September 14, 200519 yr these are some facts: AMD: -64 bit model has cool & quiet technology -better than intel in gaming -slower in encoding/ripping - might need to be overclocked, but yet again for the price:performance ratio it kills intel Intel: -great for all around office applications -good for ripping/encoding -CPUs cost alot more than AMD's (up to 20-30% more in the same range of processors) read this: http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NTI0
September 15, 200519 yr Russell.Crowe said: I don't know if there is another thread about this, but I did all the searching I could and didn't find any. I would like to know what some of you out there prefer and why you prefer it. I'll start with my experience. In my experience, AMD's run hot and were quite slow for me(I haven't any with AMD64, Dual-Core, or HyperTransport technology however). The computer downstairs is an AMD Athlon 2400+, and is suppose to be running at 2.0 Ghz when really its only getting 1.6-1.8. I've had so many speed problems with that computer. That's why I stayed away from them for my computer. Intel processors(not including the shitty ass Celeron) have ran great for me. It's fast, runs cool, and does everything I want it to do. The one I'm using now is a Intel Pentium 4 540J w/HT running at 3.2 Ghz. Please give me some input. I still run the lateist games with 4x antialiasing with an thourbread amd 2600 2 x 512 MB of Pc 133 sdram.... geforce 5900xt..... that means Battle field 2 all medium settings and 4x antialiasing on..... good preformance.... doom3, all high with 4x antialiasing...... I'm sure amd has not quit thier great preformance.
September 15, 200519 yr I have a AMD 64 3200+ and I like it very much. I'd prefer it over the Intel, of course. However, most people would accuse a Intel of being a poser or somewhat of a bad processer. I don't care about that =(
September 15, 200519 yr Author Russell.Crowe said: What would be the equivalent to this or close enough in an AMD? http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116195 Still would like that answered =(.
September 15, 200519 yr sleepingjew said: AMD microprocessor have much better performance. Yes, they do practically overclock themselves because they are extremely hot. They require much better cooling than that of an Intel. However, if you have the right conditions for an AMD to work, it will work like a swiss watch. Now that you mention computers downstairs. I have an AMD downstairs that is 1.4-1.6 Ghz, it runs faster than any computer I have ever used. It only has 512 MB ram so that's nothing special. It is so quick at loading because it has such a high L1 and L2 cache. Hopefully you know what both of those are. Intel provides shit for a high price. For example, compare an AMD Opteron server to an Intel xeon. AMD Opteron's are much more reliable and much quicker than any xeon would ever be. Just remember, AMD requires more cooling than an Intel. I recommend if you are going to build it get a water cooling system, not a heat sync. And if you are going to play graphic intensive games (warcraft 3, everquest or something), get an ATI card. They work the most efficiently with AMD. Nvidia and Intel go well together and ATI and AMD go well together. Good luck with the computer! Dumbass ***got. AMD + Nvidia is fucking awsome way better then amd + ATI. ati cards suck dick. Plus amds do not run hot they run cool. plus a 2.4ghz amd is faster than 3.0ghz intel plus amds have i high fsb mine has 2.2ghz fsb compared to intels 800mhz
September 16, 200519 yr Ive always bought intel, but looking at some benchmarks AMD seem to be taking the lead. The only negative point i read on AMD's range was they had shorter pipelines, so the cpu is fetching data from the HT link at shorter intervals. Apparently this is bad for multimedia, where you want to proccess large amounts of consistent data. With the ATI vs NVidia argument, ive read ati's new cards will only be using 16 pipelines vs nvidias 24. On the other hand, its been exposed that nvidia have been cheepskating with their AF :o
October 10, 200519 yr haha have you guys heard Apple will be putting out a box sometime next year with a pentium processor :O. Talk about a last ditch effort to stay up with the competition. :owned:
October 16, 200519 yr Myke_X said: Dumbass ***got. AMD + Nvidia is fucking awsome way better then amd + ATI. ati cards suck dick. Plus amds do not run hot they run cool. plus a 2.4ghz amd is faster than 3.0ghz intel plus amds have i high fsb mine has 2.2ghz fsb compared to intels 800mhz how about explain why ati cards suck dick? also amd processors have 1000 fsb not 2200 :rolleyes:
November 11, 200519 yr Ok, im trying to decide what comp to buy one with a (939-pin) AMD ATHLON™64 3000+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology, or a (Sckt775)Intel® Pentium® 4 630 CPU w/HT Technology 3.0GHZ 800FSB 2MB Cache, 64 Bit. So far the amd one is cheaper.
