• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Intel vs AMD, fight fight fight!

H

halfadder

Golden Member
I've almost always been an Intel user. I have made a few AMD systems, but generally have found the Intel systems to be more stable. I have been extremely happy with the Intel 440BX, 845PE, and 865PE chipsets. These, along with good ram on a reputable brand board, have been rock-solid stable.

My AMD experiences haven't been as good. I used original Athlons with the Via Apollo KX133 and AMD 760 chipset and found both to be more flakey than anything from the Intel world. Even after using different RAM and tweaking RAM timings, I still had strange crashes. My experience with the Nvidia nForce 2 chipset has been better, but still not perfect.

So here I am today about to build another system. This time it's for a friend who really does need ultimate stability and a complete system with 17" DVI LCD for $1000 solid. I can easily do this with a 3.0 GHz P4 and the 865PE chipset. But perhaps I could get more performance with Athlon 64.

What are your thoughts? It seems like most of the forum users here are AMD fans. What are some of the pros/cons I should be aware of?

Also, what is the situation with RAM thruput? Even the old Intel 865 and 875 chipsets do dual channel quite nicely (and have a 800 MHz CPU bus). But the A64 only has one channel (and there's no way I can afford Opteron or the dual channel Athlon 64). Also the Athlon bus numbers are much smaller than the Intel numbers.... yet the Athlon does very well in the benchmarks!

And finally... I would love to hear stories from users who have recently built both AMD and Intel systems, I would like to hear how they compare in the real world in terms of performance, and more importantly, stability.

Thanks in advance!!
 
Generally AMD has a better price - performance ratio and AMD is much better in a gaming PC. It really depends on what your freind will be using the PC for.
 
If you would like to be liked by the crowd go AMD. (Which ATM also make the fastest gaming processors)

Read some comparisons on hardware sites (like anandtech) for comparison.
 
Intel is slightly easier to type since there's only one captial letter. AMD is shorter but you have three capital letters to deal with.
 
BTW, little-known fact: the proper abbreviation for versus is not vs., it's v..
 
Intel = MultiMedia
AMD = Gaming
Macintosh = Paper Weight.

That sounds about right, each has it's own application depends what you want it for.
 
Dual channel, clock speed and bus speed by themselves mean nothing. Have you checked the great performance of intel's own low-clocked Pentium M? Have you looked at the poor performance of high-clocked Celeron chips?

Real-world performance is what matters.

Price / performance matters if you're on a budget.

Your specific applications matter since there are one or two where intel isn't a poor second.

Read thread #1 in this forum for a $200 socket 754 A64 2800+ and motherboard combination that is equivalent to a $290 intel 3.0E combo in gaming and most other applications. If you're on a budget does it make sense to spend the extra $90?
 
> Macintosh beats all.

I use a PowerBook w/ Keynote for my presentation slides! 🙂
But as I mentioned in another forum: yes, I am weird, that's why I drive both a Saab and a Ford!

Back on topic, the more I read about success with AMD, the more I think this next machine will be my first 64 bit venture with a shiny new Athlon 64.
(But I'm still interested in hearing AMD v. Intel stories)
((thanks for pointing out "vs" v. "v")) 🙂
 
Originally posted by: slirp
Intel = MultiMedia
AMD = Gaming
Macintosh = Paper Weight.

That sounds about right, each has it's own application depends what you want it for.
Click to expand...

By definition Games are multimedia.
 
Originally posted by: mechBgon
BTW, little-known fact: the proper abbreviation for versus is not vs., it's v..
Click to expand...

Interesting, have to add that to the list of little known crap I have in my head, good to know.
 
Originally posted by: jvarszegi
Originally posted by: mechBgon
BTW, little-known fact: the proper abbreviation for versus is not vs., it's v..
Click to expand...

Don't be so stuck up; I guess it is a little-known "fact". 😉 Every modern language changes daily.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=vs.
Click to expand...
If I start lecturing about how to properly line-break a hyphenated word at the hyphen, using a stacked double hyphen, then you can start giving me grief for being "stuck-up" :evil: Just trying to use this thread for something more useful than plain flamebait... 😀

 
The G5 processor is the fastest processor money can buy and more. It supports TRUE 64bit computing with infinite bandwidth (compared to Wintel) for absolute maximum gaming performance. It also runs cool and requires less power to run making it also the most perfectly balanced mobile processor available. A single G5 processor can easily outperform a DUAL CPU Wintel computer in just about every task. With Dual G5 PowerMacintosh's, performance is further DOUBLED enabling things you couldn't possibly dream of doing it on a PEECEE. Combined with the ultimate in hardware and the ultimate in simple to use, secure and perfectly stable software (Mac OS), the Apple Macintosh is the ABSOLUTE FINAL WORD in desktop and server computing.
 
