″
well thats about as much use as a tit in a carrier bag.
interesting stuff if there more expensive for the same performance as a c2d i know were my money will be
so amd still sucks hairy camel b@lls then.
Yeah it seems they are more expensive :S
@bomb, 1
The reason you use very low resolutions when you test cpu’s in games is so that your sure it’s not the videocard limiting. So yes it is very useful.
About the results: not very surprising, I didn’t expect it to beat the penryn or even the kentsfield and it has been quite obvious for some time with all the early tests which some diehard amd-fanbois claimed to be false.
“well thats about as much use as a tit in a carrier bag.”
That was a CPU TEST. At high resolution, you are testing more on the gfx card than the CPU. Low resolution is much more CPU dependent and so that we can tell the different between CPUs.
looks like intel is still the way to go.
AMD again fails to obtain my money to purchase any of their processors. I left the AMD side 3 years ago and have not looked back.
AMD is releasing brand new hardware that can still be beat by hardware that was released a year ago, a year in computing technology is a huge chasm and AMD has not done a whole lot to bridge that gap. That is sad, truly sad.
With the Phenom 9900 being $280 AMD is going to have one broken heart when the holiday price cuts come in for the Q6600 and Q6700. The Q6600 is already cheaper and with its well documented and successful stock cooler overclocking potential it shreds the Phenom right out of the box.
With the release of Yorkfield (and Wolfdale in 30-60 days), and looming holiday season price cuts for the C2D and C2Q Intel lines i would say that the whole launch of the “spider platform” is a little lackluster.
AMD used to be able to argue that it could win the price vs performance battle, but with the low price of the Q6600 and looming price cuts for the Q6700 that is going to start becoming a very tough statement for AMD to sell.
Furthermore purchasing 4 crappy ATI 3870’s for your new Phenom 9900 is going to make you look pretty silly when a Q6700 with x2 8800GTX in SLI is cheaper, has more developed drivers, a better overclocking reputation, and DESTROYS that setup in any head to head benchmarks or tests.
GJ AMD/ATI for coming out with brand new hardware that is obsolete as it hits the shelfs.
I’ve pre-ordered the 2.6 Phenom, and going to get EVGA nforce mobo, and 3g DDR2 1066.
the phenoms are cheaper then current quads. remember though, there’s still patches, and hotfixes, and drivers, and optimisers that will appear.
all in all I am not overly impressed with AMD compaired to Intel, but Core Quads are based on C2D technology, not 4 core… so lets hope optimisers will improve performance.
Yeah, I’ll be sticking with my Q6600 G0 @ 3.6ghz.
Oh boy, I’m disappointed. AMD needed to AT LEAST equal the Intel chips and it does not do that. Intel’s are still faster and cheaper, and I really did like my AMD chip I once had.
Im not sure whether AMD and ATI are doing a bad job or if Intel and nVidia are just doing such a good job…
Im not regretting the purchase of my Q6600 G0 a single bit though. Excellent overclocking possibilities. I’m starting the overclocking procedure soon. Gonna try to bring it up from 2.4 to 3.6.
#9 Please tell me how your Phenom and your eVGA AMD socket board that doesn’t exist work out for you.
Standard AMD fanboy, has no clue about computer technology or how it works and is easily suckered by hype. When you get that eVGA nForce board plz make sure you let me know how long it took you to fit that Phenom into an LGA 775 socket. Lasher FTL.
will my AMD athlon X2 64 5600+ overclocked to 3 GHz preform better than the new pheonoms or are they just better power consumption?
ReeGed i think you might blow up your processor. i have never heard of a gain that much from overclocking.
HAHA!! If the new AMD processors can’t even keep up with the Core2 processors, how do they expect to compete with the new “Penryn” 45 nanometer processors from Intel? AMD better do some MASSIVE price drops if they want to continue in the PC market.
the spider platform will be very cheap
not bad at all for the price.
The most interesting in the spider platform is AMD Overdrive and the stuff you can do with it, and that future processors will fit it for a very very long time.
