Intel Vs AMD CPU, not allowed to compare?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

theMan

Diamond Member
Mar 17, 2005
4,386
0
0
hey fatty, does THIS look like intel kills AMD in "ENCODING OF ANY KIND"??? doesnt look like it to me.
 
F

fatty4ksu

Golden Member
Mar 5, 2005
1,282
0
0
Originally posted by: Hacp
Originally posted by: fatty4ksu
Yup, meant single-single core.
Click to expand...


Next time make things more clear.

Also, imo, P4s compare quite well with single core A64s, but they heat up too much. If it weren't for the heat, the average user would benefit more from a P4 because of its ability to handle multimedia tasks better.

A64 is still the way to go for gamers :). ANd the FX-57 is no slouch in multimedia intensive tasks either :).

Btw, I tend to trust Xbitlabs in their reviews of CPus and Video cards more than AT. I find AT always has alot of errors and inconsistancies.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-fx57.html

Heres a benchmark comparing both dual core and single core flagships of both companies.
Click to expand...



Agreed, good solid post. The flagship vs flagship def/ goes to AMD.
 
T

theMan

Diamond Member
Mar 17, 2005
4,386
0
0
fatty, you always just try to agree with people to make yourself seem like you actually know something. the truth is, none of your posts have actually shown that you have any knowledge on the subject. you either just spit out random things you've heard people say on the forums, or just make things up. why are you even wasting your time posting here if thats all you are going to do.
 
X

Xyo II

Platinum Member
Oct 12, 2005
2,177
1
0
the only thing that intels beat out the amd is vectors, right? i saw that on some benchmarking between about 8 cpus, 1/2 intel, and they pretty much all sucked. (the intels)
 
T

The Linuxator

Banned
Jun 13, 2005
3,121
1
0
Originally posted by: Banzai042
Actually that would be Java, java uses system.out.println(), C++ uses cout<<. Oh, and just out of curiosity could some people post links to benches so that he can see just how bad AMD beats out Intel. Oh yea, i also forgot one other thing he said, when i told him that the P4 archetecture is old he responded with: "Actually the p4 is newer than the athalon 64, sure it's been around for longer, but every time they release a new core it's new technology, but AMD hasn't updated the A64 since it came out."
Edit: He also maintains that Intel 64 bit is Better than AMD 64 bit for some reason which he didn't justify to me.
Click to expand...


Yes it's JAVA, and if anyone is intrested in using it inorder to determine if his friend is an idiot or not it's licensed under the GPL :p and anyone can use it , offcourse under the GPL you guys have to give me credit if you do anything with it :beer:

oh and BTW JAVA SUCKS !!!
 
V

Vee

Senior member
Jun 18, 2004
689
0
0
Originally posted by: Banzai042
Actually that would be Java, java uses system.out.println(), C++ uses cout<<. Oh, and just out of curiosity could some people post links to benches so that he can see just how bad AMD beats out Intel. Oh yea, i also forgot one other thing he said, when i told him that the P4 archetecture is old he responded with: "Actually the p4 is newer than the athalon 64, sure it's been around for longer, but every time they release a new core it's new technology, but AMD hasn't updated the A64 since it came out."
Edit: He also maintains that Intel 64 bit is Better than AMD 64 bit for some reason which he didn't justify to me.
Click to expand...

Your friend is a fool and lives in a fantasy world.
And it's the other way round. In long mode AMD is even more superior.

And why this weird unhealthy affection for a big monopolistic, bullyish, probably criminal marketing machine?
That haven't come up with anything clever or beautiful by themselves since the 4004?

Doesn't he realize how royally screwed we all are, the day AMD folds?
 
Qbah

Qbah

Diamond Member
Oct 18, 2005
3,754
10
81
As much as I wish it were the other way, AMD wipes the floor with Intel CPUs. Now. Though you can never predict the future ;)
 
H

hurtstotalktoyou

Platinum Member
Mar 24, 2005
2,055
9
81
Originally posted by: Banzai042
Actually that would be Java, java uses system.out.println(), C++ uses cout<<. Oh, and just out of curiosity could some people post links to benches so that he can see just how bad AMD beats out Intel. Oh yea, i also forgot one other thing he said, when i told him that the P4 archetecture is old he responded with: "Actually the p4 is newer than the athalon 64, sure it's been around for longer, but every time they release a new core it's new technology, but AMD hasn't updated the A64 since it came out."
Edit: He also maintains that Intel 64 bit is Better than AMD 64 bit for some reason which he didn't justify to me.
Click to expand...

P4 used Netburst architecture in 2000, and still does five years later. The Athlon uses similar core architecture first released to the market in 1999. However, both processor lines have undergone major revisions and updates. Most recently, AMD switched to dual core. A little later, so did Intel. Your friend is full of ****** if he thinks the Athlon 64 hasn't changed since it was released. The most glaring example is the dual-core technology, but AMD has also handled the migration from 130nm to 90nm with ease.

In the end, though, age doesn't matter at all. What matters is performance. If you get an Athlon 64, your computer will run faster in almost every task. If you spend the same amount of money on a P4, it will run slower. Would you get the slower CPU, just because you thought it was newer?
 
C

coldpower27

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2004
1,676
0
76
Originally posted by: Banzai042
Ok, recently one of my friends began telling me that Pentium 4 and Pentium D procs are slaughtering AMD procs, and even said that the PD EE is literally unbeatable by anything AMD offers. When i reminded him that even the 3800+ X2 beats the high end PD in most cases, and that for raw performance the FX-57 reigns supreme, and that some people have tested and proven that it takes a p4 OCd to 5 GHz to match/beat an FX57 he told me that it's an irellivent comparison. Why? Because apparently comparing a 32 bit P4 to a 64 bit AMD isn't fair, and produces skewed results, and not only that, but the P4 is actually superioir because it is a native 32 bit proc with "better" 64 bit support from AMD. WTF is up with this, is Intel trying to spread a new brand of skewed marketing or something?
Click to expand...

There are fanboys of both camps, if he indeed said those things the bulk of it is false. I wouldn't post such information here, it will stir up trouble.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom