Constant hate towards AMD

Discussion in 'Desktop Computers' started by codename47deni, Jan 19, 2012.

  1. codename47deni

    codename47deni New Member

    Messages:
    48
    Intel vs AMD - the never ending war between the companies and their fans...

    Seriously, why do people hate so much on AMD? I mean how much will it matter for the average customer in the end?

    I am buying an AMD Phenom II X4 960T and most of my friends say that I'm buying shit, even though my setup will be able to run today's games. And they never had an AMD in their life! Talk about bias.

    How much advantage does Intel really have over AMD?

    How does this affect the customer?

    Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse...
     
  2. chuckzwood

    chuckzwood New Member

    Messages:
    23
    In the market right now, Intel is a strong leader as far as performance goes. Intel having a strong competitor is best for the consumer, but AMD needs to do some more work before giving much competition. **This is coming from personal opinion from what I have read -- far from seasoned experience!**
     
  3. codename47deni

    codename47deni New Member

    Messages:
    48
    Sure. That's fine with me, but jeez... It's like I'm getting ostracized by not following the herd.
     
  4. trewyn15

    trewyn15 New Member

    Messages:
    267
    No shame in getting AMD, but personally if I'm ever going to spend a lot on a nice gaming build I would want to spend the little bit extra on getting the "top" processor in the market right now.

    Still, like you said, the AMD will handle your games, then you're fine. Plenty of people with respectable systems around here running an AMD
     
  5. codename47deni

    codename47deni New Member

    Messages:
    48
    Okay. But I had a tight budget, and computer prices are way higher where I live. I see that in the US you can get killer deals on all computer parts. Plus you have a wider variety of stuff to choose from.

    I'm also curious how this AMD will handle my games, even if Intel has an edge.
     
  6. chuckzwood

    chuckzwood New Member

    Messages:
    23
    As long as you buy an AMD processor which is good enough, they can handle games just fine.

    Some people are radically into certain brands. Although I do prefer some brands over others (such as Ford over Chevy), I am not radical in any of these preferences. But sometimes the "fan boys" are entertaining ;)!
     
  7. SuperDuperMe

    SuperDuperMe New Member

    Messages:
    2,216
    I think its all just BS tbh. The power these people are talking about is pretty much miniscule. A few fps for a few hundred doesnt sound all that great to me. Last amd chip i had was an xp2000, before that i had an intel p4, now an intel e6600.

    SO long as it does the job. Is affordable, and wont break i dont care who makes it. For me if intel has a chip as cheap as the 955be then id be up there ass, but amd are leaders in affordable but well performing chips. For methats what counts. Im not a performance jockey so dont really care if i get that extra 4 fps at 16 million p or w.e. If i can play a game, it looks smooth and i enjoy myself. All is good.
     
  8. trewyn15

    trewyn15 New Member

    Messages:
    267
    If you can't afford it you can't afford it, agreed with what was just said, if you're on a budget a few fps isn't worth it for sure!
     
  9. Ankur

    Ankur Active Member

    Messages:
    1,947
    Intel also says that AMD is its competitor as its products are nicely priced.
    AMD can do well, I like they have a good ambition.
    But seriously saying I hate when new guys choose AMD over intel for those 8 cores.
     
  10. codename47deni

    codename47deni New Member

    Messages:
    48
    I wouldn't even know what to do with those 8 cores. I think the average user wouldn't need more than 2 cores, but that's just what I think.

    I'm not going to render video or do serious work. I believe that Intel is better for that kind of thing, but I'd rather buy an affordable AMD that can do the job.

    I had both AMD and Intel systems in my lifetime, and didn't really care much for brands. They both performed well.
     
  11. claptonman

    claptonman New Member

    Messages:
    5,480
    45-55 fps on BF3 with ultra, I'm not complaining. And if I went Intel, I'd have to cut back on my video card.
     
  12. Spesh

    Spesh New Member

    Messages:
    501
    It all comes down to budget at the end if the day. With current hardware, the only real reason for considering an AMD platform is if you are limited by budget. This doesn't mean that AMD chips are bad, they suit a purpose and are priced accordingly.
     
  13. codename47deni

    codename47deni New Member

    Messages:
    48
    Thank you!
     
  14. OvenMaster

    OvenMaster VIP Member

    Messages:
    2,643
    I've been using AMD since 2004. Even for my last build (Oct '11) when I compared CPUs and motherboards, I found that I just can't afford Intel. AMD gets my money for sheer value.
     
  15. jonnyp11

    jonnyp11 New Member

    Messages:
    9,717
    only difference between the 2 is when it comes to pricing. your 960t will be barely behind a i3-2100 which costs the same. but your cpu can either unlock to a 6 core or you could easily and cheaply upgrade to cooler and put that thing at 4ghz or higher which it now beats the i3, and the i3 can't overclock but maybe and extra .1 or .2ghz before it becomes unstable and screws things up. i'd take a phenom x4 over an i3 every time plus it also does better at multitasking and once in game, there is virtually no difference.
     
  16. codename47deni

    codename47deni New Member

    Messages:
    48
    Now that you mentioned multitasking. I wanted to know if you could elaborate on the importance of multiple threads. What does Intel excel at when it comes to applications, photoshop, video rendering and stuff like that?

    when does having multiple cores and more threads really come into play?

    How does RAM really affect over all performance and when do I have enough RAM?
     
  17. jonnyp11

    jonnyp11 New Member

    Messages:
    9,717
    Ram amounts needed change over the years, for anybody 8 is more than enough, 4gb's can easily do anything if on a budget, anything over those is only going to be used in a professional editing or 3d modeling situation. for cores it's like having 1 person do a worksheet at school vs 1 doing the front and the other doing the back, way faster in the second option, as for threads, there's not a way i can think in this example but they only add a little performance and there are many programs that can only use 1 or 2 cores, and a thread just makes it so the core acts like 2 and can do a little more, so i guess the people doing the work are semi-ambidextrous or whatever, so he can write a littloe with his other hand at the same time.

    as far as where intel excels, right now they excel at everything pretty much, i think amd wins against them for video editing and 3d modeling on the lower end up to the low end x6's but once you get the the i5-2300 or 2400, intel's back in the lead i think.
     
  18. Spesh

    Spesh New Member

    Messages:
    501
    Yes, AMD tend to be competing in the lower - mid end, using an aggressive pricing strategy, which gives you a great alternative if you are a home user. Generally speaking, any proffessional environment that requires high productivity in mulithreaded tasks will use Intel based systems, as will enthusiasts.

    It's been a little while now since AMD have been able to offer any reasonable competition to Intel in terms of outright maximum performance.
     
  19. kdfresh09

    kdfresh09 New Member

    Messages:
    895
    codename47deni...forget about your friends playing you for the black sheep just cause your leaning on amd's side of things. ive ran my rig now for some time and i can not complain. i have never come into a situation where it wasnt enough, and i do gaming, video editing/convering as well as rendering and audio compiling. granted, when it comes to everything besides gaming that i listed, im sure intel would get the job done "a little quicker", but ill gladly take the 6 cores i have over intels 4 for the same price. even if i were to get a quad core by amd and contemplate it with a i5, i would still rather get the amd and spend the extra money i saved towards my gpu fund. i mean, look at the 3dmark11 thread...im ranked #3, and its AMD. tell your friends that they can have intel, but your going with the 960t, with the possibilty of unlocking it to a 6 core cpu, and if not, overclocking it to 4Ghz and it still being onpar with an i5 stock, while being able to have a better GPU because of it.
     
  20. Okedokey

    Okedokey Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    9,506
    One thing people forget though is, if you get a 960T or similar, thats almost the end of the line. With the i3, it still performs as well now, plus you can upgrade right through to i7 and ivybridge, so the future upgradability is massively better.
     

Share This Page