AMD or INTEL?

[wakOrang3]

to all computer fanatics which do you think has more user AMD or INTEL and why? post your comments here!

[Catweazle]

This is a useless topic. More people use Intel processors because Intel sells more processors. That doesn't mean that Intel is better or worse than AMD. It simply means that Intel sells more processors.

Currently, AMD processors outperform their Intel performance counterparts in just about every market segment, and for almost all computing tasks.

But you need to identify the appropriate processor type for the purpose it is aimed at performing. Just identifying if it is Intel or AMD is not enough.

[belama]

I agree with you Catweazle. This question has benn discussed in many sites on many occasions anyway. Its getting old and too general as a question.

[wakOrang3]

sorry guys, just wanna know your side :) but anyways thanks for all your comments :)

[Catweazle]

Tell us what tasks you wish to use the PC for, and what budget you have available for it, and we should be able to advise what processor would be best to use.

[wakOrang3]

im planning to buy a new one for my fedora core4 but doesnt cost much...is AMD be ok?

[Catweazle]

What sort of applications are you planning to run? That's more to the point than what OS you plan to run.

[wakOrang3]

im planning to use it as a home server....just for personal use.

[belama]

If you are looking for a server cpu, the AMD Opteron is better than the Intel Xeon but if you want a normal cpu, im not sure if AMD64 is better than Intel P4 for servers.

[goaliemike]

Ya go for AMD, checkout their site www.amd.com

[djrivera1]

Own both Preferred AMD
AMD good for unziping gaming excepted rendering avi files a little slower in that.
INTEL bad at gamining very bad, unziping take 3 times longer rendering avi slow.

[belama]

Anything in the department of encoding for video, music... Intel is the way to go.

[goaliemike]

Own both Preferred AMD AMD good for unziping gaming excepted rendering avi files a little slower in that. INTEL bad at gamining very bad, unziping take 3 times longer rendering avi slow.

Dude are you shure the intel wasnt a celeron by any chance, and both were the same clock speed. Im not trying to prove that intel is better or anything... But its true intel is better at encoding, but AMD is still a gamers favourite choice, for superiour power and clock speeds. But as we were talking about most of us would head towards AMD for a home based server

[djrivera1]

Dude are you shure the intel wasnt a celeron by any chance, and both were the same clock speed. Im not trying to prove that intel is better or anything... But its true intel is better at encoding, but AMD is still a gamers favourite choice, for superiour power and clock speeds. But as we were talking about most of us would head towards AMD for a home based server

Positive it wasn't a celeron it was a Intel Pentium 4 Processor Extreme Edition 3.73 ghz with 2meg cache memory, was going to use this system for gaming for video encoding it faster in anything else ok, don't dislike intel but the AMD FX processer did better in encoding mp3 file and good in video encoding and in FPS IN Unreal Tournament and Farcry. Intel did better in video encoding. Think intel make very good processor too But AMD definily better in gaming. Same video card in both.

[goaliemike]

AMD's FX series are the best gaming processors you can get thats what there made for. I know lots of people like intel for some reasons, and others like AMD for their reasons. But the average person woudnt see a difference so thats why some companies get away by selling a fast celeron, but when it comes to gaming those celerons suck. But since ive gotten my Athlon 2000+ im sticking with AMD and ill soon need a new computer so im still looking into dual-core, maybee waiting for a quad-core thats supposed to come out in 2007-2008 or just get a FX series.

[belama]

What advantages a quad-core cpu would give to you???

[jwenting]

Intel all the way, certainly for machines that need stability and a long uptime.
Intel beats AMD hands down when it comes to reliability, even if AMDs sometimes have slightly higer performance when measuring raw speed (and even there, AMD often deceives customers by listing performance comparisons between their highend CPUs and Intel Celeron while listing those Celerons as Pentiums).

[Catweazle]

AMD often deceives customers by listing performance comparisons between their highend CPUs and Intel Celeron while listing those Celerons as Pentiums

There is absolutely no need for AMD to do that, as they enjoy a clear performance lead in every processor category currently available, except for the Centrino's PentiumM, for which AMD does not yet have a competitor.

Add to that the fact that current AMD processors use power more efficiently and thus run at lower temperatures, and I'm sure you'll find that the 'reliability' enjoyed previously has now evaporated ;)

[belama]

AMD often deceives customers by listing performance comparisons between their highend CPUs and Intel Celeron while listing those Celerons as Pentiums

Is that a fact? It is quite interesting.

I also prefer Intel. I can't find a good reason for switching to AMD and nobody has given me a convincing reason yet. The only reasons someone gave me was that some encoding is faster with AMD, which is not true to me, and that games run better with AMDs - this is true but the margin of performance is small. I dont buy a computer just for games so why would I go for AMD over Intel? The only good thing you could have is the lower prices, but I would rather spend 50$ more for Intel.EDIT: Maybe some people could try to find more convincing reasons? Give it a try. :D

[Catweazle]

No, that's not a fact, belama.

As for convincing arguments, the power usage is the primary factor which concerns me. The higher powered Pentiums simply run too hot for realistic consideration, in my view, requiring at times some quite ridiculous cooling solutions when used in a performance system.

When better performing AMD processors use 20 to 30 watts less power, it's clear to see that Intel simply hasn't got it 'right' ;)