|
View Poll Results: So which do you like AMD or Intel | |||
AMD | 83 | 74.11% | |
INTEL | 29 | 25.89% | |
Voters: 112. You may not vote on this poll |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
02-23-2005, 08:50 AM | #1 (permalink) |
Ravenous
Location: Right Behind You
|
INTEL vs AMD
OK, so later this spring I am going to build a new machine and I wanted to get your thoughts on which processor everyone likes. I know I know the debate could go on forever.
__________________
Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as Gods. Cats have never forgotten this. |
02-23-2005, 08:57 AM | #2 (permalink) |
Professional Loafer
Location: texas
|
This is just going to start a flame war, you know that right?
I use both processors and they each have their advantages and disadvantages. I also have a Sun Machine up at work that uses UltraSPARC III Cu processors. Why did you start this thread? I'm sure this has been done and worked over numerous times.
__________________
"You hear the one about the fella who died, went to the pearly gates? St. Peter let him in. Sees a guy in a suit making a closing argument. Says, "Who's that?" St. Peter says, "Oh, that's God. Thinks he's Denny Crane." |
02-23-2005, 09:42 AM | #3 (permalink) |
Addict
Location: Nottingham, England
|
Yes this thread has be done a few times, but unless you are a total computer geek it is hard to know who has the better processor out at the moment. I use AMD simply because they are cheaper, and seem to do the job. Oh if you go for Intel, I think some of their new processors need new special memory.
|
02-23-2005, 10:06 AM | #4 (permalink) | |
Ravenous
Location: Right Behind You
|
Quote:
Well now that AMD has gone with the 64bit processor, I thought I would get everyone's opinion. Sorry for those of you who are sick of this debate. My apologies if this has been done thousands of times before. I just did a search on INTEL vs AMD and yes there has been much discussion on the topic, so I am sorry.
__________________
Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as Gods. Cats have never forgotten this. Last edited by wolf; 02-23-2005 at 10:14 AM.. |
|
02-23-2005, 01:05 PM | #6 (permalink) | |
Ravenous
Location: Right Behind You
|
Quote:
__________________
Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as Gods. Cats have never forgotten this. |
|
02-23-2005, 01:10 PM | #7 (permalink) |
....is off his meds...you were warned.
Location: The Wild Wild West
|
I have two AMD's and one P4.
Between my two fastest computers (P4-2.8GHz and AMD 2400+) the AMD is noticeably faster (all other components are equal). I seem to get a lag on my P4 after a period of time (requiring a reboot) while I rarely see this happen on my AMD. When it comes time to upgrade the P4, I plan on switching it to AMD and all of my machines will be AMD. |
02-23-2005, 02:55 PM | #8 (permalink) |
Go Cardinals
Location: St. Louis/Cincinnati
|
Intel just released the 6xx series of processors with the EMT64 extensions, and a 2MB Level 2 cache.
So, now both companies have 64-bit processors, although there is little software out now that takes advantage of it. My vote: Intel
__________________
Brian Griffin: Ah, if my memory serves me, this is the physics department. Chris Griffin: That would explain all the gravity. |
02-23-2005, 03:20 PM | #9 (permalink) |
Psycho
Location: Firefox yourself and change the world!
|
Interms of what I currently use its AMD 64. But the system that gets used most now is my G5 Mac. So I guess I would have to vote AMD sence no apple proc are on the list.
__________________
I'll make ya famous! |
02-23-2005, 03:29 PM | #10 (permalink) |
Tilted F*ckhead
Location: New Jersey
|
I just use AMD because they are notoriously easier to overclock. That's my sole reason to use AMD.
__________________
Through counter-intelligence, it should be possible to pinpoint potential trouble makers, and neutralize them. |
02-23-2005, 04:32 PM | #11 (permalink) |
Knight of the Old Republic
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
|
This question can be answered in one sentence: buy an AMD if you're on a budget or want to play games and buy an Intel if you're gonna do media creation (movie making, CAD, encoding, ripping, etc.). This statement is considering the best that AMD and Intel have to offer. In other words, it doesn't work the same way for Celerons and Durons.
-Lasereth
__________________
"A Darwinian attacks his theory, seeking to find flaws. An ID believer defends his theory, seeking to conceal flaws." -Roger Ebert |
02-27-2005, 12:40 PM | #14 (permalink) |
Insane
Location: Austin, TX
|
AMD processors have the best price : performance ratio. Hands down. Naturally this doesn't quite hold when you look at bleeding-edge stuff, but for any reasonably-equipped system, the same $1000 will get you a much faster AMD platform than a $1000 Intel platform.
/AMD employee |
02-27-2005, 05:48 PM | #15 (permalink) |
Natalie Portman is sexy.
Location: The Outer Rim
|
I'm thinking of upgrading my other PC with one of Intel's 6xx series 64-bit, 2MB L3 Cache processor. Anyone had any experience with them yet?
__________________
"While the State exists there can be no freedom. When there is freedom there will be no State." - Vladimir Ilyich Lenin "Reason has always existed, but not always in a reasonable form."- Karl Marx Last edited by omega2K4; 02-27-2005 at 05:51 PM.. |
02-27-2005, 07:16 PM | #16 (permalink) |
Not so great lurker
Location: NY
|
I don't think that many people have had any experience with the Intel 6xx series, but here is a review that may help you (no 64 bit benchmarks on the chip yet/from this review)
http://www.techreport.com/reviews/20...0/index.x?pg=1 |
02-28-2005, 04:46 PM | #18 (permalink) |
Crazy
Location: Georgia Southern University
|
Definitely AMD. The latest Athlon 64s pwn the latest P4s. Plus you have to look at price difference. AMDs have always been cheaper in terms of bang for the buck.
