Amd or Intel for gaming

[Warriorhazzard]

Which would you recommend for OUT OF THIS WORLD GAMING!???

AMD or INTEL (both 2 cores )

Why do ppl say AMD is gamers choice is it trie?

 

[ceewi1]

These days, Intel's Core 2 Duos are about the best choice.

 

[PC eye]

I never seem to have any problems gaming with an AMD64 3500+ single core model cpu with 2gb of ram on a Socket 939 board. While Intel has always focused on clock speeds AMD had the performance edge for the longest time. Presently they are geared more towards the new line of quad cored cpu that will be primarily seen on server type boards. AMD's older Atholon XP line of 2-2.2ghz cpus used to ring circles around Intel P4s seeing 3-3.4ghz.

 

[recon]

Intel (shame)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103861

this is going to be your best processor

while intel is more for a worker like designing and movie editing, amd has always strived for gaming

AMD and ATI have come together (i cry every time i see it)

(im going to build my own cpu lol) (amd has done a stupid, stupid thing)
(still amd whoops intels can of snot)

 

[Geoff]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103861

this is going to be your best processor

while intel is more for a worker like designing and movie editing, amd has always strived for gaming

AMD and ATI have come together (i cry every time i see it)

(im going to build my own cpu lol) (amd has done a stupid, stupid thing)
(still amd whoops intels can of snot)

The Core 2 Duo line (especially the X6800) are far better then the FX-62, and are much cheaper.

 

[palmmann]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103861

this is going to be your best processor

while intel is more for a worker like designing and movie editing, amd has always strived for gaming

AMD and ATI have come together (i cry every time i see it)

(im going to build my own cpu lol) (amd has done a stupid, stupid thing)
(still amd whoops intels can of snot)

looks like you haven't been around for the last year, lol

 

[Angel.of.Death]

looks like you haven't been around for the last year, lol

Owned.

 

[Archangel]

The Core 2 Duo line (especially the X6800) are far better then the FX-62, and are much cheaper.

the x6800 is better, but not by far,.. besides that, the x6800 is just as expensive as the fx-62 (at least over here its even a bit more expensive)

However, i have to agree that the C2D processors are better than the AMD's

 

[PC eye]

the x6800 is better, but not by far,.. besides that, the x6800 is just as expensive as the fx-62 (at least over here its even a bit more expensive)

However, i have to agree that the C2D processors are better than the AMD's

Going by...? clock speed? Going by? It takes a little more then just clock speed to realize a high end gaming machine. AMD still has something up their sleeves with the ATI deal.

 

[adz_619]

Going by...? clock speed? Going by? It takes a little more then just clock speed to realize a high end gaming machine. AMD still has something up their sleeves with the ATI deal.

Possibly some graphics incorparation that will blow NVIDIA away!!
I was a great fan of AMD, but i am pretty saddened with Intel taking the lead.

I support AMD but whichever CPU is top at the time i use it.

 

[flash527]

Possibly some graphics incorparation that will blow NVIDIA away!!
I was a great fan of AMD, but i am pretty saddened with Intel taking the lead.

I support AMD but whichever CPU is top at the time i use it.

i couldnt agree more. i loved my FX-60, but i just ordered an E6300.

 

[maroon1]

the x6800 is better, but not by far,.. besides that, the x6800 is just as expensive as the fx-62 (at least over here its even a bit more expensive)

I disagree with you, because as I know the E6600 can beat fx-62, so the X6800 should be better than fx-62 by far.

Also the core 2 duo are better overclocker than AMD

 

[Ku-sama]

i couldnt agree more. i loved my FX-60, but i just ordered an E6300.

how much are you selling your's for?

 

[Grey410]

AMD Fan Myself.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103861

this is going to be your best processor

while intel is more for a worker like designing and movie editing, amd has always strived for gaming

AMD and ATI have come together (i cry every time i see it)

(im going to build my own cpu lol) (amd has done a stupid, stupid thing)
(still amd whoops intels can of snot)

I'm a huge fan of AMD but if you go to www.tomshardware.com or www.anandtech.com or www.firingsquad.com you will see that in almost all gaming benchmarks and benchmarks in general even the E6600 outperforms the FX-62 and it costs about $600 less.

My last build was an AMD and I loved it. I went from AMD XP to P4 back to AMD 64. I am a huge AMD fan but when my stock E6600 @ 2.4 stomps my roommates Opty 165 @ 2.7 in everything from frame rates, to load times, to benchmarks well I'm sold. I have 3 friends with AMD builds who all admit my new C2D rig is better, faster, and just looks better playing games.

Are AMD cpu's good for gaming? YES! Are they decently priced at the lower end YES, but they are not currently the best CPU's for gaming as sad as I am to say that. I think that being an AMD fan is good but hating Intel is a little overboad as without Intel AMD wouldn't be where it is today. AMD without an Intel there 1st could very well be Intel itself. It's still a business when you get down to it. I'm glad they're both around. Competition is a very good thing for consumers and it makes new products come out faster.

