AMD or Intel??

We have a CPU section for this. Also, it's addressed in CPU 101

The AMD X2 series outperforms the Pentium D series at anything you can throw at it.
Click to expand...
Assuming of course you can afford it

but the AMD X2 is by far the best dual core, in fact it even beats the P4 EE in some tests.
Click to expand...
The Pentium4 EE is a singlecore chip remember? Pointless to compare to a dualcore box.

always get the X2 3800+
Click to expand...
Thats awfully broad.

This is off topic but, what school do you go to?
Click to expand...
We got PMs for this stuff :)
 
iv never had AMD iv had Intel all my life i like Intel but i hear that AMD is good so what ever u decide
 
skyhigh said:
iv never had AMD iv had Intel all my life i like Intel but i hear that AMD is good so what ever u decide
Click to expand...

I had both Intel and AMD and I prefer AMD. But I can't say it's a fair comparison. Alot of people like AMD too. :rolleyes:
 
Buy the March issue of Computer Shoppers Magazine. All of the dual core processors from AMD and Intel were tested against each other. You will be surprised to see the the AMD X2 4400+ pretty much whips the Intel Pent Extreme. None of the Intels had a chance against the AMD x2 4600+ and 4800+ in ANY benchmark. If this was the only magazine coming up with this conclusion, I would be skeptical BUT it's testing the same across the board as far as magazines go. Supposedly the AMD X2 4400+ has the best performance for the dollar value of all the tested CPUs.
 
None of the Intels had a chance against the AMD x2 4600+ and 4800+ in ANY benchmark.
Click to expand...
Did they try four 4-thread Lightwave renderings? Or how about doing 16 2-pass DVD encodes? ;) X2 will get eaten alive (well so will the PXE, but at least it'll have a snowball's chance)
 
Praetor said:
Did they try four 4-thread Lightwave renderings? Or how about doing 16 2-pass DVD encodes? ;) X2 will get eaten alive (well so will the PXE, but at least it'll have a snowball's chance)
Click to expand...
im sure nobody in this forum will be doing anything that intensive.
either way the Athlon 64 core is faster than pentium 4 cores, they simply perform better. rather than adding an extra slower pentium 4 core, they added the faster athlon 64 core making it faster than all the pentium d's.
frequency on the other hand - doesn't matter as much as people think.
look at intel's pentium m. look at its frequency v. its performance.
especially since it will be reintroduced into the desktop, i wonder what AMD will have to counter that ;) we shall see
 
im sure nobody in this forum will be doing anything that intensive.
Click to expand...
*cough*
either way the Athlon 64 core is faster than pentium 4 cores,
Click to expand...
no they're not, class for class they clock lower.

rather than adding an extra slower pentium 4 core, they added the faster athlon 64 core making it faster than all the pentium d's.
Click to expand...
i can understand this statement just enough to know that it is wrong

especially since it will be reintroduced into the desktop,
Click to expand...
they aren't reintroducing mobile chips to desktop for two reasons
1) They never did it in the first place (exlcuding the AOpen i855 etc)
2) The new conroe core is not soley mobile technology

i wonder what AMD will have to counter that we shall see
Click to expand...
those who actually read up, already know whats in AMD's roadmap
 
I got a x2 3800+, and couldn't be happier. The processor is $295 at Newegg.com, which might be a bit pricey, but it's a great processor. Since it's dual-core, it's great for just about anything.
 
I would say AMD for gaming, Intel for other. I don't know how many of you have heard of Intel Itanium 64-bit processor, but HP uses them in a lot of their multi-processor/multi-OS servers like their Integrity class servers for example.. But I wouldn't think they'd be better than dual AMDs (for gaming)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top