If your “enthusiast” go Intel, if your a common gamer AMD is awesome value, and dont worry about having to buy new motherboards every few months
Overdrive is just awesome tbh.
at the rate everything keeps changing i don’t know what to go with…
Even my other computers E6850 outperforms the AMD Quad, do not get me wrong, I was all for AMD throughout the years, until the Core 2 Duo range came about, since that time AMD lost their footing and these processors are not that bad when you compare the performance over value.
Intel still reigns supreme until next year, where maybe, just maybe AMD can “catch up!”.
PRICE!!!!!
The Phenom 9600 is £199.74 (With VAT) & the Intel Core 2 Quad Pro Q6700 is £334.86 (with VAT), a differnace of £135.12 ;o.
So with Intel being out a lot longer and games set up to work with Intel quad (ie Crysis), to me AMD better. Are the games set-up to work with Phenom like Intel is? I don’t think so.
What I like to see is Price per performance (like http://www.rlslog.net/hd-3800-amd%e2%80%99s-midrange-rebuttal-benchmarks/)
Also add up if your building price for a new rig, RAM+Motherboard+CPU+GPU = AMD or Intel for cost.
Sorry but for my budget, AMD wins hands down.
@15 Roofy: It’s very possible
I know people who have overclocked their Q6600 processors to 4.0 Ghz. You just need great cooling.
What’s up with the scene?
We want Unreal Tournament 3 !!!!!!!!
Multiplayer Crack of course
@ReeGed
Lol. Seriously though your dreaming if you think you can get a 1ghz increase.
It possible, but not worth it! What are you going to spend 300 on cooling?
You would be better off with a quad core system :).
Is Unreal Tourney 3 out yet? I don’t think it is… But I feel as if it was released for some reason. Maybe they released the demo too early.
e2180 overclocked to 3.2GHz. $90. Similar performance in games.
I’m with E6750 2.66ghz@3.2ghz with stock cooling.
8800GTS 320mb.
UT3 max settings 1280×1024 smooth game play, even without the OC.
but can’t play Crysis on high settings 1280×1024 no aa,
only when set shader to medium, it’s run smooth.
hate this game, it’s to damn beautiful :-).
@NuZZ Q6600 is a quadcore CPU… Also you can get over 1ghz increase by overclocking. All CPU’s are unique though, so theres no guarantee anyone can do it, but people have overclocked their Q6600 to 4ghz my friend
@23, for Q6600 G0 most can get 3.4-3.6Ghz with the default Intel cooler.
older revisions of Q6600 however were not so good at overclocking.
haha i already decided ages ago not to keep up with cpu…. they get released almost every year.
The battle between CPU and so on will always go on and on anyways. I remember AMD got a huge lead ahead of intel awhile back, now its time for Intel to take the huge lead. It will always go backwards and forwards.
25, you have me beat. e4400 @ 3.2GHz for $125
AMD are not competing like they used to. The Athlon 64 architecture was fantastic for it’s time, cheaper and faster than Intel. Now AMD are more expensive and not as fast as Intel CPUs, not really a good deal is it.
Intel don’t have any incentive now to drop prices for their Penryn CPUs next year. Competition drives prices down and AMD just let down the consumer, the vicious cycle begins, the consumer doesn’t support AMD and Intel can keep prices at a higher level.
It is all video card performance anyhow when it comes to games now. Spending top dollar on a CPU when 90% of the work is your GPU…….just silly in my opinion.
Intel: “All you gaming are belong to us!”
@ GGMan
Why are you comparing Phenom 9600 with Q6700? The Q6600 is much closer in pricing and it’s still much better.
And are you seriously suggesting that the games have to be reprogrammed to work properly with amd’s quad? The differenses aren’t big at all, atleast not for the apps and games, amd can hype the “native qaud-core” all they want the games only sees that its has four cores and thats it.
@NuZZ
It its very easy to overclock Core 2 cpus and it isnt impossible to achive a 1Ghz increase with stock-cooling.
Wow, this Q6600 intel cpu seems to be a good overclocker.
The Q6600 is the best damn thing I ever bought.
G0 SLACR!!
#32 speak for yourself, not all of us just play games. Those that spread scene releases for small monetary compensation have lots and lots of DVDs to encode and that takes processing power.
