Intel or AMD ( :confused; )?

[vivek]

Hello Friends,

Good day !

Now a days we here so much about the "cpu war" between intel and amd (the two major players in the arena). However, are there any concerns about compatibility between the two processors ? What I mean is, is it guaranteed that the same software would work on both the cpu platforms. ? I have heard that sometimes softare manufacturers try to make use of some special processing instructions to make their software faster (or better). So, what would happen to such software when they are run on other 'compatible' processors ?

Since I am out to purchase a new processor and a new mother board, I need to decide between Intel or AMD (AMD definitely seems to be less expensive). Any suggestions, concerns in this regards are welcome.

Thanks in advance,

Warm Regards,

Vivek

 

[Goi]

AFAIK, whatever runs on an intel processor will run on an AMD processor, unless its specifically coded to take advantage of processor specific instructions/features, such as intel's SSE/PID or AMD's 3DNow! However, such software is EXTREMELY rare. Most software only support, or are optimized, for one or the other, or both, but aren't coded specifically for them, except for demo software to show off the power/speed of such features. So, you have nothing at all to fear about software compatibility.

If you're building a new system, I would strongly recommend an AMD Duron or Thunderbird based system, simply because its MUCH cheaper than a comparably clocked intel system, but yet performs about as good if not slightly faster(depending of application) to a comparably clocked intel system.

 

[ragiepew]

What Goi said is mostly true but he left out one part...

Even if the software is specifically coded for SSE (or 3dnow!) it will still work on the opposing Chip (be it AMD or Intel). SSE/3dnow are optional for the programmers and even if they are implemented the software will not slow down or not work on a system that doesnt support SSE/3dnow. It wont be "as fast" as a comprable (speed wise) system that does support SSE/3down (or whatever its optimizations are) but it will still run. As far as 3dnow v. SSE... I think its a toss up (SSE might have a slight advantage in number of titles due to Intels market share an name) but the total number of SSE/3dnow optimized applications is still relatively low compared to the total market.

 

[vvvvvv]

intel

 

[Dark4ng3l]

amd way better value and they wil rock even more when software becomes more optimised for 3dnow!. Dont beleve the early irongate incompatibility problems witch stopped existing over a year ago.

 

[nateholtrop]

intel...by A LONG SHOT!
imho

Nat

 

[BlackIguana]

notice how the AMD guys give nice long rational advice and state the reasons for their opinions. The intel guys simply say : 'intel' cause thats all intel is....its not superior technology, its just a brand name that ppl refuse to admit is not the best any more...seeing as how you can buy a good kt133 motherboard and a socketA t-bird 750 (that will most likely hit 950-1ghz easy) for less than a 933mhz or 1ghz intel part alone costs, it makes sense....not to mention you arent losing anything in compatibility or performance, sometimes exactly the opposite. I used to be strictly Intel, but went with an athlon 700 classic and kx133 board last year...It ran flawlessly except for a bug with a VIA chipset driver (KX133 was very new), and I easily corrected it. I'm now running a KT133 board with a blue-core tbird 750@1010mhz (it will go higher but i need a better HSF), and it is ROCK solid. I would say if you wanna really keep on top of things and want to avoid using a thrid party chipset
(VIA isnt my fav) , to wait a month, buy an AMD 760 based motherboard, some pc1600 or 2100 DDRSDRAM and a 133mhz FSB t-bird.
Still will be about the same as an intel system in price but will kick its sorry ass performance wise.

Another well thought-out post by an AMD supporter

 

[flyfish]

uuuuhhh...AMD Rocks?

 

[Dexion]

AMD of course. If you notice the prices of the 1Gz Tbird system compared to Intel's P3 1Ghz, its a dramatic difference. The performance of the AMD Tbird is close or if not better in some applications to Intel's P3. At less than $300 for a 1Ghz chip, how can ya go Intel? AMD boards are just as stable and just as affordable as any Intel platform with known companies producing excellent motherboards; Asus, MSI, Abit, Soyo, Chaintech etc. The best 3 reasons to jump onto the AMD wagon; its cheap, its fast, and its stable.

