Which is quicker amd or intel

Dj-Immy

Distinguished
Jan 4, 2006
2
0
18,510
im getting a little concerned on what cpu to buy for my new pc a AMD
or Intel as the intels run higher at clock speed like 3ghz but Amds run about 2.0ghz can anyone explain this which is actually quicker with the dual cores and the normal 64 bit cpus all input will be great.
 

bourgeoisdude

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2005
1,240
25
19,320
im getting a little concerned on what cpu to buy for my new pc a AMD
or Intel as the intels run higher at clock speed like 3ghz but Amds run about 2.0ghz can anyone explain this which is actually quicker with the dual cores and the normal 64 bit cpus all input will be great.

I know people hate these technical run-around answers--but I still have to answer truthfully. It depends. IMO, comparing the fastest AMD with the fastest Intel of the same "line"--AMD wins. That still doesn't answer the question though. Name specific processor lines you are considering and I can compare, but it just depends. Also remember except for outrageous-priced POC boards, motherboards are designed for either AMD or Intel--not both. So the motherboards determine speed almost as much as the processor does in a way.

I buy AMD processors, and most gamers at the current time will recommend AMD as well. Remember though 2006 looks to be a major change with Intel processors, so late this year Intel just may pull off a miracle and stomp AMD. I wouldn't be too surprised. Intel has the $$$ to spend on major overhauling to catch AMD. Hope this helped...likely I just confused.

Bottom line: AMD wins now, who knows about Q3?
 

luminaris

Distinguished
Dec 20, 2005
1,361
0
19,280
Couldn't agree with you more. Too many factors involved to really determine a true answer. Yes, there are tests but just how true are they? To me, numbers simply do not matter, its the real world end user that determine how good they really are. I love AMD and Intel and have machines setup with both. Both have identical 7800GT cards in them and gameplay seems the same to me. AMD does seem to process a little faster in some things but the Intel seems to shine in other areas.
 

Flakes

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2005
1,868
0
19,790
so late this year Intel just may pull off a miracle and stomp AMD

yeah the Pentium M, its a modified Pentium 3!

look HERE if you dont believe me :)

what do you do most? if its gaming then AMD if its encoding/decoding then its Intel....although the difference in milliseconds on the encoding doesnt really matter but that how it stands at the moment.
 

CBlanks

Distinguished
Jan 5, 2006
3
0
18,510
It seems to be that Intel is better for video editing software such as Adobe Premier. It is actually quite a bit quicker when it comes to redering large video files and anyone considering doing any video editing should invest in an intel system. For everything else, especially gaming, AMD has a huge upper hand. I myself have recently made the switch to an AMD system and couldn't be happier. The chips run cool, not too loud, not too expensive either. A chip like the amd 3700+ san diego core is a perfect match for what most people need and shouldnt be too expensive either. Make sure its socket 939 to be future compatible.
 

Rabidpeanut

Distinguished
Dec 14, 2005
922
0
18,980
Dear Dj-Immi

You have just asked the question that has been unanswered for a long, long time. No matter what you do your answers will be biased. And since i am completely impartial i will tell you this.

If you want to use your computer as a typewriter, or a spreadsheet or anything useful, (Well you should not be upgrading your computer in this life at least). But if you really have the urge to run a .doc file faster than anyone has ever run one before, buy an intel. If you want to use the computer for anything that could possibly earn you a living, buy an intel. If you want the computer to bribe your bank manager, buy an intel. If you want to use your computer as a very large, expensive paperweight, buy an intel. And most importantly if you are prone to fits of histerical anger, buy an intel(This way you might get angry and throw it out of the window and the world will be a better place for it, when an intel dies and angel gets it's wings).

HOWEVER

If you want to have fun, Get an amd.

If you want to be 8) like the rest of us, Purchase an *AMD*

If you want your games to run :twisted: , Aquire an AMF'nD

If you want to be :) buy an -=AMD=-

If you want to be :D find an A M D

If you feel you need to :lol: look for THE Lord and Master <A+M+D>

But then again you might b one of those :cry: goth people so you could always get yourself an intel.

So IOW march down to a good computer shop and be 8) and :) and :D and :lol: and buy an AMD

And to think, intels used to be soooo good :cry:
 

RichPLS

Champion
I have a Prescott 3200 and a Opteron 175, and previously had a Athlonxp 1900 (still do) and dual P3-550's and a Intel P4-1900.
The dual P3-550's with 4 10k SCSI drives ate the XP1900's lunch on certain tasks... now the Opty 175 eats the Prescott's lunch in most tasks, and last month the tide was in AMD's court, but the tide is turning once again...
Seems to me, the cutting edge mostly has been with Intel as far as the leader and latest technology is concerned being implemented into PC's. It is just that the latest tech does not always equal the fastest gaming PC's, but if you do more than game, and Intel has never done poorly gaming, just periodicacaly lately AMD trumps them with their top line chips, other PC uses need to be considered. I mean over 60fps is enough for gaming, and if one does over 100fps but the other multitasks faster and easier giving user a feel of performance instead of waiting for prev app to finish, which one would you suspect would be chosen by the end user as the fastest? The one that multi-tasks better. This has been AMD;s weak spot as far as I am concerned. And to some extent, AMD, rather late, addressed this with dual-core.
Now, with Intel's newly Presler cores, it looks like there will be a new performance crown in gaming and multi-tasking, and the ball will be in AMD's court to play ball!
Wait and see is what I say....
For now, I will watch from the windows on my Opty 175 and PrecHOT 3200 and see which way the wind blows... (hopefully over my poor overheated precott.}
 

Rabidpeanut

Distinguished
Dec 14, 2005
922
0
18,980
RichPLS, you always seem to make me sound like a 5 year old. Would you mind leaving like a 1 person gap between my post and yours, i'm being inferiorised. :D
 

margag_

Distinguished
Oct 24, 2005
451
0
18,790
intel vs amd is a never ending story but Rabidpeanut has it right

AMD always win the crown no matter how longs it takes...

the rest is an endless pointless technological mine is bigger than your's battle.


and i own a p4 530 :roll:

wish i known better when i bought this...
 

black_dought

Distinguished
Dec 23, 2005
58
0
18,630
Dear Dj-Immi

You have just asked the question that has been unanswered for a long, long time. ................. And most importantly if you are prone to fits of histerical anger, buy an intel(This way you might get angry and throw it out of the window and the world will be a better place for it, when an intel dies and angel gets it's wings)........