__________________
I will not walk so that a child may live! - Master Shake |
02-28-2005, 05:38 PM | #19 (permalink) | |
Here, yet not all there.
Location: Franklinville, NJ
|
Quote:
__________________
The taint. Conveniently located between the snack bar and the dumpster. |
|
03-05-2005, 09:17 AM | #25 (permalink) |
Ravenous
Location: Right Behind You
|
I just wanted to thank you all for your help. I will update you when I make my purchase
The only thing that worries me about the AMD's is the multitasking benchmark.
__________________
Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as Gods. Cats have never forgotten this. |
03-05-2005, 11:18 PM | #26 (permalink) |
Psycho
Location: Down Under
|
If your into games AMD is the way to go. Certain 3d/media creation tasks run faster on Intel(often due to these programs using SSE3). This will all change soon though. AMD's next version of the A64 will support SSE3. The other HUGE change is Windows 64 bit edition. Early tests between Intels new 6 series(64 bit processors) and AMD's Athlon 64 on RC2 of WinXP 64 bit show a huge increase for the Athlon. The big thing is that the Athlon 64 was built to be a 64bit processor from the ground up whereas Intel's new 64 bit chips really just have 64bit support tacked on.
The thing I like the most is that people can't call AMD's chips "Clone's" anymore. Intels implementation of 64bit is basically a copy of AMD's. Competition is good :-) |
03-06-2005, 12:40 PM | #27 (permalink) |
We can't stop here! This is bat country!
Location: SL,UT
|
For years i had always used pentium, then when it came time to upgrade i was on a budget and ended up getting and athlonxp 2400. i loved it. when i upgraded again i went with the athlon 64 3200 and its working great for me. moved the 2400 over to my server and it runs great. i have nothing against either processor. they both run great. at work i run a network of about 30 computers and about 90 percent of them are all amd and we have no problems. if intel comes out with a processor that totally kicks amd's ass, then i'll probably go with it.
__________________
Brian: “Ok, all we’ve gotta do is find the American Embassy, and they’ll help us get home” Stewie: “Home? I have no intention of returning to that disgusting hovel with that intolerable woman, that fat slob, and that insufferable dog… Oh, you’re right here aren’t you? Oh well, I stand by it." |
03-07-2005, 09:23 PM | #28 (permalink) |
Psycho
Location: Fortress of Solitude
|
I use AMD at first for cost vs. performance. But after getting used to them I really like AMD. I understand for my use (gaming) I am more than happy with them over Intel. Intel are good processors aswell. And I doubt very much for the uses most of us use them for ( again Gaming) you wouldn't be able to tell.
My 2cents. AMD all the way.
__________________
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids,we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music." -Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc, 1989 |
03-08-2005, 05:22 AM | #30 (permalink) |
Insane
Location: Michigan
|
I personally go for AMD as much as possible. My personal desktop is an Athlon64 3000 chip and I CAN overclock it, I got a mobo that has every speed/voltage setting you can think of, I just don't know squat about overclocking and have been to lazy to figure it out. Other machines of mine include an Athlon XP Pro 2600+, Athlon T-Bird 1400, Duron 750 (my personal production server), Pentium 3 600mhz (BitTorrent and FTP on my home conenction), Athlon XP 2100 and Athlon Duron 1ghz lappy's.
I have a P4 2.4 ghz at work and the thing sucks ass. It's a Dell, not a home brew, so I'll give Intel the benefit of the doubt, but I can't see spending $400 on board and chip to achive 3ghz when I can spend $240 on an board and AMD chip at 2ghz and not notice a real difference. I don't encode movies or do music production, so I don't see the benefit of getting Intel.
__________________
Patterns have a habit of repeating themselves. |
03-08-2005, 08:44 AM | #31 (permalink) |
aka: freakylongname
Location: South of the Great While North
|
I went dual proc. on my machine so I thought it best to stay with intel. It's been very very good to me... ;-)
__________________
"Reality is just a crutch for people who can't cope with drugs." Robin Williams. |
03-08-2005, 08:58 AM | #32 (permalink) |
Metal and Rock 4 Life
Location: Phoenix
|
I've had both, I've enjoyed using both.
I hate these polls, but human nature doesnt let me pass up a poll. AMD since that is what my current rig is. It may change next time with new technology.
__________________
You bore me.... next. |
03-10-2005, 11:18 AM | #33 (permalink) |
Tilted Cat Head
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
|
Intel. same reasons I buy Levi's jeans...
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. |
03-14-2005, 12:09 AM | #34 (permalink) |
Patron
Administrator
Location: Tōkyō, Japan
|
AMD, since it's faster (greatly) on anything else than media creation on the low/mid -class and faster/equal on high-end.
The differences usually go like Intel has 1-7% gain in media creation and amd has 10-30% edge on everything else. I also run nowdays all own systems with AMD (barton, athlon mp on tfp and opterons on my own) and office systems on intel (only because dell doesn't sell amd and I'm not allowed to buy different brand). It's a no-brainer to choose AMD. [edit]The newest high-end AMD's seem to beat intel even in the media creation[/edit]
__________________
br, Sty I route, therefore you exist |
Tags |
amd, intel |
|
|