Cheat Engine

[Mazeura]

I had forgotten that AMD was releasing these until I was looking at Newegg today. What do you all think about these?
I was comparing prices and you can get a tri-core 2.1 GhZ for 149$ (3.6GhZ HT) and for the about price a E6550 (2.33GhZ 1333FSB) for 155$ or a E4700 (2.6GhZ 800FSB) for 139$.

What do you all think about these processors?

I think that for medium level gamers (like college students and casual gamers) that these would be a good alternative over the dual and quad cores from Intel, simply because they should out perform Intel's dual cores that are at the same price. And the cheapest quad core is 220$ (the Q6600).

Edit:
Oh, I'm putting up the stats for the tri-cores (that have been released) here.

[superweapons]

The cheapest Core 2 Quad price was $180 (no rebates). I have one of them.

When you compare them by price (comparing Q6600 at $224 against X3 8750 at $195), the Q6600 turns out to be a better buy (around $5 more worth it). Overclocking headroom is about the same using stock cooling (I pushed my Q6600 to 3.0GHz on stock, same with the X3).

Overall, the Phenom X3 8750 isn't too bad, but I would rather spend a little extra on a 15%+ boost in speed with the Q6600. Especially if the price for a Core 2 Quad is lower than the Phenom X3.

[Mazeura]

Ok, I'll rephrase what I said in my first post. "The cheapest quad that I know of..."

Anyways, I still think that the mid-range tri-core would be a better buy for people who don't game a lot. I was thinking about this earlier and most games run on either 1, 2, or 4 cores right?
So with the tri-core you can run a game and it would only use 2 cores, leaving a 3rd core open for anything else that you want to be going on in the background.
I don't know how the computers use the quad core though when your multitasking in the background while playing a game though.

[Uber-1337]

no, some games like the UT3 engine uses as many cores as youve got, and therefore leaving no more cores for extra use.