 

[ragiepew]

<< notice how the AMD guys give nice long rational advice and state the reasons for their opinions. The intel guys simply say : 'intel' cause thats all intel is....its not superior technology, >>


BlackIguana: I have another reason for you... how about that the AMD guys really know what they are talking about and the Intel guys (not all, just the ones that are posting so far) know nothing of what they are talking about and are just used to trolling and saying stuff like &quot;Intel Rox0rz&quot; w/ no reason to back it up...

alin

 

[Trifecta]

It would be a really bad idea to buy at this immediate time. If you must build a system *right now* you will be missing out on the next wave of processor/motherboard advances that are currently materializing. The DDR boards for aMd are soooo much faster.

As you can see by my sig, I am a split vote. Shoot, I also have a P2-450 and a K63-450@600. My favorite all time system? = the pentium 2 450!...why? solid performance.

My new favorite system? The duron 600@950...why? RAW FRIKIN' SPEED. My games run faster, boot up times are lightning fast, compile times are amazing. The Duron is simply unbeatable (dollar for dollar)

Now, if you can afford the intel chip, you should definately spend the money elsewhere (like on a kick arse video card or big monitor) Processing power is so far ahead of the current application needs (Quake3, photoshop, etc, etc) that more RAM, better Video card, or a new Monitor will definately make you &quot;feel&quot; much better about your system.

Question for anyone: Do you really need a P3-933? Is the price warranted?

However, one thing that ticks me off is the price of a good motherboard for the Duron vs. the intel 815 chipset. I really do think that the 815 is amazingly well designed.

Via has not met up to those standards, although their feature sets are quite impressive...

 

[StickHead]

AMD Roxks!!!!!!


Hehe,

I think I would wait regardless of which platform you want to go with. Both Intel and AMD have new stuff coming out which will make the stuff now cheap if your not worried about having the fastest system out there. First off Intel has the P4 comming out soon so the P3 should drop in price(about time). As for AMD, they have their DDR boards comming out soon so the KT133 solution will be very cheap plus the rumored AMD price drop should hit any day now and really whip Intel as far as price wars go. Either way I would wait a month or so and see what the market looks like.



AMD RULZ!!!!!!

 

[osage]

For me AMD is the way to go at this time. Cpu's are cheap, mobos from most of the big players are available now and not too spendy.
I run a P3 650@949 on a P3V4X, for me to gain much I'd have to spend $175. for a P3 700 that may or may not OC as well as my 650. For that money I can get a mobo and a cpu that is just about sure to go 900. Plus I get to play with new stuff.
Trifecta, it's always a bad time to upgrade the new stuff is always better and it's always just around the corner. If you want to stay cutting edge you would have to upgrade weekly.
Just my .02

 

[psykohog]

AMD all the way. Built my very first computer asus a7v duron 600@927 a real kick ass system.
Good luck with your choice,

 

[flyfish]

True.......true.

 

[Trifecta]

osage.

I was speaking of the major improvements on system bus...

we dont see too many of those weekly (thank God)

The main thing is: When such an upgrade is happening, it will inevitably drive down the prices of the &quot;older&quot; technology (older, yeah right...)

I mean to say: If you could wait a couple more weeks, more major mobo makers will be coming out with the new mobos running the DDR! At that point it is a great time to buy. Many vendors start looking to dump the old lines, and then buying into that &quot;newer&quot; technology will allow you to have the upgrades when available.

At least, that is what I did when the 133 frequency came out...

and I should have probably waited to build my AMD system, but hey! 50 dollars for a 950mhz processor is a great deal no matter how you look at it...

 

[Sporko]

I don't understand the concept of waiting for the next great thing around the corner. This mentality just means you'll never get anything. These boards are full of advice like &quot;don't buy now because the new Zippidydooda will be out next month.&quot; Just buy the best your budget will allow now and then upgrade whenever your budget allows. As new technology cycles seem to be measured in weeks now, it is almost impossible to buy anything without hearing about something better the next day.

It's sort of like trying to pass every car on the road ... there is no &quot;front of the line.&quot;

 

[Trifecta]

SPorko

There have really only been 3 signifigant increases in mobo speed ...

from 66 to 100 - big speed increase
from 100 - 133 - extremely valuable for overclocking
and now the increase to 266...

Its foolish to be buying these newer 900mhz - 1.2ghz processors at the 133mhz bus speed...YOU ARE DEALING WITH A SERIOUS BOTTLENECK WITH YOUR RAM...

