Skip to comments.Vanity - Better Choice - Intel or AMD?
Posted on 11/28/2006 7:08:02 AM PST by jonno
It's been a long, long time, but I'm back in the market for a new PC. The last time I built a machine (10 years ago 8^) I used an AMD processor, but there were always "issues".
I've been looking over at the Dell site, and they seem to have some very good deals. What is interesting is that the AMD-based machines are a good deal cheaper - and what about that Celeron?
So today I'm looking to tap into the deep pool of Freeper knowledge.
Right now Intel, hands down. Core2Duo or Core2Quad(QX6700)
AMD if you like gaming.
Intel if you don't care.
How much $ are you willing to spend and what are you going to use it for?
You get what you pay for. The AMD chips are okay and are far more compatible now than they were, but Intel is still the industry leader (at least now that they got the Core 2 Duo line out) and they have lots more R&D money.
I'd still buy Intel and have for my last two machines (both purchased this year.)
Even Apple has gone Intel!
What do you intend to use it for...and what operating system do you intend to use?
are you smoking dope?
I'd say just make certain you get a 64 bit processor from either company, and make certain it is a 'dual core.' Unless you are a propeller head looking for THE best performance, you'll be happy with either.
Stay away from Celeron.
Make certain ANY processor/ PC/ Notebook you buy is ready to run Microsoft Vista **AND** can handle at least 2 Gb of RAM.
That's my 4 cents. I have 6 machines here in my company-- 3 are intel, 3 are AMD. No issues.
> AMD if you like gaming.
That used to be true.
The Core 2 Duo chips outperform all similarly priced Athlon 64 and Opteron CPU's when it comes to gaming, and to just about everything else.
It was AMD for gaming until the Core 2 Duo came out.
I consider myself an AMD fan, BUT Intel right now has the best
processors... if ya don't trust me do some reviews online... just go to yahoo and search for a review of the "Intel Core2Duo E6600"(thats a pretty good sweet spot)
I do a bit of gaming and love AMD's. They run my programs for school quite well, too (MATLAB, Mathematica, AutoCAD). The only thing you might want to do is make sure you have extra cooling capability. A single case fan might not do the job - use 2 at a minimum. As far as dual core processors, I believe that it's basically a wash between AMD and Intel. The only difference (I beleive) is the AMD's are 64 bit whereas the Intels are still 32. (Someone please correct me on this if I'm wrong...)
Any incompatibility (issues) you saw in the past were probably more due to a cheaply made and poorly engineered motherboard rather than the AMD processor, a company looking to scrimp on costs will scrimp on everything.
yea, im using a custom homebuilt AMD system right now, like i said i like AMD they have done LOTS for ALL of us... but Intel has an excellent product in the Core2Duo and Core2Quad(IF you do professional apps like 3D rendering, video editing and such)
Exactly right. It's a no-brainer.
yea its bette not to give advise if your not sure.
In this case the Intel Core2Duo BLOWS AMD's X2 and FX out of the water... and Intel is also 64bit :\
There are not many, if any, games that use a dual core processor right now. I used to be an Intel user, but that all changed after I tried an AMD. I only care about performance, so I am not an Intel or AMD devotee as many people are.
AMD uses recycled electrons, Intel uses fresh electrons. There's nothing wrong in using recycled electrons. All computers use recycled gold at contacts. AMD has rigorous testing of them. AMD has put cost pressure on Intel such that they'll be doing it too. Other than that, without bench testing, comparable chips are indistinguishable. A mid range computer today has more computer power than existed in 1965 in the whole world. Use the power responsibly. Don't drink and write code.
iTunes is the WORST test, check 3D Studio max and other apps...
Intels Mid range processor is better than AMD has period... understand?
I used to run a celeron...got no complaints..like the AMD products, can't stand intel
I've been with AMD for 10+ years now and never looked back.
It's a bang for your buck issue.
Go to Tiger Direct. They have pre-built systems or bare bones kits.
My SIL buys the bare bones kits and builds pcs for himself, friends and relatives with never a problem. He uses both AMD and Intel too. (But I like Intel). And I shop at Tiger Direst also, never any issues with them. Service is good.
And from what I 'hear' Windows XP Pro is the OS to use. (don't know about Vista)
Have you been conducting benchmark tests on the processors?
