Intel vs. AMD - which should I get?

mrman3390

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2007
8
0
18,510
0
So I'm setting up my first build and several people have said that I should go with Intel instead of AMD like I was originally planning. I can't for the life of me figure out why. Unless what I've been researching has been outdated by a few months, AMD seems to have a much better price vs performance ratio. It's kind of a budget gamer PC, and here's the meat and potatoes of what I've got:

ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe Socket AM2 NVIDIA nForce 570

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Windsor 2.6GHz Socket AM2 Processor

EVGA 320-P2-N811-AR GeForce 8800GTS 320MB GDDR3 PCI Express x16 HDCP

mushkin 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit


It was recommended to me to get an Intel e6420 and an Asus SLI 650 mobo instead. Thoughts?
 
Amd will be more than adequate. The dual cores start at $59 for the brisbane 3600 (newegg). The only real choice is how much to spend on the video card. You can also read THG's article on building a $300 pc that runs vista.
 

yipsl

Distinguished
Jul 8, 2006
1,666
0
19,780
0
The only difference I'd make is get the 640 version of the 8800GTS if you're in it for the long haul. If you plan on going 8900 (or whatever they call it) when it arrives, then the 320 will be fine for now. Regardless of how drivers improve DX10 performance for current cards down the line, I expect next year's games to benefit greatly from the extra graphics RAM.

On the other hand, do you need it now or is an older PC viable for six more months? Let's hope Phenom pans out as AMD plans in November. I do wish they'd just called it Agena. Phenom is such a lame name for a CPU.
 

vincio_filiarum

Distinguished
Jun 10, 2007
74
0
18,630
0
Well, if you're a budget gamer, why not consider the E2140... you can OC it quite well (I've seen 3Ghz chips), costs a ludicrously small amount, and is based on the same core as the 6xxxx chips, just with 1\4 of the cache... which, in the benchies I've seen, means nothing. Get a budget mobo and the RAM is cheaper, and you're laughing!

Your choice of course... but I suspect these E21xx are an absolute steal...

Don't know about where you are, but in the UK they're the same price ballpark as the 3800, but you can OC them much higher and the RAM's cheaper.

As I said, your choice... but I'm just throwing an idea out into the fire...
 

waleedhk

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2006
231
0
18,680
0
you can buy the new pentium series but because they have less L2 cache they will slow down the fps of the game. if you are choosing a processor for overclocking and larger cache just get a e6420, if no overclocking get a e6320 it also have large L2 cache.
 

systemlord

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2006
2,737
0
20,780
0
Go with any of the Core 2's as there newer tech. Even the E6600, I'm running mine from stock of 2.4GHz to 3.6GHz on air, thats a 1200MHz OC. To think I just spent $220 for it. You could spend $125 for a mainboard from Intel. On July 22 Intel's going to have another price drop.
 

mrman3390

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2007
8
0
18,510
0
This is all great feedback for what kind of money I can look to spend, but I'm more curious about performance. Do the intel cpu's perform that much better and more reliable to OC? This is not an upgrade computer, it's brand new everything. I looking to build a gamer computer that will run just about anything on max or near max settings, that I won't have to upgrade in another 6 months, and that I don't have to spend a ton of money on. (trying to stay under $1500 altogether)

A lot to ask, I know. :) But I believe it can be done. I've got everything worked out except which cpu and mobo to get: Intel or AMD. I've always had AMD in the past and been wonderfully satisfied with it, but this is my first start-from-scratch build and I'm not entirely sure about all the pro's and con's of choosing one brand over the other. Help me out here? ^^;
 

mgtech

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2007
160
0
18,680
0
In the high performance market intel dominates amd, there is no sugar coating or any other BS surrounding it. Unfortunately, it is that simple. I used to be an amd user, but that will soon change. I was let down by the performance of an Athlon X2 5200. Wait until July 22 and get an intel cpu. Anything at or above an e6600 will own amd and put it to shame. Get a p35 mobo and some ddr2 1066.
E6750 (dual) or Q6600 (quad) will be cheap on July 22
Gigabyte p35 mobo
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128050
Corsair ddr2 1066
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145033
 

mgtech

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2007
160
0
18,680
0
IF you want a comparison. OK. intel is much more efficient in power and for clock speed. It also has a larger cache, at least in most cases. They are also newer. My x2 5200 at 2.6 ghz is about as fast as an intel e6420 at 2.13. Not to mention that the amd chips rarely make it much past 3ghz, while intels can reach 3.4-3.6 on air, usually, with a good fan.
 

mgtech

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2007
160
0
18,680
0
However, I will have to say in the area of gaming the graphics card is much more important to the picture quality than the cpu regardless of how fast it is. If you want good picture get a good gpu!
 

