AMD Vs Intel Advice! (Please move this thread)

[orion23]

Hi,
So I just switched from an Intel P4 3.4GHZ to an FX-55 SLI system.

Well, if you like to do more than 1 thing at a time in your pc, like downloading, encoding, listening to music and chatting all at once, then AMD is not for you.
Sure the FX-55/57 are the fastest around and runs so much cooler, but they are not faster by much, and you would sacrifice good, old, beautiful Intel Hyper Threading.

On the positive side, my FX-55 runs at only about 35c to 45c, while my Pentium 4 3.4GHZ would run anywhere from 45c to 65c using the same cooler!

In my case I'd rather have a processor that would allow me to multi task like the P4 with Hyper Threading!

People, This is about Hyper Threading NOT "Dual Core"

 

[ShotgunSteven]

My Athlon64 3500+ lets me multitask just fine. Perhaps there is a screw loose in front of your keyboard?

 

[DaveSimmons]

Wrong forum, bad advice.

If multitasking is really the most important feature to you:

Even an A64 X2 3800+ is going to outperform a P4 with HT since it has 2 P4 3.2 - 3.4 equivalent cores while the HT is just time-slicing a single core. And only the $1,000 P4 dualie has HT.

 

[mOeeOm]

Originally posted by: orion23
Hi,
So I just switched from an Intel P4 3.4GHZ to an FX-55 SLI system.

Well, if you like to do more than 1 thing at a time in your pc, like downloading, encoding, listening to music and chatting all at once, then AMD is not for you.
Sure the FX-55/57 are the fastest around and runs so much cooler, but they are not faster by much, and you would sacrifice good, old, beautiful Intel Hyper Threading.

In my case I'd rather have a processor that would allow me to multi task like the P4 with Hyper Threading!

Shoulda went with a A64 X2 then , if you could afford an FX-55, then you coulda easily afforded a 4400+ and OC'd it to 4800+

 

[KoolDrew]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Wrong forum, bad advice.

If multitasking is really the most important feature to you:

Even an A64 X2 3800+ is going to outperform a P4 with HT since it has 2 P4 3.2 - 3.4 equivalent cores while the HT is just time-slicing a single core. And only the $1,000 P4 dualie has HT.

:thumbsup:

 

[orion23]

Yes, I realized it is the wrong forum, hopefully a mod can move it.

I know about dual core processors, and I am not compairing those to intel's dual core.
I'm compairing P4 Hyper Threading to AMD's processors.

If you have used a P4 with Hyper Threading then you'd know what I'm talking about.
Intel is way, way better at multi tasking without having to go with an expensive dual core.

Anyway, I'll soon be switching to an X2-4800+ and see what that is like!

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: orion23
Yes, I realized it is the wrong forum, hopefully a mod can move it.

PM the Mods and ask for a moving company.

 

[KoolDrew]

For single cores Intel is better for heavy multitasking, audio/video encoding and some 3D rendering. AMD is better for everything else, especially gaming. So since you seem to be a heavy multitasker going with the AMD single core was not a wise choice.

When it comes to dual cores AMD is faster in pretty much everything and since it is obvious you have a pretty large budget an X2 is your best bet. However I wouldn't get a 4800+. Just get a 4400+ and overclock. It will save a lot of money. You could even just get a 3800 and overclock it. The only thing you will not get is the extra cache, which don't really help performance much in most cases anyway.

 

[sourceninja]

I made the switch from a P4 3ghz to a AMD64 3500 and I couldn't be happier with the switch. And as 64bit OS's mature I'm getting even more happier. However, I do find its multiasking very limited (forcing me to make ecessive use of niceness to control how much a program can eat my cpu) so this winter I am planning on a switch to an AMD x2, probably a 4400 or something similar. And I bet that will resolve all my issues.

My main plus for my current pc compared to my old pc is that it no longer heats the room to insnae levels. My old machine (p4 3.0 with nvidia 6800 gt) would raise the room temp while it was on a noticable level. My amd64 (with cool and quiet on btw) and a nvidia 6800 gt, does not raise my room temp any noticable amount.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: orion23
Hi,
So I just switched from an Intel P4 3.4GHZ to an FX-55 SLI system.

Well, if you like to do more than 1 thing at a time in your pc, like downloading, encoding, listening to music and chatting all at once, then AMD is not for you.
Sure the FX-55/57 are the fastest around and runs so much cooler, but they are not faster by much, and you would sacrifice good, old, beautiful Intel Hyper Threading.

In my case I'd rather have a processor that would allow me to multi task like the P4 with Hyper Threading!

People, This is about Hyper Threading NOT "Dual Core"

You said nothing about HyperThreading in the title, you just said AMD versus Intel. If that's the case, give me AMD dual core, and to Hell with Intel.

 

[Maximilian]

I switched from a K5 to a Pentium 4 3.2 and boy o boy i noticed a HUGE difference, long live INTEL!! WOO! Amd must suck, my K5 couldnt even play battlefield 2 :frown: tsk tsk

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Soviet
I switched from a K5 to a Pentium 4 3.2 and boy o boy i noticed a HUGE difference, long live INTEL!! WOO! Amd must suck, my K5 couldnt even play battlefield 2 :frown: tsk tsk

Sometimes the Game designer will impliment enhancements that are CPU specific either because that is the chip they are using (wihtout knowning about the enhancement) or they can get better performance using certain types of Intel or AMD specific instructions.

When Intel first came out with the MMX enhancements, is was also an attempt to encourage designers to use Intel for the peceived benifits of those instructions.

 

[hans030390]

I never noticed my CPU going any faster/slower than my cousins 64 3000+

but it is known that P4 is better for standard work. AMD is good all around, but excels in gaming (64 cpus i mean)

 

[zerocool1]

Originally posted by: Soviet
I switched from a K5 to a Pentium 4 3.2 and boy o boy i noticed a HUGE difference, long live INTEL!! WOO! Amd must suck, my K5 couldnt even play battlefield 2 :frown: tsk tsk

I had battlefield 2 demo playing on a 1.3 tbird with no video acceleration, it was working fine. But once we threw in half life it was choppy. I forgot to install drivers.

 

[Ausm]

Ht is hyped B.S. All my AMD processors blow away Intel processors.


Ausm