need advice - AMD or intel ?

[trk1980]

i am planning to build a system but i am confused whether to build a AMD system or a intel system. i found that almost all hardware sites and computer magazines are in favor of AMD machines and AMD systems outperformed intel machines in most of the benchmarks.however,in the competitive performance guide,which i found on AMD website,a comparision is made between AMD Athlon 64 4000+ and intel pentium4 550 3.4GHZ and AMD comes out as the winner.though AMD is the clear winner,the average performance difference is only about 20%.considering the fact that Athlon 64 4000+ costs more than $350 to that of pentium4 550 3.4GHZ i think p4 is the best buy.i believe the same is the case with other AMD and intel processors.thats why i chose intel.this is my base configuration.

1) ASUS P5AD2-E Premium motherboard based on 925XE chipset ($275)
2) Intel® Pentium® 4 processor 540 supporting HT Technology @ 3.2GHZ / SOCKET LGA775 ($250)
3) Kingston HyperX 1024MB PC5400 675Mhz Dual Channel DDR2 Memory 2 x 512MB ($325)

is there a better AMD system or for that matter a better intel system for the same price ?

 

[KoolDrew]

What exactly are you using the system for? The only reason to go Intel is if you are doing high end video encoding.

 

[pentiumobile]

You sound like a gamer. If thats the case AMD is your choice.

 

[trk1980]

i use it for gaming ..

 

[Zap Brannigan]

AMD; no question about it for gaming.

 

[biostud]

save some money and don't buy the fastest AMD processor.

 

[synapse02]

Id say go FX.. IF you cant do that then it doesnt matter, either-or are going to execute instructions hella fast and you wont be able to tell the diff anyways.. There is the whole 64bit arguement, but whatever.. WIth an FX chip ur getting an onboard mem controller that cuts latency between the proc and the ram in half as well as 1MB of cache mem..

 

[KoolDrew]

save some money and don't buy the fastest AMD processor.

I agree. Get yourself a 3200 and overclock it.

 

[Markfw]

Or a 939pin 90mn 3500+ winchester.. And why are you comparing a 3.2 P4 with a 4000 AMD ? That not fair. you should compare a 3200+ with a 3.2 P4, in check case the processor is LESS than the Intel. And the motherboard is WAY less than $275.

 

[Rapsven]

Go FX? Moron. Fools and their money are soon parted.

Go with the 3500+ Winchester at max. It's plenty fast.

And don't forget, A64 chips are not as cache dependant as Intel. 512k or 1 megabyte of cache will hardly make any difference. And every socket 754 and 939 and 940 CPU has an on-die memory controller.

 

[synapse02]

Moron?? WTF It was just a suggestion. Some of us like ferraris and some of dont I guess. AMD is currently making the best chips and the FX is the best of the best. In the grand scheme of things computers dont cost that much, and better now will save you in the long run.

 

[SrGuapo]

Originally posted by: synapse02
Moron?? WTF It was just a suggestion. Some of us like ferraris and some of dont I guess. AMD is currently making the best chips and the FX is the best of the best. In the grand scheme of things computers dont cost that much, and better now will save you in the long run.

You are paying a definate premium for a CPU that will be outdated in 6 months. In terms of performance, the FX-55 is really only worth a couple hundred bucks. They can charge $900 because some people have small penises and lots of money and think it is really worth $900.

I would much rather spend $200 on a 3200+ today, then buy a new $200 CPU (that wll be better than the FX-55 anyway) in a couple years and not notice any performance penalties.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: synapse02
Id say go FX.. IF you cant do that then it doesnt matter, either-or are going to execute instructions hella fast and you wont be able to tell the diff anyways.. There is the whole 64bit arguement, but whatever.. WIth an FX chip ur getting an onboard mem controller that cuts latency between the proc and the ram in half as well as 1MB of cache mem..

You'll get that memcontroller with any A64.
As for the Ferarri reference, chicks dig Ferarris, but they'll run away very quickly if you start bragging about your Athlon FX.

 

[icejunkie]

Originally posted by: Sunner

Originally posted by: synapse02
Id say go FX.. IF you cant do that then it doesnt matter, either-or are going to execute instructions hella fast and you wont be able to tell the diff anyways.. There is the whole 64bit arguement, but whatever.. WIth an FX chip ur getting an onboard mem controller that cuts latency between the proc and the ram in half as well as 1MB of cache mem..