If so, which benchmark tests have you conducted and what are the results?
Also, which games and hardware variations did you use to come to that conclusion?
As I said, I only care about performance. If one chip outperforms the other, I will use it. If the tests you've run show me Intel is better, then I will consider an Intel for my next purchase. But right now, mine says AMD.
"There are not many, if any, games that use a dual core processor right now. I used to be an Intel user, but that all changed after I tried an AMD. I only care about performance, so I am not an Intel or AMD devotee as many people are."
I recommend a bit of catchup reading at tech sites. I also chase the price/performance curve, but at the present time Intel Core 2 Duo wins across the board in all categories - gaming and applications alike.
It even runs cool, unlike their previous egg-boiler. Personally I expect some good work from AMD soon. That's the way these things go, back and forth.
(Side note: the E6400 is the sweet spot; cheap and monumentally overclockable).
there ya go... thats STOCK... now the E6600 CAN easily be Overclocked to be as fast as the X6800...
Four desktops, and 4 laptops all Intel, and from Windows 95 to
Windows XP. Anything not XP or 2000, is in backup role.
yea... IF your going to Overclock... I always overclock but i love the E6600 because its still a great overclocker + the added cache.
A lot of the Core 2 Duo chips have much less processor speed, like 1.8 GHZ. What's the deal with that?
the mhz war is over... that is meaningless(I thought AMD proved that to ALL of use over the past couple of years...)
Its all about operations/instructions per clock cycle
As it is in politics, it is in processors. I look at all sites with a bit of skepticism. There are obviuosly reviewers who have a particular bias towards Intel or AMD. I am talking about performance on my system and AMD has been better so far. No.6 is correct about these things going back and forth. Build yourself a top of the line machine today, and it will be top of the line until next week.
Intel will hold the title for some time, look at the road Intel and AMD road maps. Why do you think i'm lying to you? Like I said I'm an AMD FAN! Although I'm not going to lie for them.
Its also getting good reviews... QUAD CORE Intel Processor
You can also get it FACTORY overclocked or free to 3.2GHZ x 4 and it also retains the manufacturer warranty...
I hope you get exactly what you want in a PC regardless of where or from whom you purchase it.
If I had to start from scratch, I would be going with a Core 2 Duo. Of course, I'd have to get new memory (which I would have to do even if I stuck with AMD).
Actually... you're wrong... you can get a Core2Duo motherboard that supports DDR + DDR2 and AGP
This was just a quick link BUT others ARE on the market by other companies
The AMD is an X2 4400+ (overclockable, if you're in to that). I know it is old news now, but 6 months ago, it was the best bang for the buck (price/performance). A few months after I bought it, the price dropped dramatically. The AM2 was the new thing. But, as I'm sure you are aware, if you try to keep up with the latest and greatest, you'll be changing your system constantly. When all is said and done, what are a few milliseconds to the average user?
I guess the next question on this thread should be which is better, NVidia or ATI? LOL.
As of today, go with a duo Intel.
Soros fund's stock holdings grows 38%
Billionaire investor's hedge fund takes stakes in AMD, Chipotle Grill, adds to Cisco holdings.
November 14 2006: 7:39 PM EST
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- An investment fund controlled by billionaire investor George Soros increased its long stock and options positions by 38 percent to nearly $2.9 billion in the third quarter, according to a quarterly disclosure filed with U.S. regulators Tuesday.
Unlike previous disclosures from Soros Fund Management LLC that showed particular sectors in and out of favor, the holdings across multiple sectors as of Sept. 30 showed a diverse set of new holdings. They included a nearly $20 million stake in Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (Charts), and an $11 million position in Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc.
LOL! not thats where I have to start doing some research... I'm NOT a gamer and generally it depends on what you need it for...
Your processor is fine and im thinking strongly about upgrading my Athlon64 3500+ to a X2 4400
They see-saw for industry lead all the time... right now, I think Intel has the better top-end processors. If you're looking for middle-tier stuff, AMD will probably be less expensive than the most equivalent Intel chip.
In any case, consumers should have a great deal of affection for AMD simply because they forced Intel to be more competitive and not drag their heels so much trying to milk older technology.
This is why I love AMD but Intel does currently have the crown up and down the price scales...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.