I'm just wondering if anyones played around with the new AMD quad core chips at all. and if so how do they compare to their Intel Counterparts?

I'v been lanning on getting a Q6600 but i'm wondering how it would compare with say a AMD PHENOM X4 9600 QUAD-CORE 2.3GHz 4MB 95W chip for about the same price.

__________________

From what I've read, AMD dropped the ball with these chips. The came our WAY later than Intel's quad core, cost more, and do not perform as well (especially when it comes to overclocking).

I wouldn't get one. If I were you, I would wait to get my hands on the q9450. Can you say 12MB cache goodness and with 260MHz clock and 267MHz FSB extra for around $120 more, you can't go wrong.

Clock for clock the year plus old Q6600 can still kick Phenom booty. And Intel is WAY more overclockable, Phemons seem to struggle to hit 3GHz, Intels' have been hiting in the 5Ghz range on the 45nm's. The only reason I could see to go that route was if you had an AM2 mobo that supported it already.

Yep, stick with Intel until AMD releases something new.

There's even a required "bug fix" patch for the Phenoms which drops performance by 10 - 15% on top of already lackluster performance when compared to the C2D chips.

I was an AMD fanboi for 15 years, but still wouldn't touch anything of theirs until they get their #@it back together.

This site is the best for in depth review (or quick benchmark comparisons) :
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_20...1075&chart=439