Quad core has allowed me to encode 3 or 4 separate projects at high speed while still using my comp; whereas using a single core processor you could only encode 1 thing at a time and couldn’t use your computer at all. Multi cores save lots of time and allows you to get more scene releases to your customers.
Looking forward to x2 Yorkfield on Intel Skulltrail (octcore), with x2 8800GT 512mb DDR3 in SLI for my new build. I cannot wait for construction to begin
, Skulltrail will be out sooooooooooooooooon.
Unless you are the true intel fanboy who prefers to give tons of money to buy a CPU who is a bit better than the opponent, AMD is still the cheaper/smartest deal.
Noobs like you mantain companys like Intel and Apple alive.
Proof that Q6600 can be overlocked up to 4Ghz
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/244597-29-core2quad-q6600
Thanks for havin my back on that one Ordinary Guy
bring on UT3!
@8
Just wondering how you got 4x 3870’s being more expensive than 2 8800GTX’s.
4x = 876 where 2x = $1000+
As far as the 3870 goes, it’s sad that just because it’s an RV variant that it gets stuck with the 256bit ring bus instead of the 512bit bus given that it is using GDDR4. It’d be nice to see them ditch that since they are relying on this part until an actual R series successor comes out and not just a die shrunk 2900XT with some extra DX calls added.
I guess in the end that’s why they’re pitching it in at the $200 range market.
Phenom has failed massively in terms of performance.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Phenom_9700-Spider_Platform-790FX,review-29761.html
All they can do now is play the price game.
Come on you are not even trying….
Q6600 at 3.2 will leave Phenom in the dust.
#38 you seem to be blissfully uninformed. There is not a C2D Intel that cannot stomp the brains out of a similarly priced AMD chip. Just because most of us talk about Q6600, QX6950, E6700, etc; the real gems are the “lower” Core 2 chips.
Chips such as the E4500 Allendale for $125.00 or the E6550 Conroe for $175.00 i have repeatedly overclocked both of these processors to 3.0ghz STABLE (by stable i mean ran Prime95 torture for 24hours straight
) on the STOCK COOLER. I also know that the E6550 can easily go to 3.6ghz with aftermarket cooling.
This ignorant claim that AMD wins price vs performance is just something that their fanboy community has repeated to the point that they still believe it is true. When you put aside feelings about brand loyalties and start looking at the pure, unbiased scientific data about the subject you will quickly find that Intel chips use less energy, run at lower temperatures, and have much much much higher overclocking yields compared to AMD chips THAT ARE THE SAME PRICE.
Compare E2140 Allendale vs. AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000 Brisbane; E6550 Conroe vs. AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+ Windsor; and then finally look at Q6600 vs. Phenom 9900 and then look at the benchmarks. You will clearly see that in a scenario where the processors cost the same amount of money Intel will still outperform the AMD contender. Too many times AMD fanboys try to befuddle the argument by comparing a cheaper AMD chip to a more expensive Intel chip.
What is AMD going to do when the Intel holiday price cuts start rolling out this Friday? The Q6600 is ALREADY CHEAPER THAN PHENOM.
Pfffttt bring on UT III
my q6600 which is overclocked to 3.2 works just fine thanks!
My money still goes to AMD, you all intel owners should thank me cuz this keeps the competition so there’s no monopoly.
Whoever rolls out the better deal come black friday is the winner for me. haha, although I think that’ll end up being AMD given that they’ll have just ordered a boatload of initial supply.
If the C2Q comes up though, there’ll be no hesitation there either.
Massive price cuts for all!
Give AMD a 10 for creating this marvelous wonder “Phenom” it’s just the begining of something even better……..i hope they
remove memory controllers from their CPU and blow the competition away like big time…….cheers
To all people that think that games aren’t optimized for specific CPUs - compare Quake Wars running on Windows and Linux. Linux version has no CPU tweaks because they were hard to port (Visual Studio specific stuff) and the performance difference is quite big - my Athlon64 3500+ can run it smoothly in Windows but on Linux it’s struggling with low graphics settings. Even iD recommends to use at least dual core processor there.
Also AMD can still fight in low/mid-range market, new 0.65nm AMD processors (Brisbane) overclock rather well and are really cheap. I get the impression that AM2 motherboards are usually cheaper too.
