Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel vs. Amd

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel vs. Amd

    Well since I made the "Nvidia vs ATI" I figured I should do this too

    Well? What processor brand do you prefer?

    This time around i'm gonna turn the tables and vote for Amd
    not only is it's dual core processors superior than intel (for now, and its IMO don't kill me for it >.>) I also have a backing link to prove it

    http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-1.html

    There... so what do you guys say?

  • #2
    Re: Intel vs. Amd

    Your link is a comparison of the Athlon 64 X2 vs. the Pentium D from 2005. You really want to be comparing the A64 X2 with the Core 2, not the Pentium D.

    There really isn't much comparison, IMO. Intel beats AMD hands down.

    Just pick your benchmark and check the numbers.
    Diplomacy is the art of saying "good doggie" while looking for a bigger stick.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Intel vs. Amd

      When AMD had the best gaming rig I had one and loved it. Now Intel is on top and I have one of them and love it. Performance is key not brand. For my anyway.
      The Old Guy
      kin3
      sigpic


      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Intel vs. Amd

        Originally posted by kin3 View Post
        When AMD had the best gaming rig I had one and loved it. Now Intel is on top and I have one of them and love it. Performance is key not brand. For my anyway.
        Yup, fanboyism is sorta pointless for computer hardware, but some people can't help but indulge in it to help them justify their purchases, I guess.
        "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.
        He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

        - Attributed to General George Patton, Jr.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Intel vs. Amd

          Uhm wow, way to grab a entirely out of context review :icon_eek: No offence but pretty much every recent benchmark will show the complete opposite. The fact that those same AMD chips are essentially the same today where as Intel has made a substatial step forward also changes things.

          As Kin and Evo Sin pointed out, go with what's best at the time.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Intel vs. Amd

            Personally, I used to be a die-hard AMD and ATI fan. Always felt they had better performance, etc etc. Then AMD stuck its head up its... ice cream cone... with regards to development and business practice. Yea, nothing like releasing a quad-core processor that is still out-performed by your dual-cores. Since ATI was bought by AMD, it's getting dragged down in the pit as well (though ATI's high-end cards seem to be faring well).

            When I built my new rig in December, I went with Intel for the first time since the 90's (I think, can't remember the stock processor in the PackBell 386, heh) and with nVidia for the first time ever. Haven't been disappointed, and I doubt I'll go back to AMD until its head is no longer coated in ice cream.
            Last edited by SmokingTarpan; 06-03-2008, 01:39 PM.
            [squadl]
            "I am the prettiest african-american, vietnamese..cong..person." -SugarNCamo

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Intel vs. Amd

              Very well put Tarpan.
              I feel exactly the same way, and if I could have afforded to get a new rig over the past few years, I would have gone AMD. I remember when the 3500 first came out, and it was blowing Intels smoking hot (literally) Pent. 4s away in games. I so wanted one, but was working 3 jobs at 80 hours a week to make ends meet and support the wife while she went for her master's.
              Then intel saw the light with their mobile processors as the future, and dumped netburst and P.4/P.D mini space heaters, and took the lead from AMD.
              I can't wait for AMD to make a huge comeback, and I will be upgrading to them when I do, if they keep their performance/price in check like they have in the past.

              LINKS

              * *


              Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

              -Carlos A. Urbizo-

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Intel vs. Amd

                AMD made better processors for quite a few years and now Intel pretty clearly has the lead. I don't get these threads. Why would someone care who manufactured their CPU? Just spend your money on whatever is fastest.
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Intel vs. Amd

                  Originally posted by Buckets View Post
                  I don't get these threads. Why would someone care who manufactured their CPU? Just spend your money on whatever is fastest.
                  Because there's a lot more to CPU's than just speed.
                  [squadl]
                  "I am the prettiest african-american, vietnamese..cong..person." -SugarNCamo

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Intel vs. Amd

                    Originally posted by SmokingTarpan View Post
                    Because there's a lot more to CPU's than just speed.
                    Ok, fine, spend your money on what is fastest and uses the least amount of power. Or what costs the least. Or runs coolest. My point is that the manufacturer should have pretty much nothing to do with your choice. Intel and AMD both make high quality parts.
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Intel vs. Amd