November 30, 200519 yr there both pretty good heard apple was going to start putting intel in there pc amd = :) intel = :)
December 1, 200519 yr amd. Cooler(temp), Faster, Better Overclocks, and 9cycles>6cycles* *im not sure about these numbers
December 1, 200519 yr GraveyardPC said: Currently, 64bit means nothing -- there are hardly any applications that support it.Yeah, except for Windows, Linux, BSD, and OSX. deception said: how about explain why ati cards suck dick?1. Slower 2. No SLI 3. Bad driver support
December 1, 200519 yr My opinon: AMD is better than Intel when it comes to quick use high intensity power: AMD's simply shine when it comes to gaming, rendering, or server hosting. My AMD Athalon on my current rig (a measly 1.8 ghz CPU with no OC) is able to both host and play a G-mod server for HL2- I had some noob come in one day and start spamming the large chimneys (that run a TON of v-physics calculations when they collide) and got about 30 of them out before I managed to kick. My system slowed to a CRAWL... but it didn't crash! As soon as I deleted some of the chimneys, it sped right back up. Everyone was like "WTF? You didn't crash? AWSOME!" Most DEDICATED servers I've found can't handle that. And that's an older ATHALON! Now, INTEL has it's place- eg, word processing, spreadsheets, ect. They make pretty good laptop CPU's more to come- jsut got busted by the computer lab lady :(
December 2, 200519 yr Running an AMD Athlon XP 2500+ OC @ 3200+ speeds. Works great. A bit of a bottle neck on the GPU tho...:( Altho, if you are looking to OC and are still on socket A, I recommend: http://www.frozencpu.com/images/products/detail_hires/cpu-swi-08.jpg http://www.frozencpu.com/cpu-swi-08.html
December 4, 200519 yr AMD rocks games. I have had both AMD and Intel systems. Older AMD systems used to melt right onto the motherboard if you pushed them too hard. I haven't heard anything like that happening with the AMD 64's. I personally like Intel better for all-around CPU usage, even for gaming. But if you're building your PC strictly for gaming, AMD alll the way.:kkkd:
December 6, 200519 yr i use Intel but i heard AMD is better for gaming, but it seems to have to warm up before it gets any good, and Intel is just as good with gaming imo, so FORGET AMD and ALL HAIL INTEL teehee i rhymed
December 7, 200519 yr i like AMD... but i have a Intel! lol.. i think amd is usually better for games but these days all u need is a fukin good graphics card screw the cpu ghz and crap!
December 9, 200519 yr thumper said: When it comes to AMD and intel AMD is the chioce for gaming. But AMD warranty sucks balls i had an AMD64 and it burnt out so when i returned it to get a new one it took 1 month to get it. but my p4 3.2 when it burned out i got a new one within a week. AMD = gaming intel = warranty I dont mind both but once again its all on what u are looking for. Wtf are you doing that you burn your CPUs up? Im guessing you were overclocking. It would be very newb to overclock a prescott P4. :O_o:
December 9, 200519 yr deception said: how about explain why ati cards suck dick? also amd processors have 1000 fsb not 2200 :rolleyes: Actually AMD 64 has a 2000 MHz bus. Learn2research newb.
December 12, 200519 yr havingfun said: AMD for games Intel for multi tasking Haha... bullshit. Athlon X2 beats the shit out of pentium-D (both dual core). A low end X2 beats the top of the line p-d at almost everything.
December 12, 200519 yr blackllotus said: Haha... bullshit. Athlon X2 beats the shit out of pentium-D (both dual core). A low end X2 beats the top of the line p-d at almost everything. You're an idiot, but thanks for sharing.
