| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
quadra87
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
|
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 8:46 pm Post subject: AMD Vs. Intel |
|
|
Is there a big diference between AMD and Intel chips (other than price)?
More specifically...I have the choice between these two for a system I am looking at. Which do you think would be better?
AMD Athlon(TM) 64 X2 4200+
or
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400
Thanks for any advice |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pkang0202

Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Right now, Intel Core 2 Duo is the king. It beats AMD hands down.
Who knows, maybe in a year it'll switch hands again. But for right now, Core 2 Duo is your best bet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wrench
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
|
Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The worst website award goes tooo! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
crazy_arcade
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wrench wrote: |
The worst website award goes tooo! |
No, adding two o's to the word "to" does not add increased emphasis. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Lemon

Joined: 11 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
I like AMD, but I also care more about price than the typical computer buyer. I believe the lowest-level 2007 AMD Sempron CPU delivers roughly similar performance in 95 percent of (non-game) normal computer uses as the top of the line Intel dual core processor. Basically, CPU speeds have outpaced OS and application requirements, unless you're a gamer.
I have students who ask me similar questions all the time, and find they're often motivated by the desire to buy "the fastest" or "the best" so they can boast to their friends, but don't care much about what they need it for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gsxr750r

Joined: 29 Jan 2007
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
You'll notice that many PC Bang's go with AMD these days. The difference is in mainboard prices (darned cheap to match with AMD processors, by comparison). Ram may be considerably cheaper, too, in many models.
Intel has the speed crown, there is no doubt, but you can still build a very fast computer using AMD chips -- for a far lower price. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
eamo

Joined: 08 Mar 2003 Location: Shepherd's Bush, 1964.
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you assume that AMD will come back with an affordable processor that will compete with C2D then you should get an AMD motherboard. They will likely undercut the C2D in price.
But what about the next generation?
After buying an Intel chipset mobo about 1 year ago, and putting a 930 D into it, I have found to my dismay that it won't support C2D. A new mobo is required if I want to go C2D.
My point is, whether you go AMD or Intel, try to research if it will support what is projected to be the next generation processor from that respective company.
Afterall, those with C2D in their boards right now will be hoping their mobo supports Intel Quads as that seems to be the future of Intel for the next year or two. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shifter2009

Joined: 03 Sep 2006 Location: wisconsin
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I read an article on CNNmoney the other day that said AMD might be going under. I imagine thats in the sense that someone else is gonna by them up and continue to make amds under a different umbrela but it was intersting. Least I think i read it on cnn-money. I am sure some guys here have a much better idea of what is going on than I do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wrench
Joined: 07 Apr 2005
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AMD was in more trouble before.. CNN money is not a very good source of any finaincial info. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gsxr750r

Joined: 29 Jan 2007
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
CNN is not a good source for much of anything.
Believe me, if this were true, every reputable computer magazine and online site would be covered in stories about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Demophobe

Joined: 17 May 2004
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If AMD goes down, then so does ATI. There is no way.
AMD are quietly going in a different direction. Discreet graphics for the mainstream market. That is where companies draw their big bucks from, not the niche enthusiast market. They are being pretty quiet these days, but their next CPU will be a solid offering and the on-die graphics / CPU will be arriving shortly.
This will take onboard graphics off of the mainboard and onto the CPU die, with all the speed advantages that will bring.
Apparently Nvidia are making a discreet graphics solution for Intel as well... |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
quadra87
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
edit
Last edited by quadra87 on Fri Oct 29, 2010 12:56 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cubanlord

Joined: 08 Jul 2005 Location: In Japan!
|
Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Core 2 Duo E6600 here baby and no complaints. It has eaten everything up that I have thrown at it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
itaewonguy

Joined: 25 Mar 2003
|
Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
AMD will release something this year or next year to compete with INTELS duo 2 core and quad core. Just so they can get even market share!. so im sure we will see 2 core and quad core processors by AMD by the end of the year or early next year!
and then again it will just come back down to preference!
it will be suicide for AMD to not bring out 2 core or quad core processors to compete with INTEL. so expect it real soon.. I doubt they will come out with a product that beats INTEL right now. I think right now they will just want to compete and gain back market share!
I still prefer intel! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|