AMD vs Intel

[M0NEYSH0T]

Hi all--

Question in terms of overal AMD performance vs. Intel...

So I am looking to build a new RIG with a AMD 64 bit chip, http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...ts/showdoc.aspx?i=2242...

So I am wondering, if you purchase the CHIP above, the article says that it runs at 2.2 Ghz. Huh? My AMD 2800 XP runs about that fast. Now you have the intel chips out up to 3.6 GHZ.

Questions:

Can you compare system specs? Apples to Apples here?

Fill in the black:
The chip , AMD Athlon 64 3500+ 64bit running at 2.2 GHZ like the article says is compared to an Intel __________?

 

[Markfw]

3.6 ghz in most things. Read the benchmarks !!!!

 

[M0NEYSH0T]

where are the benchmarks? clearly I am blind

 

[Mik3y]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
3.6 ghz in most things. Read the benchmarks !!!!

 

[M0NEYSH0T]

Originally posted by: Mik3y

Originally posted by: Markfw900
3.6 ghz in most things. Read the benchmarks !!!!

So you are saying that AMD chip would compare to a 3.6 GHZ InteL?

 

[M0NEYSH0T]

found them
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...oc.aspx?i=2242&p=7
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...oc.aspx?i=2242&p=6

Not sure how to read them though...

I am looking at the 3500+, yet, the benchmark contains more than one 3500+. Which one am I looking for?

 

[Markfw]

Its simple. The stock 3500 is almost as good as the 3.6 Intel, runs cooler and is cheaper. What more do you need ? (I didn't mention the OC site, since Intel fanatics would say it OC's as well, NOT!!!)

 

[Lithan]

I think amds are quite simply an all around better chip. Intel still seems to hold a lead in certain media applications... but it's generally very slim, and amd actually leads in many of these tests. The 3200+ does not compair with an intel 3.6 however (though you will likely not see a difference). Perhaps in games, but overall, a 3200+ ~= 3.2-3.4 intel. Xp's on the other hand tend to be overrated, so an athlon XP 3200+ ~= 2.8-3.2 intel

Then there are the people who swear that your computer will explode and give you cancer if you try to do two things at once with an amd chip (Intel chips pre-HyperTreading era amazingly never had this problem. Mysterious.) Again, a few media apps benefit from this and not much else. If you like to encode while you game and can play doom3 with 14-20FPS, by all means buy an Intel HT processor. If however you only use standard, low-cpu usage apps in the background while gaming (downloads, uploads, antivirus, firewall, media players, etc) while gaming anyone who even hints HT will help you should be laughed at, and if possible, spit on.

Basically if ALL you plan to do is work with media, buy intel. If you mainly plan to game or might want to get a cpu upgrade in without a new MOBO, buy AMD. If you want a general machine that is a good performer for most any task you want to run, buy whatever you want. I moved to 478 several months ago because my 754 rig wasn't a fan of my memory. I've since changed to 939, and hop back and forth between the 939 and the 478 rigs. Both are very nice machines (Winchester@ 2.6, Northwood@3.8). I have had no problems with either.

 

[Mik3y]

clockspeed isnt an entirely accurate method of comparing or determining speed between different cored cpu's. cpu's are built on a pipline based architecure. basically, speed is determined by how fast data is transferred from one end of the pipeline to the other. note that amd and intel uses different length pipleines; amd utilizes a series of short pipelines and intel utilizes a series of long pipelines. as in relation to physics, the longer the distance, the higher the frequency is required to match the speed of short pipelines in going from one end of a pipeline to the other. this is why amd cpu's have much lower frequencies then intel cpu's and amd still performs on par or better then intel. generally speaking, amd does more work per clock cycle then intel does. also, amd does more operations per cycle and intel has more cycle's per second. i hope this makes sense.

 

[M0NEYSH0T]

Thanks to all of you...

One more thing. What is a 'socket' and does it matter what socket the chip is? Obviously, I know that I must purchase a motherboard with the correct socket.

Lastly, could one of you recommend a motherboard to go with this CPU?

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: M0NEYSH0T
Thanks to all of you...

One more thing. What is a 'socket' and does it matter what socket the chip is? Obviously, I know that I must purchase a motherboard with the correct socket.

Lastly, could one of you recommend a motherboard to go with this CPU?

A CPU has a certain amount of pins that is used to attach and transfer data to the motherboard. The place where you attach the CPU is called a "socket". So the CPU must have the same amount of pins as the socket to be compatible.

So if you're going to buy an A64 you can either choose socket 754 or socket 939. Socket 939 have dual-channel support and will in the future be able to support dual-core CPUs. Socket 754 is on the other hand a bit cheaper than the 939 solution, so depending on your budget you should choose what seems right.
Most would go for the 939 solution, and some would wait for next generation of A64 motherboards as they will support PCI-Express, and they will ship some time in '04.

Otherwise a nForce3 based 939 + a 90nm based Athlon 64 would be my suggestion

 

[M0NEYSH0T]

thanks all, I really apprecaite those of you that **educated** me ab it!!