I am also excited to see that AMD and ATI are doing new and exciting things.

Just sharing my Humble Opinion

 

[dragon2309]

Going by...? clock speed? Going by? It takes a little more then just clock speed to realize a high end gaming machine. AMD still has something up their sleeves with the ATI deal.

I cant tell whether or not your being argumentative, ignorant or just an AMD fanboy... Its proven by almost every benchmark out there that gaming wise the C2D's outperform most/all of the current AMD range. I can recall the famous one where the e6400 (i think) performed better than an FX-62

an example of scuh can be found here - http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=c2le&page=6

that was just one of many on a google search result

more benchies can be found here - http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2802&p=10
and here - http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?page=7471&head=0
and again here - http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/914/5/page_5_benchmarks_pifast/index.html

and to add insult to injury, all the "reasonable" C2D's are on average £200-300 cheaper than the FX-62.

AMD fanboys cant even calim on AM2 to save them either, all that did was introduce the capability of DDRII memory, which isnt exactly the greatest addition to a system, higher speeds and bigger capacities introduces higher latencies whc=ich ends up having a backwards effect on the system (to a certain degree of course)

So maybe AMD will come up with their new architecture pretty soon in 2007, by then intel's kentsfield will be mainstream in the desktop PC market and AMD will be behind once again. Face it, at least for a little while the AMD reign of power is over.

dragon

 

[PC eye]

Possibly some graphics incorparation that will blow NVIDIA away!!
I was a great fan of AMD, but i am pretty saddened with Intel taking the lead.

I support AMD but whichever CPU is top at the time i use it.

One thing planned between AMD and ATI is the incorporation of gpu support into the upcoming line of cpus. The idea for 2008 and beyond is to integrate microprocessors with graphics chips. It will like having a third or fifth core added to the newer line of cpus that come out. That's geared to meet the demands for graphics and multimedia.

You can easily point at all of the benchmarks you want until you realize the next line of cpus will make the C2Ds look like "code 2 dinosaurs" no matter who makes them. For 2007 AMD is focused more on the server line of quad core cpus coming out. That will pretty much surpass their Opteron line. So much for the Opteron 185 planned for a 2007 build. Now we'll see how long it takes AMD to get out of it's hopefully temporary slump. But the bulb that burns the brightest usually burns out the quickest.

 

[jp198780]

im going with Intel..

 

[dragon2309]

You can easily point at all of the benchmarks you want until you realize the next line of cpus will make the C2Ds look like "code 2 dinosaurs" no matter who makes them.

Wait, so your comparing current benchamrks of current CPU's against somethign that sdoesnt exist and is being theorized about.... hmm

For 2007 AMD is focused more on the server line of quad core cpus coming out. That will pretty much surpass their Opteron line.

Lol, ok, again your comparing items from different generations... The brand new "theorized" cpus from AMD, against this current generation of intel's opterons... That cannot possibly be a fair fight, now stop and take a look at the quad core kentsfield CPU's from intel. Maybe thats a bit more fair, i havent seen any bencmarks for these yet, but im guessing they are a tad better than the opteron line.

But the bulb that burns the brightest usually burns out the quickest.

You could apply almost ANY analogy to this situation to help prove a null point...

dragon

 

[Impr3ssiv3]

I think that being an AMD fan is good but hating Intel is a little overboad as without Intel AMD wouldn't be where it is today. AMD without an Intel there 1st could very well be Intel itself. It's still a business when you get down to it. I'm glad they're both around. Competition is a very good thing for consumers and it makes new products come out faster.

this is called a monopoly

AMD wouldnt have any competion, so no need to strive to get better


its just like a communistic country


if everyone gets the same amount of money, then there is no strive to go to school longer and work harder to become a doctor

 

[diduknowthat]

One thing planned between AMD and ATI is the incorporation of gpu support into the upcoming line of cpus. The idea for 2008 and beyond is to integrate microprocessors with graphics chips. It will like having a third or fifth core added to the newer line of cpus that come out. That's geared to meet the demands for graphics and multimedia.

You can easily point at all of the benchmarks you want until you realize the next line of cpus will make the C2Ds look like "code 2 dinosaurs" no matter who makes them. For 2007 AMD is focused more on the server line of quad core cpus coming out. That will pretty much surpass their Opteron line. So much for the Opteron 185 planned for a 2007 build. Now we'll see how long it takes AMD to get out of it's hopefully temporary slump. But the bulb that burns the brightest usually burns out the quickest.

My 100 watt lighbulbs been out burning my 60 watt one Ahah ok joking..but still, what are you trying to tell him? Get a FX-62 and hope that the new line of CPU and GPU in one processors use Am2 boards?