Processor AMD vs. Intel

[BriGy86]

i am wondering what CPU and motherboard to get, i don't want to turn this thread into a war against Intel and AMD
i was originaly going to get an Intel 2.8C

the good things i see about AMD is that they are cheaper, they have a veriety of 64 bit chips, and most the AMD mouther boards i have looked at support IDE 133

Intel on the other hand, i understand there ratings a bit better, i hear they're better for multitasking, there boards support more RAM.

when ever i have asked people WHY AMD is better all i get is a BS answer like "because intel sucks"

i would like to know in what ways AMD is better than Intel.

another thing i have been told is that AMD is better for gaming while Intel is better for multitasking and multimedia. i play games once in a while but i wouldn't consider myself a hard core gamer

suggestions one chips, mother boards, and brands are welcome

thanks

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

AMD is better because it runs everything faster then intel pricepoint equivilents.

 

[Schadenfroh]

because intel sucks

 

[BriGy86]

what exactly are the pricepoint equivilents?

and another thing i don't know much about is the cores on AMD's there seems to be more of a veriety and i have no idea if one is better than the other

 

[BriGy86]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
because intel sucks

haha, thanks

and if i got an AMD i would probably want a 64 bit model

 

[scottieg]

idunno

I have always been a P4 guy untill just 2hours ago I picked up an A64 3000 NewCastle. I am really looking foward to installing it.

The thing is

A Barton 2500 which is what 1.8ghz is competative to a 2.4C. They may have different GHZ ratings but amd runs faster per clock.

 

[IanE]

I've never had Intel CPUs on my personal PCs, but at school and at work all the PCs are Intel, and for doing the same things... my pc at home (AMD Athlon 64 3000+) on DIALUP loads and runs applications and internet faster than the Intels on T1 and DSL... I believe my school's PCs have P4s at 1.8ghz and work is a P4 at 2.2 I believe.

I've never had a problem with any AMD CPUs, not even the early K6-2s, that 500mhz CPU was a beast and ran Half Life on dialup like a dream...

Townhomes = bad for DSL/Cable

I hope this helps.

Oh, AMD is also quite fond of price-cuts lately, take advantage of the cheap 64 bit CPUs while you can, they're incredible.

Ian

 

[BriGy86]

Originally posted by: scottieg
idunno

I have always been a P4 guy untill just 2hours ago I picked up an A64 3000 NewCastle. I am really looking foward to installing it.

The thing is

A Barton 2500 which is what 1.8ghz is competative to a 2.4C. They may have different GHZ ratings but amd runs faster per clock.

that was a little help, but faster per clock? i thought thats what the Ghz was, billions of cycles per second

or am i wrong?

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: BriGy86
what exactly are the pricepoint equivilents?

and another thing i don't know much about is the cores on AMD's there seems to be more of a veriety and i have no idea if one is better than the other

Not really.. if you go with an A64, chances are you will either have a NewCastle or a Clawhammer.
the only difference aside from teh MHz difference is one has more cache.

For example

3200+ Newcastle, 2.2GHz, 512k cache
3200+ Clawhammer, 2.0GHz, 1meg cache

I have a Newcastle and I love it.

You just have to sit down and use a PC with an Intel and a PC almost the same with an A64...
I just like the way the A64 runs, it just seems to run more fluidly, of course benches better in pretty much all games, and usually costs less than the equivalent P4... 3200+ A64 vs 3.2 P4 for example.

To me there is no option other than AMD. (at least not right now)

 

[BriGy86]

"For example

3200+ Newcastle, 2.2GHz, 512k cache
3200+ Clawhammer, 2.0GHz, 1meg cache "

that brings another question, which is better high frequency or more cache?

 

[CraigRT]

I felt the higher MHz was better simply because the CPU cost less money.. so even if they are about equal, the NewCastle was a bit cheaper. (IMO making it the better buy)

the benchmarks say they are almost dead nuts the same...

 

[BriGy86]

so the cores on AMD's don't matter all that much as the dif. between the cores in intel are?

i've been told that the prescott gets hotter than northwood

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: BriGy86
so the cores on AMD's don't matter all that much as the dif. between the cores in intel are?

i've been told that the prescott gets hotter than northwood

Pretty much.
Yes, I think the Intel cores matter a little more.. although not for the average joe.
the Prescott does get hotter, but other than that, not too much difference between the 2.
benchmarks do show some slight differences, but heat is the main factor in the decision in my opinion.
I'd go with a Northwood if I had to.
I have a Northwood 2.4B at work, and it works OK.. nice and cool.

 

[gwai lo]

P4's longer pipelines give them an edge in rendering, video encoding, stuff like that.

AMD's run pretty much everything else faster.

 

[Markfw]

Actually, if you check the latest benchmarks, Intel looses at everything.From anand recent review "It was difficult to resist being a little sensationalist in this 939 roundup and titling the review, "Who needs 925X?" That would have been a fair title, however, since you can clearly see that all of the Socket 939/FX53 boards completely outperform Intel's top 560 on the top 925X motherboard. Even Media Encoding, the last bastion of Intel dominance, is now a dead heat with the new AutoGK benchmark. "

Go the Athlon64.

 

[effee]

Majority of users here are AMD supporters. Its like going to rage3d forums and asking ATI or Nvidia?

 

[raildogg]

Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
because intel sucks

:thumbsdown::disgust:

 

[imported_Bleh]

I have a intel 2.6c overclocked to 3.3 ghz and I love it. I used to have an amd 1.4 ghz athlon (last one before they went to xp) and I loved that til the board got hit by lightning. If your doing gaming then amd is the way to go but if your more into music/video editing and movies then intel is the one you should pick. Personally if my brother in law purchases my computer from me ill be making an amd 64 90nm rig because im a gamer.

 

[BriGy86]

thats kind of why i am a bit hesitant, im not much of a gamer (only have 1 and UT demo)

would AMD still be worth more to me than Intel?

 

[oldman420]

I think it depends on what you are going to be using the system for.
If I were building a strictly gaming rig I would go with Intel as the 800 MHz Prescott smokes almost any amd .but get ready to spend 600 bucks or so for a CPU/MB combo and now with ddr2 ram it gets even more expensive.
AMD on the other hand will give almost non perceivable less performance losses and some gains.
its really a tossup but with a a64 3500 you probably could match a p4 3.2 at stock.
IMO memory and not CPU come into play and will weigh heavily at these rates of speed the bus of each will do way more than most games can take these days.
wow this post sucks sorry.
so in conclusion I would if I could afford it get a Prescott over an a64 for gaming right now.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: BriGy86
thats kind of why i am a bit hesitant, im not much of a gamer (only have 1 and UT demo)

would AMD still be worth more to me than Intel?

yes

 

[mbackof]

This really depends on what you are using the system for.
Gaming, Server type applications (help desk, WWW server) - AMD 64 is the best power/price combination.
Video Editing - Intel P4 still does the best at this on the benchmarks.
WWW, Word Processing, Office work - just get an AMD Athlon with NForce 2 motherboard, it is more than enough power and is cheaper.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: BriGy86
thats kind of why i am a bit hesitant, im not much of a gamer (only have 1 and UT demo)

would AMD still be worth more to me than Intel?

I really do think so.

 

[HiDeAtHfInItIoN]

Id say go AMD if ur gonna be gaming...im about to buy a 3500+ 90nm

 

[Gamingphreek]

P4 is only marginally better on some encoding/decoding apps.

AMD is for the most part better right now. Especially price performance.

"Celeron > AMD Processors"
-Felix (Had to say it )

-Kevin