Wow AMD has really dropped the ball, Intel are already on their 2nd gen Quad Cores and AMD is only on their first.
Sigh.
@52 [ut2k4wikichici]
But AMD does have one thing going for them: they have watched Intel for the last 18 months and can learn from their quad-Core campaign.
Think of it this way, AMD has had time to perfect it and will be able to do more in the coming months.
getting some pc parts for Xmas, Q6600 being among them, from what people say, i cant wait
q6600 ftw!
Nice stats. I always liked AMD better than Intel (For Gaming of course).
INTEL is way better so far !!
and ahm the OS ure using and all software on it doesn´t even support 2 cores that good by now..
so…. ftw
#43. You can overclock AMD too…
Anyway, AMD almost crashed when they buy ATI from a year ago. They started stabilizing just now, so don’t except any miracle in the new series. But with ATI in they hand, they already made some interesting stuffs, like ATI’s Stream Computing Technology. (Stream computing allows ATI graphics processors to work in concert with today’s high-performance, low-latency computer processors to solve complex computational problems. Based on Stanford University’s testing that compares work unit processing on an Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHz processor vs. similar processing being conducted on a Radeon X1900 XT) And the Spider series has future too. But they need some time. And the program developers too. Just look around. How many 64bit app or game is out there? Or with multi-core, multi-vga support?
6400+ STILL smokes them all.
never used amd never will do so
Now nVidia will release their new triple graphic system so AMD will be beaten there also. AMD should really lower the prices another 20% or so.
lmao..What a failure…atm.
HAHAH what a waste of R&D money x)
lOW RES BENCHMARKS ARE SYNTHETIC - Real world scenarios only please - I game @ 1920×1200 - im not interested in low res benchmarks, OK so if shows if the cpu is the bottleneck - at that res who cares? lets see what they can do real world - NOT SYNTHETIC.
AMD is much better in terms of pricing and the will surely realise new drivers to work bwtter in the next months, their new series cpus are new compared to intel’s cpus, amd lead the way for new technologies for the couple of years now and tehy will come back again, i hope, if the dont, forget about cheap cpus in the future, and intell fans should pray for amd to come back, becouse of them they can afford to buy their precius intell cpus cheaper. AMD ALL THE WAY.
Interesting, I have the Intel Q6600 which I thought I bought too early, it seems it works out on a few programs for the price. You can pick those up pretty cheap now days.
I personally do like AMD, I truly do. I’m from Austin, where they’re based and have supported them since the AMD K5 and K6 lines. However Intel finally caught up and made the Core2 line very good. I really hoped this new AMD would trash it, so I could go back
. AMD prices are always better though. I also recently had to move back to Nvidia because ATI ran its short course of great vid cards. The 8800GTX just destroys the ATI counterpart. C’mon AMD pick up the pace again please!
After reading a few of these posts I think I need to get up on overclocking my Q6600.
I’ve built 5 PCs in the last 3 months for people, they’ve all been AMD except 1 who requested an Intel Proc. I think for the mass public AMD chips are the way to go, unfortunately if you don’t care as much about price the Intels are a bit faster.
@64
Your mentality there is pretty good, show you real world benchmarks? Well 640×480 would be real world benchmarking, letting the CPU run to it’s peak extent without worrying about the GPU capping the numbers.
If you’re running 1920×1200 you’re punishing the GPU not the CPU and as such it’s not a real world benchmark, it’s just inaccurate measurement of CPU performance by people too focused on graphic performance.
If you want high res numbers go dig up a video card review not a CPU review.
Had a PC since Win’95 and have always been an AMD buyer.. price Vs performance has always been FTW.. but this “spider” platform…. it all stinks to high heaven of one big marketing ploy.. Anyways.. why would you buy dearer newer hardware that is slower than older cheaper? 6400+ kills these new AMD offerings and is £130 max..
Also COME ON.. 4 graphics cards.. are the new generation of gpus so bloody weak that you now need mulitiple numbers to run anything? That strikes me as being bad hardware.. there’s no way I’ll fall for this.. the days that I NEED 4 gpu’s just to game, is the day that I throw my system out of the window and go back to using a slate.
