What is the configuration of this AMD power supply?

Graphics: ASUS EN7600GS Silent HTD Serie 699 Yuan ASUS EN7600GT 2DHT 256M 950 Yuan.

Processor: AMD Athlon64 X2 3600+ AM2 (90 Nano, 625 Ԫ AMD Athlon64 x2 3600+ AM2 (65 Nano, 720 Ԫ.)

Motherboard: ASUS M2V-TVM 445 yuan, ASUS M2N-E 840 yuan.

Memory: Kingston 1GB DDRiII667 570 Ԫ Kingston 1GB DDRii533 560 Ԫ.

HDD WD Caviar 1600JS 7200 rpm 8M (Serial Port 455 Yuan (Western Digital)

Optical drive Sony DW-G120A 285 yuan Sony AW-G170A 300 yuan.

Chassis Cooler Master SWAT 330 359 yuan.

Fan Cooler Master susurro 180 yuan.

Edifier Shengmai X100V 130 yuan.

It is still recommended that you use a power supply, which will be better for dual-core support.

Huntkey Multi-Core DH6 (rated 400W) 398

The hardware is pretty much there.

The XP355 of the power TT and the Panshi 400 of Huntkey are all available.

The power supply is no problem, it is recommended that you change the graphics card, to 7900, a good horse with a good saddle :)

This power supply is good, so it's okay.

In terms of performance, Intel processors tend to have better performance and reputation. Intel processors have the advantage of supporting hyper-threading even with the same number of cores, and Intel processors can achieve better performance through multi-threading and software optimizations, such as the AMD FX 9590 with 8 cores, but it is inferior to the Intel 4-core i7-6700K in PC MACK tests. However, when it comes to single-core speeds, AMD processors tend to have faster clock speeds.

2. **。

Usually, people think that AMD's processors are cheaper, but this is actually a myth. In fact, Intel and AMD's processors are basically the same, but Intel is more popular in the mid-to-high-end market, and AMD dominates the low-end market. In fact, for example, the parameters of the AMD A6-5400K,** are comparable to the Intel Celeron series.

3.Graphics performance.

Since AMD has a discrete graphics business, it also has certain advantages in terms of processor integrated graphics, and Radeon integrated graphics cards are usually better than Intel's integrated graphics. But when it comes to high-end gaming PCs, it's not hard to find that OEMs choose Intel Core processors, which deliver around 15 to 30 fps more frame rates than APUs in the same class. In other words, you may want to consider AMD's processors when choosing an integrated graphics card, and high-end discrete graphics cards are more suitable for Intel processors.

4.Overclocking space.

AMD processors typically offer more headroom for overclocking, and mid-range APUs typically support overclocking; Intel, on the other hand, tends to only offer overclocking in mid-to-high-end products, which also requires at least a Core i5-6600K. So, if you're on a budget, choose an AMD processor to overclock for better performance.

5.Compatibility and Availability.

AMD processors are slightly inferior to Intel in terms of compatibility with other components such as motherboards, and many motherboards only offer Intel processor interfaces, so the choice of AMD motherboards may be relatively limited. In addition, Intel processors often provide support for NVIDIA and AMD graphics cards, but some AMD processors only support their own independent graphics, which is also a part to be aware of.

Now the latest AMD Ryzen series is still good. It is comparable to Intel's latest series in terms of performance.

Performance: Core2 Duo > Athlon, X2 > Pentium D

Value for money: Athlon's X2 > Pentium D > Core 2 Duo (because Core's ** moisture is too big right now).

Energy consumption: Pentium D > Athlon, X2 > Core 2 Duo

At present, the mainstream dual-core processors in the personal PC market mainly include AMD Athlon64 X2 series CPUs produced by AMD and Pentium D dual-core series and Core 2 Duo dual-core series CPUs produced by Inter. AMD first launched the X2 dual-core CPU, Inter company in order to make up for the personal PC market followed AMD to launch the Pentium D dual-core CPU to occupy the market, but due to the inherent deficiency of the PD dual-core processor architecture, it launched the Core 2 dual-core series CPU in 2006, and replaced the Pentium naming method that has been used for several years. It can be seen that the Core brand processor launched by Inter is of epoch-making significance.

Since it is a dual-core processor, it will naturally evaluate its performance differently from a single-core processor. One of the more confusing is what are the nuances of the three dual-core processors launched by these two companies? Below, let's briefly understand the differences between the internal architecture and performance of these three types of dual-core processors.

AMD's Athlon® X2 dual-core processor is based on AMD's K8 architecture, which has the advantages of low power consumption, high execution efficiency, and integrated memory controller on the hardware for faster response. And it uses the same exclusive L2 cache as PD dual-core, so it is normal for X2 to outperform PD in terms of performance.

Inter's PD820 and PD915 series dual-core processors use Intel's NetBurst architecture, which is characterized by high clock speeds. PD dual-core processors use dedicated L2 cache, which means that each core can only use a fixed L2 cache. (This is a clear difference from the latest CORO architecture, which is a shared L2 cache).

As for the understanding of L2 cache size, generally speaking, the larger the L2 cache, the better the performance. The Netburst architecture has a 31-level pipeline, which is very effective for big data tasks, but when dealing with simple tasks with a small amount of data, the design of ultra-long pipelines will have a large delay, and the number of instructions processed in a single cycle is limited, and the efficiency is not high. Therefore, due to architectural defects, the PD dual-core was replaced by the later Core 2 dual-core processor before it was fully popularized.

Inter's Core 2 dual-core processor uses Intel's new architecture Conroe, which is much better than the Netburst architecture of the Pentium D. The PB's pipeline structure is 31 levels, while the Core has only 14 levels, and the shorter the pipeline, the faster the delay.

The i3 and the Athlon-Quad are indistinguishable.

i5i7 seconds kill speed dragon quad core, the budget for playing games is enough for i5

Otherwise, it's on 955, graphics card 5850, i5

The motherboard is P55

955 motherboard with 870

880 is fine.

There is no absolute comparability between the two.

But I choose the E8400

The e8400 is playing the game very well.

The AMD720 has an advantage when multitasking.

The E8400 is more stable.

Better performance. (E8400 is more widely applicable).

Now the latest AMD Ryzen series is still good. It is comparable to Intel's latest series in terms of performance.

In terms of performance, the core is good, the price is good, AMD is good, generally speaking, most of the good AMD processors are compared with the first-level core, and the performance is relatively similar Then**cheaper, I have used both brands I always feel that AMD multitasking is much worse than the core, and often fake death, but if you are just a game, AMD can be enough, and it is a lot cheaper.

Gotta Core, never amd, I regret dying.

Interl's compatibility is generally stable and suitable for design office use.

AMD Gaming's speeds are fast.