why do you choose AMD OR INTEL system?

[jamesbond007]

I'm very unbiased when it comes to choosing parts for the systems I build for myself and others. It's simply a matter of what fits the budget, has the most features, and also depends on what I already have.

I chose AMD for my system because I run dual CPUs. Dual Xeons don't cost *that* much more than the MP2200s I use, but the RDRAM and the motherboard for the Xeons costed more than I wanted to spend.

I'm extremely satisfied with both companies' products. Really, to me, it comes down to the motherboard that chooses what CPU goes into my custom rigs.

 

[IQJUMPuw]

My vote goes to AMD. Hands down. When it comes to price/permance ratio... there's really no question. AMD all the way.

I have:

AMD Athlon XP 2000+ with GeForce3 Ti200 64MB
Intel Pentium 4 2.4GHz with GeForce3 Ti200 64MB
Intel Pentium 4 1.4GHz with GeForce2 MX400 64MB

I can honestly say I like the AXP 2000+ system the most. I've never had any problems with it. It's quiet and stable and I've had it for a while now. I bought the P4 2.4GHz because I was given a P4 system without a CPU... It has 128 DDR RAM and bunch of SCSI drives in it. I honestly havn't had enough time to mess around with it, but it's not all that fast. I'm not a big overclocker either, so overclocking is out of question... Oh yeah... the P4 1.4GHz is crap. It's Willamette of course, but it's just crap. My little brother is using it.

 

[amdskip]

Originally posted by: BentValve
I chose AMD for the price/performance ratio.

me too, AMD is the underdog too

Edit: My chipsets (VIA) work great so it must be the operator

 

[BurnItDwn]

best bang for the buck ... currently got 4 AMD systems and a really old mac .... i have had several intel systems in the past, and i have been very pleased with them.

 

[Kevin]

AMD

Intel's business practices piss me off. I remember reading about some company that had Intel beat. So Intel started a frivilous lawsuit that caused the other company to fold due to legal fees. Atleast Microsoft buys its competition...

 

[Macro2]

Intel knew the P4 was weak. So they came up with a bunch of Intel optomized benchmarks to make it look good. Bapco even shares the same address as Intel.
Next time I run Quake in the background and photoshop in the foreground I'll get a P4.

 

[SexyK]

Not trying to be a jerk or anything, but the "bang for buck" arguement just doesn't work anymore. The argument is now (as someone above correctly stated) "cheapest processor available". In the mainstream 2.0GHz/2000+ on up range, Intel meets or beats AMD for the dollar. The only difference is that AMD keeps their low end around and prices it at $50. Anyone shopping in the mid to upper range really doesnt have to factor proce into the decision, since it's about even. That said, IMO Intel is crushing AMD in terms of features in that range. Many more options in terms of chipsets and memory, better thermal performance, better overclocking chips (for the most part, milage may vary), HT on the high end. It's really hard to pass up a $215 P4 2.53B, espicially compared to an lower performing 2400+ at $169 or a more expensive 2600+ at $285*. Anyway, I don't really care, Intel has served me well, and its a shame some people post things based on personal feelings alone, and refuse to look at the reality of the situation. But it comes down to you, make a decision, you'll be happy either way.

Kramer

* according to Pricewatch on 12-29-02

 

[Kowan]

Either one would make you happy. As someone else stated, get the platform that has the features you're looking for.

"Atleast Microsoft buys its competition..." LoL, nice disclaimer. Netscape bought by MS.

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: Macro2
Intel knew the P4 was weak. So they came up with a bunch of Intel optomized benchmarks to make it look good. Bapco even shares the same address as Intel.
Next time I run Quake in the background and photoshop in the foreground I'll get a P4.

Come on, do you even read Anandtech articles?

REAL WORLD BENCHMARKS

This kind of FUD really ticks me off. I'd also like to know which company "had intel beat" then got frivolously sued.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: BentValve
I chose AMD for the price/performance ratio.

I am planning on building another system soon and I am looking at who offers the best bang for the buck.
Is an Athlon XP2600+\Nforce2 system less costly than one based on a P4 2.6 gHz\DDR motherboard?

 

[Kevin]

Originally posted by: SexyK

Originally posted by: Macro2
Intel knew the P4 was weak. So they came up with a bunch of Intel optomized benchmarks to make it look good. Bapco even shares the same address as Intel.
Next time I run Quake in the background and photoshop in the foreground I'll get a P4.

Come on, do you even read Anandtech articles?

REAL WORLD BENCHMARKS

This kind of FUD really ticks me off. I'd also like to know which company "had intel beat" then got frivolously sued.

