i need a "gaming" pc

[samjc3]

why you guys such intel fanboys? if you're going for price get some sort of low cost amd chip for your cpu...

Its not fanboyism when there is irrefutable proof of one being better. At that point its simply cost vs performance. And Intel absolutely has it this round.

 

[bic]

AMD has nothing out right now that even comes close to Sandy Bridge. Some of the midrange i5 and low end i7 Nehalems still edge out AMD's six-core flagship. AM3 has been declared end of life, and AM3+ CPUs may or may not work in AM3 motherboards.

Wait for Bulldozer or go Intel.

 

[oinquer]

no doubt about intel being better at most of the line from AMD at the moment....

while there was a time when AMD got past Intel in Low-Mid end CPU, at this moment Intel is kicking AMD ass...

the old question was...prices...sandybridge starts at about 107€ in my country....for that price i could be getting an AMD X4 955 that by Passmark table performs pretty much the same...(i know that passmark tends to be a bit unreliable...)...BUT most of the other Intel CPU line will kick amd ass by a long score...

now...if we are talking about NEED??
have anyone EVER did a average CPU consumption? clean you OS of spyware, uneeded stuff running...and get a software to read CPU consumption over time and log it...then check back to do averages.....for most people an Core i5/AMD X6 or something like it will be doing his work with both hands tied while kneeling blindfolded......

hey...my brother installs most of its CCTV systems with ATOM 450/550 up to four camera's...Intel e5700 if needed more cameras...

its the same with smartphones...1Ghz ARM cortex A9 ultra fast dual core CPU....and most of the time its underclocked to 500-600mhz...(not that i wouldnt want it xD )

 

[DemonTraven]

if you want to discuss about amd and intel i'd make a new topic so you could do your discussions there, and i'm actually interested in it, very nice to learn things about pcs i didn't know

 

[XCVG]

Most of the time you aren't using anywhere close to your full CPU capacity. However, there are times when you are. I've actually got my CPU (all 4 cores) to around 100% by Task Manager's reckoning during recoding runs. Video editing is more RAM intensive than CPU intensive in most cases. Gaming is USUALLY GPU bound, I say usually because some engines are more CPU intensive than others. So yeah, I guess recoding is about it. Maybe things like folding@home and 3D rendering on the CPU as well.

 

[bic]

CPU shopping isn't just about what you need now, you need to keep in mind what you're going to need until you upgrade again.

When I built my current PC I went a couple steps ahead of what I would actually need. I went with a Q9550 and GTX 260 when all I really "needed" was a C2D and 9800. Did it cost a bit more at the time? Yes. Will the PC stay competitive a lot longer? Very yes. (This was back when Nehalem i7s were brand new and cost $500.) Building for what you "need" right now winds up costing more in the long run, because cheap junk will be outmoded before decent stuff. I've done that before, and you wind up running into the brick wall of obsolescence far too frequently (2 or 3 years).

Try to keep a 5 year upgrade cycle in mind.

 

[vskid3]

Thats what I did when I bought my laptop. It was one of the cheapest laptops with a good GPU at the time (ASUS G60, 2.13GHz C2D, 4GB ram, 1GB GTX 260m), but it will still be relevant in a few years. I even replaced the weakest link, the CPU, with a 2.8GHz C2D for good measure.
You don't need to get the best to follow bic's plan, just about halfway between "ok" and "great". Should end up only costing a couple hundred more up front.