Now, while that 133mhz bus speed may have been ok back at the 450-600mhz, if you look at the speed of processor vs. 133mhz ram speed, you are running your processor at over 9 times the CPU frequency. Thats like riding a bike downhill with a parachute attached to your back.

Now is the time to embrace the new RAM technologies...fellow Anandtech forum member, can I get an AMEN?!?!?!

Those who waited to go from 66 to 100 are still running just fine, and those who waited for the 133 are seeing phenomenal overclocking increases on the intel chips. This latest improvement is worth the wait. We have been cruising with the 133 bus speeds for well over a year now, so those who waited to get in on it have systems that should last us until the next set of motherboards come out...


&quot;don't buy now because the new Zippidydooda will be out next month.&quot;

we are not talking about feature sets like agp4x and udma 100, we are talking about the next set of processor AND motherboard technology...

For example, the jump from the celeron and P2 technology versus the P3 chips...

Those who bought Pentium 2 400's and 450's at the end of their product life got in on some of the worst chips/motherboards around. Not only were those chips old news at the time, they were the maximum that the technology could afford. A few months later, the P3's came out and just a little while after that, the .18 process was in.

My point:

Those who just HAD to get in on the P3's right as things were rolling out, SHOULD have been patient enough to wait on the .18 micron technology.

If you did, your chip is loaded with features and can be overclocked (in most cases) quite nicely. In my opinion, that was worth the few months of waiting around.

I would contest that we are at the cusp of one of those innovations. (Duron vs. Athlon of 3-4 months ago)

A more appropriate question one should ask:

Can I survive on my system for just a few more months to wait on the next set of MAJOR motherboard technologies?

IMO, DDR ram is worth the wait

and the duron was worth the wait for me as well. I wanted to get an athlon, but when I read about the durons, I put it off. Thank God I read some threads that praised the new processors. Right now, Im humming along at 950mhz because of a 4 month wait. I saved at least 150 dollars by not buying into the Athlons at the same frequency. And I am poised to enjoy a who set of Processors that are not available to Slot A owners ...

The same thing happened to me when I purchase my P3V4X mobo. I waited for that slot 1 mobo, because I knew that soon enough I would be able to purchase a s370 chip and slocket. I pity those who have slot 1 boards that can only do 100mhz while they are running P3s that can be overclocked substantially ...

Was it worth the wait? In both cases for me, yes. Was I frustrated by threads like this while I was trying to decide? yes. Do I thank those who encouraged me to wait? YES !!!

Again, I think that this new technology with the AMD chipset is worth another month of waiting. Again, thats just my opinion...

 

[Syborg1211]

Alright, here are my 2 cents:

I would have to say that the first thing people use to say that AMD is better is how the cost of the AMD chips are soooo much less. Well, that is quite a crock of crap. I mean, sure, the cpu prices are the same, but how about the motherboard prices? AMD motherboards are tendingly higher priced than Intel supported boards. Also, AMD chips require some good ram to run(good ram = more money spent). Intel chips don't require good ram at all. Any low priced generic ram will do. AMD systems also require a good power supply (also = more money spent)! Intel systems don't require jack worth of power actually. I am using the 200 watt powersupply that came with my case still and that is with a geforce, dvd player, burner, and a bunch of fans. So you tell me, who does the price differential really lean toward?

Then there is the whole ddr bus that makes the AMD chips sooo much better. Well, Intel chips on 133 mhz bus are holding their own and almost as good as the AMD chips.

Also, hmmm, overclocking? Sure, say both chips can overclock to the same speed. The AMD chips by multiplier and the Intel chips by bus. Which is the better overclock? The Intel because of the increasing all out system performance by higher buses. Plus, the buses higher than 133 are making the margin between 100 ddr and 150 not very big. Especially since the 100 ddr is not even a true bus speed.

Here's another question, which has more support? Intel or AMD? Intel and it's SSE/mmx versus AMD and their 3dnow? I'll let you answer the question yourself as it is very VERY obvious.

Then, I see people making fun of Intel and their marketing commercials. Sure, the commercials are not the coolest things, but then people are talking about how Intel is stupid for doing it and they are using advertising as a last resort to beat AMD. I'd have to say the complete opposite as Intel is very smart and are marketing for popularity with the computer illiterate people. This is a smart move as they out number us by a lot. Maybe AMD should look into a couple commercials.