Me too. I think it was on TechTV at some time. It happened a while ago.

Unfortunately, marketing is the biggest factor in the comparison. You don't think the Intel commericials and the Intel Inside after Dell and other system manufacturers doesn't play a role?

What's the better bargain - 50% off and take an additonal 50% off Or 75% off?

 

[wetcat007]

AMD, Intel CPU's are often overpriced, I myself like VIA, although they are not the only major chipset around the Nvidia Nforce2 is faster than the kt400.. and just as stable. When you pay Intel prices ur paying for all their annoying and dumb commercials, where they will do some weired thing to get there name out there and make dumb minds assosiate with buying their chips. I don't have anything against their chips, just the price, and the overboard advertising.

-Mark

 

[wetcat007]

AMD, Intel CPU's are often overpriced, I myself like VIA, although they are not the only major chipset around the Nvidia Nforce2 is faster than the kt400.. and just as stable. When you pay Intel prices ur paying for all their annoying and dumb commercials, where they will do some weired thing to get there name out there and make dumb minds assosiate with buying their chips. I don't have anything against their chips, just the price, and the overboard advertising.

-Mark

 

[Paulson]

I like AMD because it does what it should, and intel's been the big dog for far too long...

AMD has given great deals with great performance to it's users... why not be thankful and stick it out with them...

I guess I'm not a gamer but that shouldn't matter all that much...

 

[Compddd]

I've had both. AMD system was noiser tho. Enjoying my 1066 rambus/p4 system now. I think I finally got it to work haha(if you've read my big crashing thread).

 

[GTaudiophile]

Intel: Intel CPU + Intel chipset = most stable solution, imo.

Also, one word: heatspreaders.

 

[mrman3k]

Both are great systems as I have built many P4 and Athlon systems for people. The myth about AMD being not as stable as Intel is not valid anymore as long as you get a good mobo, not some cheap ECS or the likes mobo. The thing to realize about an overclock, is that with a P4, if you OC a 1.6 to 2.6, the performance increase will not be that great. On the other hand, AMD CPUs cant OC as many MHz, but for the small 100-200MHz OC, you will get the equivalent of the 1GHz P4 OC.

 

[dexvx]

Also, one word: heatspreaders.

Makes you waste so much thermal goop on one processor.

Personally, I like the tualatin celeron/pentium3 processor the best. I've had an overclocked 1.6a/PC1066 RDRam and AGOIA @ 1750Mhz (166FSB), and the good old tualatin at 1.33 Ghz feels the fastest to me for some weird reason.

 

[paperfist]

AMD

I switched to AMD because at the time Intel was changing their chipsets/CPUs more often then seasons in NY. I'd buy a nice shiny new MB with an eye to future CPU upgrades only to have Intel yank that rug out from under me. AMD's also at the time were cheaper and ran faster then Intels (some still are). And the final straw is having to reeducate people that I am building a computer for that no, a new Intel chip won't make your Internet faster

 

[Kowan]

It won't? Dag Nab It! I'm stuck on a 56K and was hoping it would boost the internet to DSL speeds.

 

[krackato]

The myth about AMD being not as stable as Intel is not valid anymore as long as you get a good mobo, not some cheap ECS or the likes mobo.

That's funny. I've fixed 2 of my friends computers in the last 4 months, and both times I fixed them by swapping out their motherboard with an ECS K7S5A. Replaced a Soyo and an MSI. Including mine, that's 3 rock solid system built around an ECS motherboard that I've personally built or fixed.

 

[Budman]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Intel: Intel CPU + Intel chipset = most stable solution, imo.

Also, one word: heatspreaders.

You got that right!!

There's nothing more I hate than starting a dvd rip & coming back to my pc with a blue screen!!:|

Intel chipset + cpu = happy Budman

 

[gotsmack]

I have a really good quality older power supply that doesn't support the p4 4pin molex connector so I have to get an AMD system when I upgrade my P3.

 

[SexyK]

Originally posted by: gotsmack
I have a really good quality older power supply that doesn't support the p4 4pin molex connector so I have to get an AMD system when I upgrade my P3.

Try this on for size.

Or any other recent Asus P4 board for that matter. You're powersupply will work fine with any of those boards.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
hahahaha


I laugh at you...a 1.8A overclocked beyond 2.4 is slow? haha what a load of crap.

and how are Intel mobos hard to overclock? simply lock the PCI/AGP and up the FSB...simple as that

that's, great, i laugh at you for thinking it's fast...

i'm going back to AMD... i like AMD setups better.