Originally posted by: deathkoba
The G5 processor is the fastest processor money can buy and more. It supports TRUE 64bit computing with infinite bandwidth (compared to Wintel) for absolute maximum gaming performance. It also runs cool and requires less power to run making it also the most perfectly balanced mobile processor available. A single G5 processor can easily outperform a DUAL CPU Wintel computer in just about every task. With Dual G5 PowerMacintosh's, performance is further DOUBLED enabling things you couldn't possibly dream of doing it on a PEECEE. Combined with the ultimate in hardware and the ultimate in simple to use, secure and perfectly stable software (Mac OS), the Apple Macintosh is the ABSOLUTE FINAL WORD in desktop and server computing.
Click to expand...

:music: Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll, Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll! Troll Troll Troll, Troll Troll Troll Troll, Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll.... Troll! :music:

Thats about it...

Oh and my experience, I have just built a P4 2.8C processor based computer on a Abit IC7-G Board which delivers good but not best performance at 2.8GHZ which is why I have it overclocked to 3.5GHZ. I'm not intel or AMD fan but right now for absoulutely rock solid pc I would go with this setup because it only crashes when I really push it when overclocking. If your looking for long life (expansion) the Socket 478 and Athlon systems are going to be gone pretty soon and same with 754 (I dunno about how soon for 754 but I think pretty). The intel socket 775 is retarded beyond belief and will probably die soon because of intel's heat problem on high end systems. 3.4GHZ+ should last you a while because it seems the speeds of processors aren't goin anywhere. If you get the AMD 64 939 based boards some time (possibly next year) they should be much more stable then they currently are now. Socket 754 shouldn't last long since they just changed to 939 and to make it last longer I would go with 939 on the AMD side, but currently there are too many problems with 939 based boards so.... IMO Just overclock the setup I go, run the ram async (mine is sync but costs more!) and be done with it. 3.5GHZ is fast enough, 2.8 was too slow for gaming on my machine anyways. Remember this is IMO!
 
You don't even NEED to overclock a Mac because it's so fast already.

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango
Originally posted by: deathkoba
The G5 processor is the fastest processor money can buy and more. It supports TRUE 64bit computing with infinite bandwidth (compared to Wintel) for absolute maximum gaming performance. It also runs cool and requires less power to run making it also the most perfectly balanced mobile processor available. A single G5 processor can easily outperform a DUAL CPU Wintel computer in just about every task. With Dual G5 PowerMacintosh's, performance is further DOUBLED enabling things you couldn't possibly dream of doing it on a PEECEE. Combined with the ultimate in hardware and the ultimate in simple to use, secure and perfectly stable software (Mac OS), the Apple Macintosh is the ABSOLUTE FINAL WORD in desktop and server computing.
Click to expand...

:music: Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll, Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll! Troll Troll Troll, Troll Troll Troll Troll, Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll Troll.... Troll! :music:

Thats about it...

Oh and my experience, I have just built a P4 2.8C processor based computer on a Abit IC7-G Board which delivers good but not best performance at 2.8GHZ which is why I have it overclocked to 3.5GHZ. I'm not intel or AMD fan but right now for absoulutely rock solid pc I would go with this setup because it only crashes when I really push it when overclocking. If your looking for long life (expansion) the Socket 478 and Athlon systems are going to be gone pretty soon and same with 754 (I dunno about how soon for 754 but I think pretty). The intel socket 775 is retarded beyond belief and will probably die soon because of intel's heat problem on high end systems. 3.4GHZ+ should last you a while because it seems the speeds of processors aren't goin anywhere. If you get the AMD 64 939 based boards some time (possibly next year) they should be much more stable then they currently are now. Socket 754 shouldn't last long since they just changed to 939 and to make it last longer I would go with 939 on the AMD side, but currently there are too many problems with 939 based boards so.... IMO Just overclock the setup I go, run the ram async (mine is sync but costs more!) and be done with it. 3.5GHZ is fast enough, 2.8 was too slow for gaming on my machine anyways. Remember this is IMO!
Click to expand...

 
Originally posted by: slirp
Intel = MultiMedia
AMD = Gaming
Macintosh = Paper Weight.

That sounds about right, each has it's own application depends what you want it for.
Click to expand...

um, actually, intel is no better at multi-media then amd is. encoding/decoding isnt sides with intel anymore. they are pretty much on par. hte only thing intel has over amd is multi-tasking, but amd is faster then any comparable intel in general.
 
The majority of home users use their computers for general office purposes which both AMD and Intel excel at ever since the AMD k7/k8 and Intel P3.

Ever since then, Intel has had their lead in the Media encoding. Due mostly to their SEE optimization influence in software and as well as their raw clock speed.

AMD doesn't do bad at encoding, they just don't excel at it.

On the other hand, AMD has had their lead in Gaming. Due mostly to their onboard memory controller on the A64 CPU cores and shorter pipelines(consider a CPU pipeline like a conveyer belt) in calculating data.

Again, Intel does not do bad at gaming, the just don't excel at it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top