AMD Vs Intel Pros/Con

[OLpal]

Are you so sure of yourself; That some of the oem's haven't already got the 780g with the X4 9650 floating around for sale !! you better check.. this is gonna bitch slap intel, just a little !!.... Look Around !!

Besides they asked enthusiasts to try & learn & alot of our chips aren't even sold in store-bought machines...

Ol'Pal

Originally posted by: panfist
You people are recommending things like black edition CPU, which you can't get at Best Buy.

And the 780G chipset, which you can't get at Best Buy, yet, as far as I know.

So a lot of this advice doesn't apply. Learn your audience.

 

[BBGuy04]

Originally posted by: Vesku
Then again you work for a retail store so your boss is going to want you to Upsell, Upsell, and Upsell! Don't forget those extended warranties!

Haha, someone has worked in a retail store before, huh?

 

[BBGuy04]

Originally posted by: bradley
I bet the average Best Buy customer doesn't even know from overclocking. They probably want the best bang for the buck. That changes the answer considerably, especially in the low end where AMD clearly dominates with their 780G chipset.

Right.

Most my customers aren't too concerned about overclocking and such, for the most part like you said, "best bang for the buck".

I do appreciates everyone answers, as it gives me better insight, and I feel like I can give them more accurate information.

(Going through each reply, to make sure I don't miss anything).

 

[BBGuy04]

Originally posted by: nyker96
For me the difference is as follows (looking from an average Best Buy buyer point of view):

AMD: decent on everyday applications, good enough for things that do not demand top flight performance, at low->mid range their offerings on the same price range are quite similar to Intel. ALso AMD motherboards tends to offer a lot more feature set compare to Intel's. So many buyer will probably like AMDs for that. Another advantage of AMD is their Integrated graphics chipset boards which due to their knowledge from ATI branch of their business is superior to Intel's. In short on board graphics on AMD boards are more powerful and robust than Intel's. Can even do some games.

Intel: If the buyer needs the top of the line CPU, go with Intel. The AMD cpus only can match Intel offerings to about mid range.

As for laptops, it's different, Turion chipsets offers quite a bit of features and decent battery life. Of course the fastest here is still Intel no surprise. Thus, if the buyer is price conscience and is looking mid/low range items, AMD can definitely compete with Intel. But at the high end, AMD can't currently reach that market because they have no top performing parts yet.

Sweet info.

Question: "When you say that AMD motherboards tend to offer a lot more featured set compare to Intel" - like what?

Also, what about the Integrated graphics card on laptops? Those are good? I always based it basically if they have an ATI video card/ Nvidia card..

So basically that's saying laptops that have "Integrated chipset video card" are just as good now?

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: BBGuy04

Originally posted by: nyker96
For me the difference is as follows (looking from an average Best Buy buyer point of view):

AMD: decent on everyday applications, good enough for things that do not demand top flight performance, at low->mid range their offerings on the same price range are quite similar to Intel. ALso AMD motherboards tends to offer a lot more feature set compare to Intel's. So many buyer will probably like AMDs for that. Another advantage of AMD is their Integrated graphics chipset boards which due to their knowledge from ATI branch of their business is superior to Intel's. In short on board graphics on AMD boards are more powerful and robust than Intel's. Can even do some games.

Intel: If the buyer needs the top of the line CPU, go with Intel. The AMD cpus only can match Intel offerings to about mid range.

As for laptops, it's different, Turion chipsets offers quite a bit of features and decent battery life. Of course the fastest here is still Intel no surprise. Thus, if the buyer is price conscience and is looking mid/low range items, AMD can definitely compete with Intel. But at the high end, AMD can't currently reach that market because they have no top performing parts yet.

Sweet info.

Question: "When you say that AMD motherboards tend to offer a lot more featured set compare to Intel" - like what?

Also, what about the Integrated graphics card on laptops? Those are good? I always based it basically if they have an ATI video card/ Nvidia card..

So basically that's saying laptops that have "Integrated chipset video card" are just as good now?

Depends on the integrated card if it's decent or not, they're not bad you can't hardcore game on them but my brother plays WoW and WC3 on his x1200 integrated card

 

[s44]

Originally posted by: BBGuy04
Also, what about the Integrated graphics card on laptops? Those are good? I always based it basically if they have an ATI video card/ Nvidia card..

So basically that's saying laptops that have "Integrated chipset video card" are just as good now?

No. It's like this:

Intel anything = shit
most AMD/Nvidia integrated = acceptable, but not for gaming
AMD x1200/x1250 integrated = pretty good, light gaming
AMD/Nvidia dedicated = best, but learn the product lines

Note that AMD's 780m (HD3200) will soon replace the x1200 series as the best integrated solution. Nvidia's 8200m integrated should be in a similar class.

 

[IL2SturmovikPilot]

Originally posted by: s44

Originally posted by: BBGuy04
Also, what about the Integrated graphics card on laptops? Those are good? I always based it basically if they have an ATI video card/ Nvidia card..

So basically that's saying laptops that have "Integrated chipset video card" are just as good now?

No. It's like this:

Intel anything = shit
most AMD/Nvidia integrated = acceptable, but not for gaming
AMD x1200/x1250 integrated = pretty good, light gaming
AMD/Nvidia dedicated = best, but learn the product lines

Note that AMD's 780m (HD3200) will soon replace the x1200 series as the best integrated solution. Nvidia's 8200m integrated should be in a similar class.