And to think, intels used to be soooo good :cry:

HILARIOUS...words can only describe, but words with EMOTICONS>>flippin priceless..

Till Then continue to...."Leap Ahead" haha jp

Marcus
 

pat

Expert
im getting a little concerned on what cpu to buy for my new pc a AMD
or Intel as the intels run higher at clock speed like 3ghz but Amds run about 2.0ghz can anyone explain this which is actually quicker with the dual cores and the normal 64 bit cpus all input will be great.


. , ? ... are all usefull in sentences to make them easier to read ..
 

bourgeoisdude

Distinguished
Dec 15, 2005
1,240
25
19,320
im getting a little concerned on what cpu to buy for my new pc a AMD
or Intel as the intels run higher at clock speed like 3ghz but Amds run about 2.0ghz can anyone explain this which is actually quicker with the dual cores and the normal 64 bit cpus all input will be great.


. , ? ... are all usefull in sentences to make them easier to read ..

Conjunctions like "and" make them easier to read too! :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

Rabidpeanut

Distinguished
Dec 14, 2005
922
0
18,980
Strangely enough when i bought my computer the most expensive chip out there was an AMD, but that was when 64's just hit the scene, and i think the most expensive chip is an AMD, its one of those Opterons that you can use 8 together on 1 board i think.
 

p05esto

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2001
876
1
18,980
AMD FANBOYS, all of ya :)

Maybe it's quicker who knows, I'd argue Intel is more stable however. At least that's what my past experience tells me. I need stability more than speed.
 

Flakes

Distinguished
Dec 30, 2005
1,868
0
19,790
Maybe it's quicker who knows, I'd argue Intel is more stable however. At least that's what my past experience tells me. I need stability more than speed.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, o wait your serious?! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


thats why i went AMD intels were nout but problematic!
 
quicker?

I think Intel was still chasing after its tail and AMD is still trying to catch up to its tail.

In other news: It doesn't matter they both do the exact samething. "64bit" does no one good and doesn't mean your computer runs twice as fast. It just means it can access 64bits of data at a time through the General Registers.

Its all about personal preferences and personal experiences. Go with whatever you feel comfortable with.

im getting a little concerned on what cpu to buy for my new pc a AMD
or Intel as the intels run higher at clock speed like 3ghz but Amds run about 2.0ghz can anyone explain this which is actually quicker with the dual cores and the normal 64 bit cpus all input will be great.
 

Rabidpeanut

Distinguished
Dec 14, 2005
922
0
18,980
p05esto: If we are AMD fanboys then you are an intel fanboy. You ever heard of A little company called 3dfx?

Well a long time ago in a distant workshop they made the best graphics cards in all the land, with real looking dragons and knights in shiny armour. They used to do what intel does, put lots and lots of fancy pants parts in their cards. Then along came a small company called nVidia, they looked at these cards and said to themselves: "My goodness, look at all these wasted parts, i bet we could do the same job with half of all that stuff!" Well little did 3dfx know that nVidia cards did just what the little people at nVidia said they would, they worked faster using half the pieces. Soon 3dfx was in dire trouble, forced to sell stock and eventually going bankrupt selling their latest greatest card to nVidia that sat around on the hard drive of nVidia's design server, until one day it ended up being labeled gforce4.

But this is not the end of the story, it is but the beginning.

IOW, intel is 3dfx and AMD is nVidia. Not that i want AMD to crush intel, i just want them to fight a lot, like orcs versus middle earth, only no-one wins, excpet the consumer of course. So the moral of the story is that intel is making mistakes and they design their processors the way 3dfx made their cards, with stuff you will never need, sure it will last you 10 years, but who has a 10 year old pc? So it all boils down to *WHO CARES?* AMD is better right now, intel may be better next year, you still get to buy the stupid thing so there is no problem. Still AMD is winning so just cause you would love to give all intel employees blowjobs does not mean you have to slam AMD. Intel is making lots of mistakes right now, so don't buy an intel, it is just a dumb thing to do. And anyway you can probably get 2 AMD chips for the price of one intel and then get a dual cpu motherboard and vuala, you have 2 times the power for the same price, it is likely to change some day but until then give credit where it is due, not unintel, AMD.

This post may contain some conflicting methods of information conveyance, for that i apologise.
 

Rabidpeanut

Distinguished
Dec 14, 2005
922
0
18,980
Maybe it's quicker who knows, I'd argue Intel is more stable however. At least that's what my past experience tells me. I need stability more than speed.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, o wait your serious?! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


thats why i went AMD intels were nout but problematic!

VOTE FLAKES FOR PRESIDENT!]

w00t w00t!
 

endyen

Splendid
Wow, it must be 5 years or more, since you learned anything about computers.
Ever since nvidia came out with a decent chipset, those "stability" issues have been a thing of the past. The problem was with the available chipsets, and cheap components.
Now even via chipsets are stable, though nvidia's are better. Ati's also look promising.
On the other hand, Intel has run into a heat wall. It has caused some stability problems for other components.