All kidding asides folk, you need to get a grip of yourselves.. if you fall for this latest round of marketing to actually deserve to be conned out of your pennies.. computing is becoming such a joke now…
@69
Nice one sided slam, were you saying this when Dell and NVIDIA were introducing Quad-SLI configs? Or did you reserve it now for ATI because it seemed like a long enough span since the SLI offering that maybe people forgot.
And yeah, the 3870 and 3850 are that weak essentially, it’s already been said online and in many other cases that it’s just a 55nm HD2900XT with a crippled 256bit ring bus controller and DX10.1 support.
BTW.. is this version of Crossfire going to actually work this time, as opposed to garbage that was sold previous that didn’t work?
@ 70
My comment wasn’t supposed to be an in depth analysys.. I’m just commenting on a company that I am familiar with, and up until now have regarded to be the best suited to my needs.. I’ve never used Intel, so I can’t really comment there althogh as far as pereformance goes I can certainly say that ATM they kick AMD’s arse.. although personally the price is a bit much (saying that though C2D’s are now cheaper that AMD.. E6850 for about £165, where as a Phenom 9600 is £180.. and the C2D will absolutely demolish the 9600 in every possible way.. so that’s certainly a consideration when I upgrade.
As far as gpu’s are concerned though.. Nvidea’s sli has (usually) worked whereas ATI’s crossfire (as far as I knw) NEVER worked, or at least didn’t to any reasonable standard…
I’m not to sure about this multiple GPU malary and TBH the whole farce kind of put me off Using AMD/ATI.. (had a Ti4200 128mb once and I absolutely loved that card, but for my recent upgrade I went for an X1900xt, which I like also.)
It’s always back and forward, i loved my old Intel CPU’s (486 66Mhz, Pentium 2 MMX 133Mz and Pentium III 733Mhz) then i changed to AMD and started to use anf love the Thunderbird and XP CPUs till my last AMD wich was an AthlonXP 3200+, then changed again to Intel and now i’am a happy C2D user, is a stupid thing to be a fan boy, stay sticked to 1 brand no matter what is really dumb, just be fan of whatever is better at that time and that’s it. Oh and it’s the same with ATI and nVidia stuff.
Peace
Not bad but just remember that this is there first line of phenom’s wait till early 08 when the real stuff comes out then we will see AMD come out on top!
too bad 1stQ of 08 is when Intel’s 45nm chips will be rolling out… Intel has the upper hand right now, deal with it, times change. AMD had the lead for a few years, during NF4 days. Even my $90 E2160 can do 3.36GHz on a simple liquid cooling loop. That’s with a budget Gigabyte board, together my DS3L and E2160 cost me less than $200 bucks… AMD can’t touch that right now. I will definitely be going Q6600 in Q1 ‘08 when they get a bit cheaper.
my computer is 4 years old:
- Pentium 4 3.2 Ghz
- 1Gb ram
- Ati Radeon 9800
since it is Agp based if i wanna buy a new fast Pci Graphics card i need a whole new system,
so 3 weeks ago i spend 170 euros on Radeon X1950 Pro,
the fastest Agp card around,
every game including Crysis runs exceptionaly with their graphics in their full glory,
So my point is that
i gave breath a 4 year old system with just 170 euros so i still can be able to experience all the high-end gaming of today without whining.
Ok, When Vista came out with all of its flaws and everybody got ticked off that they didnt leave it in the oven long enough what did they do? People were flocking back to XP, at least that was my census(sp*). Do you think people were mad that they released Vista early and used the public as a testing ground to fix and optimize it? You bet they were and still are ticked. I am about to by a whole new comp and you know what, Its going to be Intel for me. I was thinking about AMD, and when I heard about the new Spidy System I was intrigued. After I read all I can read about it all I keep hearing is, oh, its ok, there going to eventually optimize it. !#@$ that!! We, as the consumers, need to pee on the junk and force people to make things right or they will Gates us to death and force Vista Protection Spyware software down our throats and not even flinch when we gag. I am getting XP Pro for my new comp with INTEL. Thanks for reading!!
