By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC - AMD vs Intell processors

1337 Gamer on 12 February 2009

AMD ftw!!!! i always love an underdog



Long Live SHIO!

Around the Network
Elite1 on 12 February 2009

I prefer Intel



Don't Worry.....Be Happy

 

ssj12 on 12 February 2009

New AM3 socket Phenom IIs arent that impressive...

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/02/11/amd-phenom-820-810-720-710-am3-cpus/1

I kind of want the 720BE since its cheap and better than an 7750BE. Sadly I have to get a new motherboard which is why I'm still on them fence between the two. Just a 7750BE would be way better than my current X2 4600+, run cooler, and I wouldnt have to shell out any $$$ for a new motherboard.



PC gaming is better than console gaming. Always.     We are Anonymous, We are Legion    Kick-ass interview   Great Flash Series Here    Anime Ratings     Make and Play Please
Amazing discussion about being wrong
Official VGChartz Folding@Home Team #109453
 
DarkNight_DS on 12 February 2009
Viper1 said:
Senlis said:

Lets say I have 80-100$ to spend on a processor.

Lets see what AMD has to offer: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010340343%2050001028%201302820275%20105101317&name=3.0GHz%20and%20higher

Lets see what Intel has to offer: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010340343%2050001157%204027&name=%2475%20-%20%24100

 

The AMD processors are dual core ~3.2 GHz.  The Intel processors for that price are a fast Pentium 4 or a slow dual-core.  How much would it cost to get a ~3.2 Ghz Intel processor: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010340343%2050001157%201302820275%20105101317&name=3.0GHz%20and%20higher

Now I know that Intel processors are faster because of the way they are made.  But that is a very significant price difference.  I don't think that the gain in performance warrants the cost of buying Intel.

I see an Intel Core 2 Duo 2.8 GHz (65 watts) for $119 which will knock the socks off either of those AMD chips (89 and 125 watts) at $80 and $90 USD.  You save the $20 or $30 that year just in energy savings.

 

Back in the pentium 4 days, AMD moved into prevelance by being more efficient per clock.  Meaning they could do more with the same GHz the pentium 4 line could.  Since the Core 2 Duo architecture, the tables have turned and now Intel does more per clock than AMD.

 

Now if Intel posted actual power consumption numbers and not a median then things might actually be comparable.  AMD posts their worst numbers meaning the most the cpu will ever use under the worst conditions at it's given clock, more often then naught AMD posts slightly higher numbers then people actually see used at the worst time.  AMD does this so people buy a proper heatsink and fan combo.

Sadly that 65 watt number means nothing to anyone.



Prepare for termination! It is the only logical thing to do, for I am only loyal to Megatron.

buttonmasha on 17 February 2009

intel processors all day. amd is a much better value though--its like the costco of processors.



Around the Network
haxxiy on 17 February 2009

I prefer AMD all the way. Here and here you get to know why.



 

 

 

 

 

Squilliam on 17 February 2009

Interesting, good stuff on the overclock.

"To overclock the AMD Phenom II X4 940 I started with the multiplier since this is a "Black Box" Edition with an unlocked multi. I pushed the multi 1x at a time until the system would not boot or became unstable. Then I backed it down by a half to achieve stability. Next I pushed the BUS speed 1MHz at a time until again the system because unstable. Doing this gave me a nice stable overclock that passed all of the benchmarks with no problems at all. The final overclocking result was 3.755GHz which is about a 26% overclock. This is also 155MHz better than my first run with this processor when I attended the AMD Tech Day."

Didn't even touch the voltage?



Tease.