Heyyou27

Splendid
Jan 4, 2006
5,164
0
25,780
0
If your budget allows, I'd go for the E6420 and 650i SLI board instead of the AMD setup, but if this seriously limits your graphics card choice the AMD system may be better.
 

yipsl

Distinguished
Jul 8, 2006
1,666
0
19,780
0
REMEMBER THE DAY JULY 22!
I'm waiting for Q1 2008 and Agena. I went AMD this time around last February because I didn't like Intel's business practices and the X2 4600+ was the best bang for the buck at the time.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=433&model2=467&chart=195

I still don't like Intel as a company. I don't see their CPUs all that much better at stock than AMD, and I don't overclock. Penryn might change things but I'll stick with AMD as an upgrade to this build because AM2 will still be viable with a bios upgrade.

By then, I expect MSI will have the problems with MSI Live and this motherboard worked out. LOL!

IF you want a comparison. OK. intel is much more efficient in power and for clock speed. It also has a larger cache, at least in most cases. They are also newer. My x2 5200 at 2.6 ghz is about as fast as an intel e6420 at 2.13. Not to mention that the amd chips rarely make it much past 3ghz, while intels can reach 3.4-3.6 on air, usually, with a good fan.
Are you sure? An X2 4600+ Windsor at 2.4 is about as fast as a stock E6400 Allendale at 2.13 in Tom's CPU charts:

3DMark06 (CPU)

E6400: 1892

X2 4600+: 1850

FEAR:

E6400: 52 fps

X2 4600: 51 fps

An X2 5000+ rates at the following:

3DMark06 (CPU)

E6400: 1892

X2 5000+: 1986

FEAR:

E6400: 59 fps

X2 5000+: 58 fps

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=465&model2=433&chart=174

Note all the years people tolerated the space heater Prescotts and Pentium D's. Now, the industry and people on message boards are kvetching about a much smaller heat issue and a much smaller performance difference with AMD.

IMHO, the ethical reasons to go AMD right now add just a bit more logic to getting an AMD over an Intel, though I'd wait till an AM2+ board over an AM2, they're bound to be out long before Agena.
 

InteliotInside

Distinguished
Feb 3, 2007
171
0
18,680
0
I wouldn't use the tomshardware charts for comparisons and benchmarks.

A lot of things change in the space of a year or even a month. New patches, drivers and updates can change the outcomes greatly.

The fact is that Intel clearly offers better performance and after the July 22nd price cuts, you'd be a fool to buy an AMD system for performance. No one can turn down a $266 E6850/Q6600 if they're looking to build an enthusiast class system.
 

Heyyou27

Splendid
Jan 4, 2006
5,164
0
25,780
0
REMEMBER THE DAY JULY 22!
I'm waiting for Q1 2008 and Agena. I went AMD this time around last February because I didn't like Intel's business practices and the X2 4600+ was the best bang for the buck at the time.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=433&model2=467&chart=195

I still don't like Intel as a company. I don't see their CPUs all that much better at stock than AMD, and I don't overclock. Penryn might change things but I'll stick with AMD as an upgrade to this build because AM2 will still be viable with a bios upgrade.

By then, I expect MSI will have the problems with MSI Live and this motherboard worked out. LOL!

IF you want a comparison. OK. intel is much more efficient in power and for clock speed. It also has a larger cache, at least in most cases. They are also newer. My x2 5200 at 2.6 ghz is about as fast as an intel e6420 at 2.13. Not to mention that the amd chips rarely make it much past 3ghz, while intels can reach 3.4-3.6 on air, usually, with a good fan.
Are you sure? An X2 4600+ Windsor at 2.4 is about as fast as a stock E6400 Allendale at 2.13 in Tom's CPU charts:

3DMark06 (CPU)

E6400: 1892

X2 4600+: 1850

FEAR:

E6400: 52 fps

X2 4600: 51 fps

An X2 5000+ rates at the following:

3DMark06 (CPU)

E6400: 1892

X2 5000+: 1986

FEAR:

E6400: 59 fps

X2 5000+: 58 fps

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=465&model2=433&chart=174

Note all the years people tolerated the space heater Prescotts and Pentium D's. Now, the industry and people on message boards are kvetching about a much smaller heat issue and a much smaller performance difference with AMD.