You'll get that memcontroller with any A64.
As for the Ferarri reference, chicks dig Ferarris, but they'll run away very quickly if you start bragging about your Athlon FX.

Hehe

 

[Zap Brannigan]

Then again "chicks" can be easily enthralled by a strand of yarn. I have actually seen a "chick" play with a string of yarn I was holding over her head like a cat would in my late teens.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Zap Brannigan
Then again "chicks" can be easily enthralled by a strand of yarn. I have actually seen a "chick" play with a string of yarn I was holding over her head like a cat would in my late teens.

You really are Zap! :laugh:

 

[jvarszegi]

Originally posted by: SrGuapo

Originally posted by: synapse02
You are paying a definate premium for a CPU that will be outdated in 6 months. In terms of performance, the FX-55 is really only worth a couple hundred bucks. They can charge $900 because some people have small penises and lots of money and think it is really worth $900.

An FX-55 will not be outdated in six months. It will no longer be king of the hill, but it will still spank the crap out of most processors used in home systems. Also, they charge $900 not because of research on the genitalia/wallet size ratio of the target market, but because it's a premium part. The biggest jump, percentage-wise related to performance, is actually from the 3500+ to the 3800+ IIRC; that's why I bought a 3500+.

 

[P0ldy]

Originally posted by: trk1980
however,in the competitive performance guide,which i found on AMD website,a comparision is made between AMD Athlon 64 4000+ and intel pentium4 550 3.4GHZ and AMD comes out as the winner.

Hah.

Anyway, yes, buy AMD. Cheaper for better performance. What everyone's looking for.

 

[SrGuapo]

Originally posted by: jvarszegi

Originally posted by: SrGuapo
You are paying a definate premium for a CPU that will be outdated in 6 months. In terms of performance, the FX-55 is really only worth a couple hundred bucks. They can charge $900 because some people have small penises and lots of money and think it is really worth $900.

An FX-55 will not be outdated in six months. It will no longer be king of the hill, but it will still spank the crap out of most processors used in home systems. Also, they charge $900 not because of research on the genitalia/wallet size ratio of the target market, but because it's a premium part. The biggest jump, percentage-wise related to performance, is actually from the 3500+ to the 3800+ IIRC; that's why I bought a 3500+.

I'm just saying, the performance increase is much lower than the price increase. Some people need that kind of power, but for even the most hardcore gaming, any A64 - when paired with a decent gfx card - will provide good results. Also, I would suggest a 3500+ (winchester) but the prices for those is insane and a 3200+ is a much better investment.

If overclocking, a 3200+ winchester can easily be clocked to 2.4 GHz and some have been able to get past 2.8 GHz. With a raised FSB at 2.8 GHz, the 3200+ will easily overpower a stock FX-55.

Basically, if you need that kind of power, kudos, and you probably have a job that will pay for the computer as well. If you are just a gamer, programmer, websurfer, etc. - that is much more power than you need and you could save yourself alot of money by updating your sytem every year or two than buying premium parts every two or three years.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: Zap Brannigan
Then again "chicks" can be easily enthralled by a strand of yarn. I have actually seen a "chick" play with a string of yarn I was holding over her head like a cat would in my late teens.

You really are Zap! :laugh:

hehe, I wonder if he wears seductive velour?

 

[Zap Brannigan]

It's Brannigan's Law!

 

[synapse02]

Originally posted by: SrGuapo

Originally posted by: synapse02
Moron?? WTF It was just a suggestion. Some of us like ferraris and some of dont I guess. AMD is currently making the best chips and the FX is the best of the best. In the grand scheme of things computers dont cost that much, and better now will save you in the long run.

You are paying a definate premium for a CPU that will be outdated in 6 months. In terms of performance, the FX-55 is really only worth a couple hundred bucks. They can charge $900 because some people have small penises and lots of money and think it is really worth $900.

I would much rather spend $200 on a 3200+ today, then buy a new $200 CPU (that wll be better than the FX-55 anyway) in a couple years and not notice any performance penalties.

If ur worried about dating then you should deff go with the top of the line, otherwise dont worry about it. Im still using a 142 I got on preorder.. Im not even sure how long ive had it, longer than any other system Ive built and I plan on using it atleast 6 more months..