Det. Bart Lasiter Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 I switched to AMD a few years ago when I got my 3400+ (which has been replaced with my FX-55 San Diego), I seriously doubt I'll ever go back to Intel. I'm curious to hear people's thoughts on the matter given the new manufacturing processes (i.e 65 nm), sockets, and cores that have come out or are due to be released/implemented soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 AMD all the way. the only reason Intel is still around is because they built up such a massive market several years ago. they have the means to hang with AMD, but at the moment, they aren't winning many battles. as far as desktop performance goes, AMD is the clear winner unless you haven't upgraded your CPU recently. and quite honestly, the benchmarks prove it. my favorite spot for that kind of info is at Tom's Hardware. and just so its said and out of the way: i don't want any Intel vs. AMD fanboy wars in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 AMD. Better product management, better performance, easy to work with. Intel has all but crashed. Heating issues and poor customer service are kicking them in the ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 I'm still running on an old Intel... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 Well I have a Pentium 4 2.4 ghz, and it works pretty well. I was considering getting an AMD chip the next time I upgraded, but I was talking to this random guy at CompUSA and he was telling me about the new chip Intel was going to be coming out with soon (Conro or something like that) and it sounded very good, the guy was telling me how it's a whole new structure and AMD is just going to keep using the same structure. So I'll probably get that after it is released and goes down it price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted April 3, 2006 Author Share Posted April 3, 2006 AMD. Better product management, better performance, easy to work with. Intel has all but crashed. Heating issues and poor customer service are kicking them in the ass. Intel fixed the heat issues when they switched to the 90 nm process (just look at that monstrosity Dell is putting out with the CPU overclocked to 4.26 Ghz using the stock heatsink), however the issues they're having with power usage and overall performance have killed them. Well I have a Pentium 4 2.4 ghz, and it works pretty well. I was considering getting an AMD chip the next time I upgraded, but I was talking to this random guy at CompUSA and he was telling me about the new chip Intel was going to be coming out with soon (Conro or something like that) and it sounded very good, the guy was telling me how it's a whole new structure and AMD is just going to keep using the same structure. So I'll probably get that after it is released and goes down it price. CompUSA? Don't listen to them. Conroe will get smashed by the new AMD socket AM2 and it's DDR2-800 support as well as the new dual core FX that will be out a few months after it's release. My advice to you is get an Athlon X2 or FX-series when the socket AM2 is out in Q3 of this year. And don't get it at CompUSA (where it'll be like $2000). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 Well the guy who was talking to me didn't work there, he just saw me looking at Oblivion and said how he already beat it, and I started talking about how it wouldn't run on my system and he started talking, for like ten minutes. He was very knowledgable, and either a liar or very rich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWally Posted April 3, 2006 Share Posted April 3, 2006 AMD Too bad macs moved to Intel. *tear* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted April 4, 2006 Author Share Posted April 4, 2006 Well the guy who was talking to me didn't work there, he just saw me looking at Oblivion and said how he already beat it, and I started talking about how it wouldn't run on my system and he started talking, for like ten minutes. He was very knowledgable, and either a liar or very rich. I cast my vote for liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathdisco Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Conroe vs. FX-60: http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2716 Intel supervised benchmarks against questionable AMD set-up. We'll know more when reviewers can do independent testing. Either way competition is good. Disclaimer: This post typed on a AthlonXP based PC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTV2 Posted April 4, 2006 Share Posted April 4, 2006 Intel isn't competing anymore with AMD. but i'd go with AMD, even though i have an Intel. AMD are just all around better IMO. i hope to get a new CPU soon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sabretooth Posted April 5, 2006 Share Posted April 5, 2006 AMD. Better product management, better performance, easy to work with. Intel has all but crashed. Heating issues and poor customer service are kicking them in the ass. Belive the Sith. All the above stuff and the fact that AMD pros are generally cheaper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RevanA4 Posted April 6, 2006 Share Posted April 6, 2006 AMD pwns INTEL to the point that they have to start putting them in MAC's to make up for the lost sales Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTV2 Posted April 6, 2006 Share Posted April 6, 2006 thing i hate with AMD is u always have to go and lookup how many GHz they are since they don't tell u, they just say like FX-55, FX-60, 3400+, etc. or is ther a way to find out easier? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stingerhs Posted April 6, 2006 Share Posted April 6, 2006 ^^^^ CPU speeds don't necessarily equate to equal performance, and the benchmarks prove it. the top of the line AMD Athlon FX-60 only runs at 2.2 GHz. compare that to Intel who surpassed the 3 GHz mark a long time ago. yet, AMD chips still outperform Intel chips. thus, its not a CPU speed difference. in a nutshell, AMD chips are better designed so they don't have to rely solely on speed to gain performance unlike Intel chips. its similar to the difference between using a big V8 motor in a big, heavy sports car vs using a twin-turbo 4-banger in a little tuner. one relies on brute force for performance while the other relies on finesse and design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted April 6, 2006 Author Share Posted April 6, 2006 thing i hate with AMD is u always have to go and lookup how many GHz they are since they don't tell u, they just say like FX-55, FX-60, 3400+, etc. or is ther a way to find out easier? Intel does that too, for instance the Pentium EE 965 gives no hints as to what the clock speed is. ^^^^ CPU speeds don't necessarily equate to equal performance, and the benchmarks prove it. the top of the line AMD Athlon FX-60 only runs at 2.2 GHz. compare that to Intel who surpassed the 3 GHz mark a long time ago. yet, AMD chips still outperform Intel chips. thus, its not a CPU speed difference. in a nutshell, AMD chips are better designed so they don't have to rely solely on speed to gain performance unlike Intel chips. its similar to the difference between using a big V8 motor in a big, heavy sports car vs using a twin-turbo 4-banger in a little tuner. one relies on brute force for performance while the other relies on finesse and design. The FX-60 runs at 2.6 Ghz. With the clock speed however, it's not just AMD's design, a CPU transfers data to the motherboard in a manner similar to that of how a radio antenna transmits data to a reciever. So, the higher the clock speed (or frequency), the tighter the waves are clustered, thus increasing the chance of interferance (resulting in a "cap" on the CPU performance of a company that just increases their clock speed on their new models). The fact that the pins that transmit data are so close together (anywhere from 775-940 pins in roughly 1 sq in or 2.54 sq cm) doesn't help matters either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MdKnightR Posted April 9, 2006 Share Posted April 9, 2006 I have been using an AMD Athlon XP 2500+ (Barton Core) for about 3 years now, and I couldn't be happier. My system runs as fast as I need it and I don't plan to upgrade the processor any time soon. My original concern as I was researching the system that I eventually built was that I had heard that AMD users typically replaced their processors yearly because they were suffering from meltdown, but damn they were so much cheaper than Pentium 4's. Luckily, I discovered that ASUS motherboards came with a heat sensor system that automatically cuts your system off if is senses that it is getting too hot. Believe me, it has saved my a$$ quite a few times. Thus I will remain a loyal AMD and ASUS customer for many years to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted April 9, 2006 Author Share Posted April 9, 2006 ^^^^ AMD and Intel traded places on the overheating issue; Intel actually released a processor whose temperature exceeded the cooling capacity of the heatsink it came with! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astrotoy7 Posted April 9, 2006 Share Posted April 9, 2006 ^^^^ ...Intel actually released a processor whose temperature exceeded the cooling capacity of the heatsink it came with! lolz.....now thats funny A crack team of engineers, computer dudes and a zillion dollars and thats what they come up with my main deskie that does all the hard work is an AMD. Th notebook and "ladies" computer in the house are Intel but I cant say I'm tech enough to have a serious opinion of which is better and why. mtfbwya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted April 9, 2006 Share Posted April 9, 2006 Heil AMD! Seriously though, better performances and better price. You can't lose! Spread the good word my friends! Seriously, Intel is still in the bussiness for two simple reasons: 1- CPU speed. Most people don't know that it means very little. Since they see that Intel have "super speeds", they go with Intel. Even though the AMD counter part is both cheaper and has better performances. 2- Well known. Like somebody said earlier, Intel managed to build up somewhat of a fan base. Pentium became a name everyone knew and everyone wanted. Except me and my Athlon Hmmmm Athlon...so sexy. Often, people will ask me for advice on computers (I'm not that knowledgeable mind you, but I still know more then 90% of the buyers) and they seem not to know about AMD. So spread the good word! Tell everyone of the advantages of AMD! *Independant advertisement. Was not paid by AMD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Det. Bart Lasiter Posted April 9, 2006 Author Share Posted April 9, 2006 lolz.....now thats funny A crack team of engineers, computer dudes and a zillion dollars and thats what they come up with my main deskie that does all the hard work is an AMD. Th notebook and "ladies" computer in the house are Intel but I cant say I'm tech enough to have a serious opinion of which is better and why. mtfbwya Yeah, it was the top-of-the-line model they had at the time, it was meant to try and knock the FX-53 or FX-55 (Clawhammer) off it's #1 spot with a high clockspeed (I think it was 3.8x Ghz). Unfortunately, for it to run with the stock heatsink it had to be underclocked (and sometimes the CPU "driver" Intel gave out with it did that automatically) to 3.6 Ghz, unless you wanted it to underclock itself to 2.8 Ghz for a short period of time every couple of minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted April 9, 2006 Share Posted April 9, 2006 When I get a new computer It'll be one of the AMD higher end duel core chips Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.