IMHO, the ethical reasons to go AMD right now add just a bit more logic to getting an AMD over an Intel, though I'd wait till an AM2+ board over an AM2, they're bound to be out long before Agena.So you'd rather buy an inferior product for the same price, because you think Intel is evil? AMD would behave the same way if they were the industry leader.
 

Sirfiroth

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2006
136
0
18,680
0
I wouldn't use the tomshardware charts for comparisons and benchmarks.

A lot of things change in the space of a year or even a month. New patches, drivers and updates can change the outcomes greatly.

The fact is that Intel clearly offers better performance and after the July 22nd price cuts, you'd be a fool to buy an AMD system for performance. No one can turn down a $266 E6850/Q6600 if they're looking to build an enthusiast class system.
FFL as spoken by IntelidiotInside
 

yipsl

Distinguished
Jul 8, 2006
1,666
0
19,780
0
[
So you'd rather buy an inferior product for the same price, because you think Intel is evil? AMD would behave the same way if they were the industry leader.
Yes, AMD would do the same. I don't consider Intel to be Hitler and I don't consider AMD to be Mother Theresa. What I do want is competition and I want to mildly punish Intel for all their restrictive practices identified by regulatory agencies in Japan, the EU and South Korea.

I didn't mind the Northwoods, they were the only good Netburst but all the "dude you got a Dell" marketing hurt everyone when added to the fact that many companies refused to use AMD CPUs and when they used them, they didn't market them, because of pressure from Intel.

You see, in 2012, I don't want to pay 1994 prices for my CPUs, so I want AMD to survive. As for inferior:

AMD is not inferior as a budget processor right now and we will see where they are when Agena hits the marketplace (note to Hector: Phenom really sounds lame ditch it). AMD is basically neck and neck in the budget processor as far as price and performance.

AMD is subpar in the high end enthusiast market. They bit off more than they can chew by building fabs, and I think they'll try ATI's model instead. We will see if that works.

I wouldn't use the tomshardware charts for comparisons and benchmarks.

A lot of things change in the space of a year or even a month. New patches, drivers and updates can change the outcomes greatly.

The fact is that Intel clearly offers better performance and after the July 22nd price cuts, you'd be a fool to buy an AMD system for performance. No one can turn down a $266 E6850/Q6600 if they're looking to build an enthusiast class system.
Why are the charts bad? They seem to fit other benchmarks found on many other sites. My problem is they aren't updated often enough. Should we mistrust the VGA charts too?

If we go by benchmarks to prove that C2D rocks and AMD doesn't then why not go by benchmarks to show that that's only true at certain price performance points and that they are much closer at others.

Yes, I'd be a fool to turn down a $266 quad core that was efficient, but I don't like Kentsfield any more than Smithfield. Will a Penryn quad core be as cheap? Besides, I'm not building a new PC and I don't object to the guy buying Intel. Go with what works.

I just recommended that he get a different GPU. My reasons to go AMD worked for me in February and I won't be looking at another CPU until Agena, because I don't want to get another motherboard.
 

Mandrake_

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2006
355
0
18,780
0


Come July 22, the E6550 (E6600 performance) will be going for $163. Good to know that the greedy CPU manufacturers don't mind sacrificing a bit of profit to gain a few sales. :lol:
 

epsilon84

Distinguished
Oct 24, 2006
1,689
0
19,780
0
I'm waiting for Q1 2008 and Agena. I went AMD this time around last February because I didn't like Intel's business practices and the X2 4600+ was the best bang for the buck at the time.
Let's face it, you would have bought the X2 4600+ regardless of best price/performance or not. Why add in all the extra spin and BS about Intel's business practices? We get it, you think Intel is an evil company. :wink:

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=433&model2=467&chart=195

I still don't like Intel as a company. I don't see their CPUs all that much better at stock than AMD, and I don't overclock. Penryn might change things but I'll stick with AMD as an upgrade to this build because AM2 will still be viable with a bios upgrade.
Wow! Didn't see that coming! You just said the same thing one paragraph ago! :lol: I was really looking forward to seeing you change your mind, but alas you still hate Intel! :lol:

Your arguments can be summarised as: I don't like Intel, I like AMD, even if Intel is better I am still sticking with AMD.

