Which is better for gaming? AMD or Intel?

[bryanW1995]

keys is probably a govt employee that doesn't count as mod baiting, does it?

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Ok, so I was happily playing DoD:S and listening to a conversation that happened to pop up. What I heard was "AMD is the best for gaming, Intel is better for surfing and simulated benchmarks". I was adamant that Intel dominated the gaming scene since the introduction of Core2Duo, but also conceded AMD's dominance during Pentium 4/D. They also mentioned "Intel has 300 or so errors (or errata) in their chips, fixing it with microcode". I acknowledged that fact but also telling them I hadn't experienced any errors. So that point was mute to me. Would you guys agree? Comments are welcome.

LOL, a cpu discussion on DoD chat. I think the pinnacle of intellectual discourse I've heard on online games is "6'7" 250, and you don't want to see him".

 

[Keysplayr]

"LOL

Great way to cover your ass."

You know it. It's actually a totally unanswerable (as of now) question, so I was just playing around.




"keys is probably a govt employee that doesn't count as mod baiting, does it?"

It was definitely an answer any politician might give.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
"LOL

Great way to cover your ass."

You know it. It's actually a totally unanswerable (as of now) question, so I was just playing around.




"keys is probably a govt employee that doesn't count as mod baiting, does it?"

It was definitely an answer any politician might give.

LOL nice one...

But i dont think a 3.0ghz phenom could match a 3.7ghz Q6600.

 

[SniperDaws]

AMD have dropped a bollock, ive never had an intel cpu before i got this Quad core and its Oc'ed to 3.2 and i cant tell any diffrence between it and my Opteron 146 Oc'ed to 3Ghz infact id go as far to say that it doesnt feel as responsive as the Opteron while pottering round winxp and surfing the net, i dont Know maybe the p95 needs better drivers.


AMD for gaming, Intel for number crunching and benchmarking, if the Opteron 146 was quad core it would wipe the floor with the Q6600.

 

[bfdd]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
AMD have dropped a bollock, ive never had an intel cpu before i got this Quad core and its Oc'ed to 3.2 and i cant tell any diffrence between it and my Opteron 146 Oc'ed to 3Ghz infact id go as far to say that it doesnt feel as responsive as the Opteron while pottering round winxp and surfing the net, i dont Know maybe the p95 needs better drivers.


AMD for gaming, Intel for number crunching and benchmarking, if the Opteron 146 was quad core it would wipe the floor with the Q6600.

You're wrong. If your Opteron was even dual core it would lose core 2 duos left and right. Your 3.2ghz quad core is faster period.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: SniperDaws
AMD have dropped a bollock, ive never had an intel cpu before i got this Quad core and its Oc'ed to 3.2 and i cant tell any diffrence between it and my Opteron 146 Oc'ed to 3Ghz infact id go as far to say that it doesnt feel as responsive as the Opteron while pottering round winxp and surfing the net, i dont Know maybe the p95 needs better drivers.


AMD for gaming, Intel for number crunching and benchmarking, if the Opteron 146 was quad core it would wipe the floor with the Q6600.

Not even on a good day. Man, think about the folks in here who would like a straight answer and really would like to know the truthful answer to the OP's question. I am still baffled that AMD got votes in this poll when we all know it shouldn't have received a single vote. If it was arguable, then sure, I could see it. But it's just not arguable. Been shown a billion times over since C2D launch.

Phenom "might" change this. But that is not what this poll included. At least do the right thing for people who aren't that knowledgable and really need facts.

 

[cputeq]

So that point was mute to me

Moot point. Sorry, it's the grammar Nazi in me.

As for which CPU - Seriously, I cheer for AMD, but it's clear at this point Intel is simply giving AMD a beatdown. Hopefully AMD's next chip lineup will be stellar.

 

[coldpower27]

The poll IMO isn't specific enough right now, if you guys went Who has the best CPU for gaming in terms of the performance factor only, then I don't think AMD would have received any votes.

 

[skreet]

Originally posted by: munky
The cpu is somewhat relevant to gaming, but the video card makes a much bigger difference. Ask yourself, which would you rather have for gaming: a single core A64 with a 8800gts, or the fastest intel quadcore with a 8600gts?

Quad-core.

 

[Nemesis 1]

To soon to call Penryn /Phenom .
Right now intel .

Keys mod or no mod. You have matured a tremendious amount threw the years. Age doesn't matter. We all learn from our mistakes. Congrats on being so open minded.

 

[bradley]

I didn't vote for either one. Most people have little use for the CPU power they have now, much less quad-core. Anyway, a more powerful video card is far more paramount for playing games. But I still believe AMD has a better and more elegant overall platform. Being able to plop in the latest and greatest quad-core into existing AM2 motherboards might be nice as well.

 

[Munky]

Originally posted by: skreet

Originally posted by: munky
The cpu is somewhat relevant to gaming, but the video card makes a much bigger difference. Ask yourself, which would you rather have for gaming: a single core A64 with a 8800gts, or the fastest intel quadcore with a 8600gts?

Quad-core.

Lol. You do realize the 8800gts will wipe the floor with a 8600gts, no matter how many cpu cores the latter card has behind it?

 

[Accord99]

Originally posted by: bradley
I didn't vote for either one. Most people have little use for the CPU power they have now, much less quad-core. Anyway, a more powerful video card is far more paramount for playing games. But I still believe AMD has a better and more elegant overall platform. Being able to plop in the latest and greatest quad-core into existing AM2 motherboards might be nice as well.

It's ever nicer to plop in existing Intel's quad-cores into existing S775 motherboards now.

 

[SniperDaws]

Ignore my posts im just a misery!

 

[Amaroque]

I haven't read the entire thread, but this is my opinion...

If you are building a new system from the ground up, absolutely go with Intel.
If you plan on reusing critical parts (like MB & RAM), I'd strongly consider AMD.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Amaroque
I haven't read the entire thread, but this is my opinion...

If you are building a new system from the ground up, absolutely go with Intel.
If you plan on reusing critical parts (like MB & RAM), I'd strongly consider AMD.

:thumbsup:

 

[Cheex]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Amaroque
I haven't read the entire thread, but this is my opinion...

If you are building a new system from the ground up, absolutely go with Intel.
If you plan on reusing critical parts (like MB & RAM), I'd strongly consider AMD.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

Intel owns gaming.

 

[bryanW1995]

WHAT??? how can you say that an opteron 146 is faster than a Q6600 at 3.2? If you are web surfing/etc then 1T memory timings and sufficient ram should generate lightning-fast response with any modern processor. I pray that it was more than web surfing duties that prompted you to upgrade to a Q6600 and then OC it by 33 %. I realize this is hardly necessary, but let's compare:

http://www23.tomshardware.com/...0&model2=871&chart=416

feel free to play with the chart until you find something that gives a single core A64 chip an advantage over a QX6850 (which is almost as fast as your Q6600 @ 3.2)

 

[Keysplayr]

That's a very cool tool that Tom's has. A direct comparison to my E6420 at stock is equal or greater than a X2 5400+. But I also did notice, the 5400 is @ 129.00 and the 6420 is now 199.00. Wow, I bought my 6420 new in april for less than that. Price went up since the 1333FSB chips came out. A 6750 is cheaper than a 6420 is right now. Weird.

 

[Amaroque]

Cool comparison. The graphs show that my AX2 @ 2.8 GHz flip flops back and fourth with my C2D @ 2.4 GHz.

I didn't even bother to compare my C2Q @ 3.0 GHz to either, because we all know that answer.