 

[Dark4ng3l]

ok amd systems do not require the best ram generic stuff works too. All oem's use generic stuff and I see them selling AMD systems. Some people run a t-bird with a 235 watt psu. The thing is you want quality(like with an intel system anyways).

 

[GaryTcs]

If he waits for DDR, shouldn't he wait for .13micron dies in q2, or the 4mb cache? or Sledgehammer?or 478 pin p-4? Also Chipgeek has a blurb about the DDR boards not being available till at least December due to a 760 chipset flaw. Buy the best thing you can afford now. Everyone here has a processor and mb that will be obsolete in a year or so anyway. Besides, that gives you the &quot;need&quot; to upgrade after the new year. DDR won't exactly be cheap for the first few months either.

I don't know how to answer syborg. AMD's processors are cheaper, faster, and as reliable as any Intel processor made today. I am not a AMD stoolie, but I will go with what's best. Any assmunch who buys cheap memory gets what he deserves. The only good point he makes is that fsb overclocking usually outperforms multiplier overclocking- because the ram, video card, and system bus are running faster. He neglects to point out that some components cannot handle that high of a bus speed. SSE/3dnow?! Huh? Does anyone remember any software making signifigant speed gains due to these instructions? I sure don't. lastly commercials- what the f#@k does this have to do with helping our friend buy the right components for his computer?

A Duron 600 or 700 gives you the most overclocking satisfaction with a >50% increase likely in clock speed.And you can take the fsb up to about 110-115.It still smokes any Celeron. Does anybody know when Durons will arrive with DDR?
All software runs on both Intel and AMD chips.

 

[Trifecta]

I am using generic pc-133 ram (Texas instruments)

bought at www.infotechnow.com

no probs at all with my duron

if I put it in my intel....boom nothing. I needed crucial to get to 850!

 

[Coolie]

It doesn't matter. AMD steals Intel's technology, changes it slightly, and calls it their own. The reason AMD can sell their processors much cheaper is because they don't need to spend much for R &amp; D...they let Intel fork out the dough. You can bet your a$$ that if Intel released an octagon-shaped 2.2GHz processor next week, AMD would have an octagon-shaped 2.3GHz processor next month.

 

[ragiepew]

syboy: There are so many mistakes in your comment that I dont even know where to start.

First off, you stand by the almighty Intel God by saying that Intel offsets its high prices by the fact that their other parts are cheaper. If you have looked for a new i815 mobo lately you will see that it costs as much if not more than any KT/X133 board for AMD systems.

Second, The issue of RAM is now defunct since this problem had to do w/ the classic Athlon.

Third, The Powersupply issue is almost defunct now also due to the fact that Durons/TBirds require &quot;less&quot; power... but still 300w is reccomended... not required, in fact I know quite a few people running TBirds w/ 250w powersupplies.

Fourth, I would like to see ANY PC133 P3 system even come close to a Micron DDR system w/ TBIRD. Please do some research before posting and also give some links to back up what you are saying...

Fifth, Intel and its mmx/sse is how much more supported thatn amd and their 3dnow!? First off you seem to forget that AMD also incorporates MMX and last I heard the MMX performance on the Athlon was better than on P3. Also, SSE and 3dnow are about tied in support, but SSE does have a slight edge... none the less... your comment is false.

Sixth, Also in your comment about OCing you point out that using Intels method of OC'ing is better because you increase your &quot;overall&quot; system performance by ~33MHz when running @ 133FSB. You however forget that the Athlon already runs @ 200FSB (albiet double pumped). Also, you dont bother to list some of the drawbacks of FSB overclocking, some things like Vid card instability, less choices for OCing speeds, and other component failures that arise from busses and parts not running at Spec speeds.

And last but not least, Seventh... You talk about Intel's commercials... yea sure I want the company I support to try to trick their users into buying P3's a month before their next product comes out and makes the p3 look &quot;old&quot;. Thats the kind of customer service and support I want from my company!

Like stated above, please make sure you do some research and actually know what the hell you are talking about before making an obscene post. I know you and your intel-blue blood... nothing you say will change that ...

have a nice day!

<edit> Typing errors... </edit>

 

[Syborg1211]

HAHA, last time I go on Anandtech when I have had some beer.