Uh,don't you mean 780G ? And if so,its already out and better than all current IGP's at this point in time.

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: IL2SturmovikPilot

Originally posted by: s44

Originally posted by: BBGuy04
Also, what about the Integrated graphics card on laptops? Those are good? I always based it basically if they have an ATI video card/ Nvidia card..

So basically that's saying laptops that have "Integrated chipset video card" are just as good now?

No. It's like this:

Intel anything = shit
most AMD/Nvidia integrated = acceptable, but not for gaming
AMD x1200/x1250 integrated = pretty good, light gaming
AMD/Nvidia dedicated = best, but learn the product lines

Note that AMD's 780m (HD3200) will soon replace the x1200 series as the best integrated solution. Nvidia's 8200m integrated should be in a similar class.

Uh,don't you mean 780G ? And if so,its already out and better than all current IGP's at this point in time.

No he means 780m because we're talking about laptops. I've actually already seen one of the 3200 integrated laptops at a bestbuy, was pretty nice was really thinking of picking one up.

 

[IL2SturmovikPilot]

Originally posted by: bfdd

Originally posted by: IL2SturmovikPilot

Originally posted by: s44

Originally posted by: BBGuy04
Also, what about the Integrated graphics card on laptops? Those are good? I always based it basically if they have an ATI video card/ Nvidia card..

So basically that's saying laptops that have "Integrated chipset video card" are just as good now?

No. It's like this:

Intel anything = shit
most AMD/Nvidia integrated = acceptable, but not for gaming
AMD x1200/x1250 integrated = pretty good, light gaming
AMD/Nvidia dedicated = best, but learn the product lines

Note that AMD's 780m (HD3200) will soon replace the x1200 series as the best integrated solution. Nvidia's 8200m integrated should be in a similar class.

Uh,don't you mean 780G ? And if so,its already out and better than all current IGP's at this point in time.

No he means 780m because we're talking about laptops. I've actually already seen one of the 3200 integrated laptops at a bestbuy, was pretty nice was really thinking of picking one up.

Sorry for my lacking of reading comprehension

 

[BBGuy04]

Originally posted by: s44

Originally posted by: BBGuy04
Also, what about the Integrated graphics card on laptops? Those are good? I always based it basically if they have an ATI video card/ Nvidia card..

So basically that's saying laptops that have "Integrated chipset video card" are just as good now?

No. It's like this:

Intel anything = shit
most AMD/Nvidia integrated = acceptable, but not for gaming
AMD x1200/x1250 integrated = pretty good, light gaming
AMD/Nvidia dedicated = best, but learn the product lines

Note that AMD's 780m (HD3200) will soon replace the x1200 series as the best integrated solution. Nvidia's 8200m integrated should be in a similar class.

So on one of the laptops

Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator X3100 - shit, yes?

NVIDIA GeForce 8700M GT - best, yes?


And if it's the "Intel anything" would you just recommend it for basic use such as reading e-mails, searching sites, watching some videos, etc, etc?

I'm really appreciating all these answers. So again, thanks

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: BBGuy04
So on one of the laptops

Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator X3100 - shit, yes?

NVIDIA GeForce 8700M GT - best, yes?


And if it's the "Intel anything" would you just recommend it for basic use such as reading e-mails, searching sites, watching some videos, etc, etc?

I'm really appreciating all these answers. So again, thanks

Actually the 8700m isn't very good. Ok - yes, but not good. The 8800M GTX is the best mobile graphics processor right now, followed by the 8800M GTS.

As for the Intel Graphics processors, that would be a good assessment.

 

[Cookie Monster]

The 8700M GT would rip through the X3100 like thats no tomorrow (the 8700M GT is a seperate mobile GPU where as the intel X3100 is an integrated GPU on the notebooks northbridge). Most intel IGPs is a no-no for even casual gaming at low resolutions like 800x600. You'd be lucky to even get the game to render properly.

Intel IGPs are fine for day to day stuff (not gaming period), but if for instance an AMD IGP or nVIDIA IGP is sold along as alternative options because of similiar price, then theres no reason of going with intel when the other options are just clearly better (i.e they offer more value for money). I guess it doesn't matter to the average joe most the time.

Video playback, watching movies and such are clearly superior on the 780G/8200 than the G35.

 

[BBGuy04]

Originally posted by: Martimus

Originally posted by: BBGuy04
So on one of the laptops

Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator X3100 - shit, yes?

NVIDIA GeForce 8700M GT - best, yes?


And if it's the "Intel anything" would you just recommend it for basic use such as reading e-mails, searching sites, watching some videos, etc, etc?

I'm really appreciating all these answers. So again, thanks

Actually the 8700m isn't very good. Ok - yes, but not good. The 8800M GTX is the best mobile graphics processor right now, followed by the 8800M GTS.

As for the Intel Graphics processors, that would be a good assessment.

Cool, thanks.

I was just basing it on the laptops I saw on the BestBuy website, and the one we currently have in our store.


I'll probably be asking more questions in different products to get more opinions so far. I'll try to post them on the right forums sublink

 

[BladeVenom]

Even for video, I would recomend AMD/ATI or Nvidia integrated graphics over Intel, especially for high definition video. http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...howdoc.aspx?i=3258&p=7