wich cpu

[wickedquig]

should i get a intel based setup or a amd setup thanks

[DampCold]

I like Intel based setups, however since I haven't used and AMD I can't really say it is better. I haven't heard much from AMD recently so I wonder if they are starting to fall behind Intel.

[nasrules]

Starting to fall behind? You're kidding, right?! Heard of the Athlon 64 range?

I'd go AMD. The Athlon XPs are incredibly cheap and the Athlon 64s are a similar price to the P4s but offer 64-bit future compatability.

[DampCold]

http://www.passmark.com/cpureview/

I would imagine some Intels are better then some AMDs and vice versus.
Intel has always had superior floating point performance, however most instructions are non-floating point. In addition, from the graphs, it looks like the AMD has superior MMX speeds.

[hawkburn]

Personally I just built a new system based on an Intel P4 3.2 ghz, but I'm feeling regretful, as I am a hardcore-gamer and I've been told the Athlon 64 bit high-end chips are equivelent to the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition (something I cannot afford) but at a much lower price.

So I said AMD

[DampCold]

So far the situation in the market looks as follows. Intel’s new CPU copes better than its AMD rival with streaming data processing and multimedia files encoding. Also, it appears quite efficient for multi-threading tasks, such as 3ds max or Photoshop. The newcomer from AMD, however, proved really fast in scientific tasks and office. If we make some additional allowances, we will be able to state its leadership over the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition even in contemporary 3D games.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...on64-fx51.html

[ferrarimodena360]

intel = brute force, games office applications, anything.........

i had amd, dont like it with games, sorry bad bad thang

[mcovey]

I voted intel because they dont try to disguise their real speed (like AMD calls a 1GHz processor a 1600+ and say, well its as fast as intel's 1.6GHz).

But the way things are going, with wintel trying to bar the competition, and their new wintel bios, I may have to use amd to continue using linux.

[nasrules]

Originally Posted by ferrarimodena360

intel = brute force, games office applications, anything.........

i had amd, dont like it with games, sorry bad bad thang

Actually, it's commonly accepted that AMDs are better at gaming while Pentiums tend to be better for operations such as video-encoding.

Originally Posted by mcovey

I voted intel because they dont try to disguise their real speed (like AMD calls a 1GHz processor a 1600+ and say, well its as fast as intel's 1.6GHz).

But the way things are going, with wintel trying to bar the competition, and their new wintel bios, I may have to use amd to continue using linux.

There is actually a reason for AMD's product naming policy. The Athlon does more work per cycle than a Pentium 4, so even at lower clock speeds it can do the same amount of work. The only one which there is a bit of a con with is the 3200 - it can't compete with a P4 3.2.

It may interest you to know that Intel are actually copying AMD now - they're not going to release any more processors with a clock-speed-based name due to the fact that it's getting harder and harder to increase the clock speed of a processor, so manufacturers are looking at other ways of increasing the speed such as HyperThreading and - yep, you guessed it - getting the CPU to do more per cycle, a la AMD!

[cpugeniusmv]

i have one of each...the only reason i have the P4 is because it was a gift. they're both fine processors, but if i were buying i would go AMD. why? they're cheaper. i'm not made out of money.

[MegaMog]

amd xp if you want a good cpu for dirt cheap. Or if you got the cash the AMD Athlon™ 64 FX-53 flagship with the biggest cache (far more important then gighertz)


here is a chart to help inform you better.

[Miniver]

amd...............by far

[CCSDUDE]

Originally Posted by mcovey

I voted intel because they dont try to disguise their real speed (like AMD calls a 1GHz processor a 1600+ and say, well its as fast as intel's 1.6GHz).

But the way things are going, with wintel trying to bar the competition, and their new wintel bios, I may have to use amd to continue using linux.

Actually you've got it bassackwards... Intel caused the tiff by going out of ISO standards on operations per clock cycle. Intel P4's do much less per cycle then AMD's...

AMD has thankfully stuck to the ISO standard, those odd ball numbers are just their attempt at keeping the PC moron market by saying exactly what they should...

An Intel chip at 3ghz gets it's ass kicked by an AMD in the 2ghz range....

Also choosing is very simple..just depends on what you're looking for and how much time you wish to put into cooling.

Office Apps/Overclocking/Budget systems and techie fun ...go AMD

Good on the fly DivX/Xvid/ect encoding, nice slow down heat safety features built into the chip and a damn decent past history (...lol they proved they suck by cheating people with the P4s though) ....go Intel

[maynoth]

AMD produces a far surperior product. In terms of price to performance ratio AMD takes the crown over intel every time. You can pay more for a name and get an inferior product, but WHY? For $80.00 you can get an AMD Barton 2500+ which is really a remarked 3200+. all you ahve to do is change the FSB from 166mhz (333mhz ddr) to 200Mhz (400mhz ddr) and presto you have an $80 3200+ which owns the intel pentium 4 3.2Ghz in almost ever test for about $200 less!!! Just make sure you have a good cooling solution like a CoolerMaster JET 7 "ACB-V83", and motherboard like the ASUS A7N8X-E Deluxe, and some decent PC3200 (ddr400) sdram like GEIL or Crucial or Corsair... There is absolutely no reason to waste your money on intel unless you need the name brand recognition

[Omyn]

AMD for life.

Pentium processors are locked down peices of garbage.

Everyone knows its all about your motherboards bus speed anyway, without a high FSB you might as well throw that thing in the garbage. :]

"I voted intel because they dont try to disguise their real speed (like AMD calls a 1GHz processor a 1600+ and say, well its as fast as intel's 1.6GHz)."

Its not a number for speed, it's a series number.