                      Intel are cutting prices on their processors so they will be affordable and in just about all benchmarking comparison tests I have seen Intel usually beats AMD with comparable processors. There may be the few times AMD does beat Intel on some benchmarks but not many, at least not now. Maybe in a year AMD will be pushing Intel, HA, that was a laugh.
                      Anyway, I too was a die hard AMD fan till lately. I had a few ATi cards but wish I had never had them. That was before AMD bought ATi at that. So, I am gald right now I have my Intel and Nvidia. It just seems more games are "MADE FOR" Intel and Nvidia. Almost all games have the splash screen that comes up saying "Nvidia, the way it's meant to be played" which makes me think it isn't only marketing but also the fact the game designers are most likely using an Nvidia card to make the game. Which means the games should play better.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Intel vs. Amd

                        Originally posted by msdz View Post
                        It just seems more games are "MADE FOR" Intel and Nvidia. Almost all games have the splash screen that comes up saying "Nvidia, the way it's meant to be played" which makes me think it isn't only marketing but also the fact the game designers are most likely using an Nvidia card to make the game. Which means the games should play better.
                        That is just because those 2 companies have the money to bully/support game devs. I have read articles though that point out that FarCry had the "Made for Nvidia", but ATI actually ran the game better. I was pretty hard core into FarCry, since the mod team I am on first built off that game, and now off of Crysis (another made for Nvidia).
                        Plus, this was back when AMD had the only 64 bit processors in town (Intel lagged way behind), and so AMD put out a super patch version for FarCry allowing it to run in 64 bit. I actually still have it on my computer.

                        I know for Crysis, both Intel and Nvidia gave Crytek lots of toys to play with, some even before public release, as well as manpower that was loaned out to them to help improve the game. It is one of the reasons Crytek got Crysis running good on a quad core.

                        LINKS

                        * *


                        Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

                        -Carlos A. Urbizo-

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Intel vs. Amd

                          Another example of this is Assassin's Creed. Although it had a "plays best on Nvidia" splash screen, the original release actually ran best on the Readeon HD3K series because it included DirectX 10.1 support. Nvidia pulled some strings and had them remove that support with the first patch.
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Intel vs. Amd

                            Originally posted by Buckets View Post
                            My point is that the manufacturer should have pretty much nothing to do with your choice. Intel and AMD both make high quality parts.
                            Well, that boils down to a matter of opinion, really. I'm convinced that, at the moment, AMD couldn't really design their way out of a paper bag. Back when they released their first quad core (Phenom), tests showed that it was grossly out-performed by their own dual-cores. Now, if I'm going to shell out the money for a spanking new quad core processor it damn well better not be worse than another processor with half the power at half the price. Take some other things into consideration, such as keeping in bad processes/architecture in the cores, and it makes me think that the people at the top of the AMD chain are not making very good decisions at the moment. I'm not sure what direction they're aiming to go, but it doesn't seem to be the right one right now.

                            It's not unlike buying cars. Really, whether Ford, Toyota or Chevy, all the cars more or less boil down to a box with four wheels that gets you from point A to point B. Yet each company has a varying degree of trust put into it by the purchasing public based on the decisions the company makes. Right now, I don't trust AMD because I believe the company is making terrible decisions at the top- and we're seeing those decisions affect both performance and sales.
                            [squadl]
                            "I am the prettiest african-american, vietnamese..cong..person." -SugarNCamo

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Intel vs. Amd

                              I see where you are coming from and agree to a point Tarpan, but I really am keeping the faith that they have something up their sleeve. I am hoping they are going to bust out is some monster CPU that has enough horsepower and extra cores that it will be able to do the same FPS as a top of the line GPU, making the need for buying a gfx card unnecessary. I am hoping that is why they bought ATI, to gain some knowledge and other stuff.
                              Could be WAAAAYYYY off base, but can still cross my fingers, they make a comeback.

                              LINKS

                              * *


                              Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

                              -Carlos A. Urbizo-

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X