Gotcha. :wink:

By then, I expect MSI will have the problems with MSI Live and this motherboard worked out. LOL!
I hope they do, for your sake. Don't think K10 would work without a BIOS flash at least. Why don't you just update the BIOS from the DOS command prompt. :wink:

Are you sure? An X2 4600+ Windsor at 2.4 is about as fast as a stock E6400 Allendale at 2.13 in Tom's CPU charts:

3DMark06 (CPU)

E6400: 1892

X2 4600+: 1850

FEAR:

E6400: 52 fps

X2 4600: 51 fps

An X2 5000+ rates at the following:

3DMark06 (CPU)

E6400: 1892

X2 5000+: 1986

FEAR:

E6400: 59 fps

X2 5000+: 58 fps

http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=465&model2=433&chart=174

Note all the years people tolerated the space heater Prescotts and Pentium D's. Now, the industry and people on message boards are kvetching about a much smaller heat issue and a much smaller performance difference with AMD.
LOL! So An X2 4600+ is now equal to an E6400 due to similar 3DMark and FEAR scores? 3DMark is totally synthetic and is about as useful as SuperPi, while FEAR is a totally GPU bound game. Nice cherrypicking of results though. :roll:

Funny how you didn't list any benchmark where the E6400 beats the X2 4600+ huh? :wink:

How about some Divxencoding? Hmmm...
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=467&model2=433&chart=177

Well well... 6:38min to 7:52min! Just an oversight on your part, I'm sure!

What do you say about some Photoshop, one of the most popular image editing programs?
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=467&model2=433&chart=186
2:26 vs 2:51
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=467&model2=433&chart=187
1:56 vs 2:16

Nah, I'm sure I'm just cherrypicking results to make the E6400 look good huh?

Then again, isn't it odd how Xbitlabs rates an X2 4800+ lower than an E4400/E6320 in overall performance, which in turn are slower than an E6400?! And an E6420 is equal to the X2 5600+. Wow, I didn't know a cache bump from an E6400 allowed it to jump from X2 4600+ to X2 5600+ levels! :roll:



I GET IT! ALL THESE SITES ARE PAID INTEL PUMPERS!!!

At least that's what the most diehard AMD fanatics will say. :wink:

IMHO, the ethical reasons to go AMD right now add just a bit more logic to getting an AMD over an Intel, though I'd wait till an AM2+ board over an AM2, they're bound to be out long before Agena.
Please. Some perspective. AMD is hardly a model example a squeaky clean company. How about their blatant BS to analysts, 2 weeks before their quarterly financials were due? How about their 'ethics' when they were handing out 'Multicore for Dummies' booklets at an Intel PR event? How 'ethical' is it for AMD to be totally BSing about performance in the face of C2D?

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_9485_13041%5E13077%5E14820,00.html


Looks like the X2 6000+ handily beats an E6700 huh? And look! The E6400 only matches the X2 4000! Humble in defeat, that's why I love AMD. :lol: :lol: :lol:

I have no sympathy for AMD whatsoever because their stupid CEO and his puppets Randy Allen and Henri Richard brought this upon themselves by being cocky and not innovating during the 3 years they had the lead with K8.
 

Cybercraig

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2007
2,058
0
19,780
0
Well if you've got to have an AMD at least get the 590SLI version of that MB. It will have 32 in the model number indicating that you get full 16X 16X in SLI mode. This could make a big difference in resale down the road even if you don't use SLI at the moment. :wink:
 

Techfan

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2007
55
0
18,630
0
Ok Intel has an advantage now compared with AMD. The C2D architecture is more efficient than AMD X2. At the same clock speeds intel dominates benches. So at high end segment intel C2D is the best and fastest CPU for now. However, if you want a mainstream segment CPU then both AMD and Intel have CPUs equal in performance and price. Check benches from several websites like tomshardware.com, anandtech.com, Guru3d.com, extremetech.com etc.
If you like to buy AMD CPU go ahead with your system specs.
 

Similar threads


TRENDING THREADS