AMD or Intel?: Poll

[ThunderPantz]

i got an amd athlon 1300+ but its kinda weird. amd i vote.

AMIDOINITRITE?

[Blue-ninja]

Whenever I build a PC I always go with AMD. Cheaper, runs a lot cooler and never let me down, not ever.

Plus, they let me over clock them, the Intel's I have looked at have their processor frequency locked so I can't overclock them.

AMD FTW

Wait..............build?

Yes, build. I always buy the parts from sites like newegg.com / ebay.com or get the parts from garage sales and then put them together. The only time I buy a prebuilt computer is when I am getting a laptop. As I said before, I always use AMD whenever I build or buy.

So you can build either a laptop or a computer without using a anti-static wrist band or something?

[edak]

yes you can...  i repair both with no wrist straps.  and for the record, computers can be built.

[DePhille]

This isn't really about opinion, more about what processor type.
If you're comparing dual-core processors, Intel definitely wins over AMD, in every possible aspect.
An Intel Core2Duo E4300 can be overclocked until it reaches the performance of a Core2Extreme, a processor worth 999€ here, with the standard cooler. If you take two dualcore processors from the same price, one from AMD and one from Intel, the AMD is ALOT slower and less efficient than the Intel (and possibly the AMD will be more expensive too).

However, if you're talking about singlecore processors, AMD is in the lead. That's because Intel's Pentium 4 hasn't got a good core, and the only way for them to compete with AMD was to have a high clockspeed. Now that Intel finally has a new core (core2duo), they can use the high clock technology on the new core2duo's and because of that Core2Duo's are alot better than AMD X2's.

This is official information, it can be found on nearly any website that benchmarked both processors.
Especially the Core2Duo E4300 is a wonder, can be easily overclocked to a very good CPU.
I was once a fan of AMD too, but since the arrival of the dualcore processors it has become very clear that AMD's victory is coming to an end, and very quickly.

Grtz, DePhille

[Temp3st]

Im getting a E6600 intel Core 2 Duo

[The Philanthropist]

Intel is more for multitasking, AMD is for brute power. Therefore, I picked AMD.

uh, what in the world are you basing this on?

On what DePhille said.

[Graham]

Whenever I build a PC I always go with AMD. Cheaper, runs a lot cooler and never let me down, not ever.

Plus, they let me over clock them, the Intel's I have looked at have their processor frequency locked so I can't overclock them.

AMD FTW

Wait..............build?

Yes, build. I always buy the parts from sites like newegg.com / ebay.com or get the parts from garage sales and then put them together. The only time I buy a prebuilt computer is when I am getting a laptop. As I said before, I always use AMD whenever I build or buy.

So you can build either a laptop or a computer without using a anti-static wrist band or something?

You can just discharge the static on your fingers before working with some parts.

[a-4-year-old]

[deleted quotetrain]
You can just discharge the static on your fingers before working with some parts.

Computer cases are coated in an anti-static paint, you can just touch the case to relieve static.

[ds dude]

I would prefer AMD. It goes all the way!

[Death MachineX350]

My single core Intel Pent.4 works really good so I'm happy with it.

[jrgp]

Edit: My friends say that AMD is better for gaming but unreliable. Is this true??

I heard one time that Intel is better for work and AMD is better for gaming. Either one of them are great for work. AMD might possibly be a tiny bit better for gaming. No, AMD is NOT unreliable.

[Clawbug]

Intel for speed, Amd for price. Currently Intel has Core2-microarchitecture, which just rapes AMD's K8 systems. Also, AMD is having some financical problems. AMD is about a 3/4 year behind intel in manufacturing process, meaning that Intel is going to start making 45nm chips when AMD just got it's 65nm process working.

But if one wants alot of performance per dollar/euro/pound/whatever without overclocking, aim for the lower end AM2 processors. They are not that fast, but they are cheap, cool and low power consuming as hell!

If one wants to overclock, go for lower end Core2Duo processors by Intel. E4300 will hit around 3200MHz with Stock cooling and without voltage inceasing, from it's stock 1600, EASY performance.

Also, AMD bought ATI last summer. Now ATI is having some majos problems with it's new cards, HD 2xxx-series. The cards are late, they consume alot of power, they are not that much faster than NVIDIA's G80-cards, but they will probably fight with their price, instead of their speed.


I'd say "both" for that vote, but I still said AMD,

[TheKhakinator]

With the release of the Athlon 64, and the processors that followed on from it, AMD took the lead in performance, however when Intel released the Core 2 Duo, and the other related CPUs, they are now far ahead. The fastest AMD on the market right now is beaten by midrange Intels that are significantly cheaper. Intel will be ahead at least until AMDs next major update.

[a-4-year-old]

if I have a 2ghz dual core or whatever name thing, does that mean I have 2 cores that add to 4 or what?

[MAGRIMAN]

I luv INTEL.
I got 2.13 GHz Core2Duo..

[bja888]

AMD - Profits go to making processes cheaper and faster.
Intel - Profits go mostly to advertising and stealing ideas from AMD (dual core, quad core, x64 )

AMD - Treats you with some respect
Intel - WANTS YOUR MONEY NOW! (Hince the advertising on the idiot box)

AMD to the bitter end!!!