Well anyway a do not think that it will be wise to buy a phenom right now there will be some bug still need a revision or two I do not think that therie is any software optimised for quad core any way it did take some time just for sp2 win XP to support it with a ptch or a expensive Win xp sp2 letest vertion if the os is barly made for that imagine a game or any benchmark it will take time faor that to be real trut just take a loock for the differance betwene to cor2 and the quad from intel the perf. the performance only come from the cpu microcode of the differance would be mutch more thane that we have to think that there is 4 cp that is four time the prossesing power the 4 should be twice more than the dual cores or almost. For now I do not think that any software is realy relyable for judging any of itel or amd multicore cpu. not until there is os and software realy otimise for multi cpu proscesing.
Okay… I’m speaking as an Intel fan who converted from AMD after core2duo… but here’s how it works, people. Intel owns, hardcore, the CPU market. AMD isn’t going to take it over anytime in the next two years, period. Intel is working on 8+ core cpu’s [nehalem] which will still be compatable with skulltrail, making a 16-core computer. Skulltrail is also compatable with 4+ graphics processing units. AMD is going to own the mid-range market, however. Why? Because for 3K you can get a 4-GPU machine. For 4K, when the 3870×2’s come out, you can get an 8-gpu machine. That’s so many times more graphical power than anything nvidia/intel can put out. For 3K less.
Uh..what you guys aren’t seeing here is this is next generation even beyond intels dreams right now. The phenom has introduced 128 bit arc, doubling the 64 bit intel is on. Say hello to to the new 128 bit operating systems in the near future, goodbye 64 bit.
If you have an am2 mobo, this is a phenomenal upgrade, to be able to go from 32 bit windows, to 64 bit windows, to the up and coming 128 bit windows all from changing the processor.
Fantastic job you’ve done for upgrade potential here AMD.
Yea I used to do AMD too. From the very first 64bit processors. I upgraded to Q6600 on Black Friday; only $168 bucks at fry’s. YOU CAN’T BEAT THAT PRICE ! no way no how. I’ve noticed that ATI and AMD are all about hype. They have all the hardware at tip top shape, but their softwares suck. For example; the 2900Xt was suppose to blow the 8800GTX out of the water with its given specs. 512bit mem. interface, gddr4, higher clock, higher core. WHAT HAPPENED; 8800gtx still owned it. Same here with Phenom; true quad core right? 3600mhz HT3. but what happens. Q6600 blows it out of the water. all hardware, but no software support for their stuff. People may be thinking that oh, that’s just a minor setback and software can be updated. It’s half true. hardware architecture is based a lot on the software it produces so in theory, ATI would have to recreate the whole card and AMD would have to recreate the whole processor to use it’s maximum potential. Nvidia and Intel on the other hand use their maximum resources. AND IF BY CHANCE ATI AND AMD THINK OF A WAY TO OUTPERFORM CURRENT INTEL PROCESSORS; intel would have already had a better processor on it’s way. AMD has slowed down and has been one step behind for a while. If intel keeps up their work, AMD is less likely to catch up.
When games are programmed to take advantage of a quad, the Phenom should be quite fast.
well its not a real test there useing to test the CPU you need min 3d settings like 800×600 and all settings on LOW
not med or high also they dont say what video cards are being used if they used gforce on both not a fair test also
gforce works good in intel for max fps but Ati give max fps
in Amd so witch did they use? what system xp pro or a ver of vista i dont think any of this realy matters tho since japan came out wiht a new micro transistor that will allow computer cpu’s to reach the 50 gig mark probly start seeing them in late 2009 or mid 2010 so whats the point of speing a few k to build a new gameing rig right now if there goign to be more the 99% faster with in 2-3 years? you can find gameing and hardware news at places like tomshardware.com
and megagames.com for some easy to find info saves time thumbing around the web all day
Man i just bought a new pc.Here are the specs.:Procesor:AMD(ADVANCE MICRO DEVICES) Phenom Quad Core 9850 2,5ghz.Video Card:nVidia GeForce 9600gt-1024,2gb of ram ddr2.Yeah…Maybe Intel is better,but if we are talking about gameplaying AMD are better.That is my opinion.Thanks!