AMD Vs Pentium - Page 2

[Catweazle]

Phaelax, comparing that Prescott to its Athlon64 competitor would be a valid comparison to make about relative thermal efficiency. Comparing it to a dual processor system, where the processors are based on a different core to the Prescott's competitor, is not really a valid comparison to make.

[Young Teck 06]

Technically if I have my say, I'd choose AMD, although my uncommon a** always chooses the dumb ones. Pentium has their good ones, but I have yet to see the performance of the P4 3.6GHz Extreme Edition.

One more thing, I was at Staples a month back and was testing the computers, I looked at one that had a P4 3.2GHz processor to a AMD 3300+ processor, and believe it or not, I opened Windows Media Player on both, and I timed it to take AMD 4 seconds to open, while the P4 took around 10-15 seconds.

Basically -- My Choice is CLEAR!

[Catweazle]

System startup time is not a good basis for comparison. there are far too many variables at play in the process to conclude that the difference is related to the processor. Most slow startups are due to the networking components configuration ;)

[meksikatsi]

I fail to see how someone that has identical software systems with two different processsors could tell the difference. Assuming that speed is comparable, of course.

[zeroth]

I fail to see how someone that has identical software systems with two different processsors could tell the difference. Assuming that speed is comparable, of course.

I have to agree with meksikatsi. If all things are equal in two different computers except the comparable processors, memory is comparable in amount and speed, HDs are comparable in speed, etc., etc., it would be impossible for a human being to measure any difference whatsoever.

The rest is just based on conjecture and is opinion and you all know the axiom about opinion...:mrgreen:

[Acorn]

If you want to know which is better, in the UK buy and read pc adviser
They show the best 10 pcs each month in three categories.
Power PCs Budget PCs and Superbudget PCs. They use a benchmark tool called worldbench 5. in the Power PC section The Amds regularly score 100+ while intel regularly score 90. the only time an Intel has scored 100 was because it was a 3.6 GHz overclocked to 4.1 GHz. Since my first Amd duron processor pc, I’ve never considered an Intel. My brother prefers Intel but his pc regularly freezes and his games just don’t seem right. Even with his £250 NVIDIA card I find amds to be more stable and better value for what you get. Also Intel are in trouble in Japan for unfair trading against Amd by offering manufactures rebates if they keep there pcs running amds down to 10% of all produced. Buying Intel is just buying a name.

[EXP]

AMD is better. It beats Intel in benchmarks.

[nat_123]

p4 is the best and the best p4 Ht extrem edition:1066MHz system bus provides up to 25 percent improved , 1MB to each core u can run nmultiple applications, such as editing video while downloading music.
of do a virus check in the back ground and dont forget 64 bit. it time to show AMD to the door , sure the p4 extrem is expencive but were is AMD's 2 core processer

[Catweazle]

errmmm.....

AMD64 outperforms P4EE in most tasks, and Athlon FX outeperforms it it most of the remainder of tasks.

AMD64X2 processors have now gone retail, and outperform the dual core Pentium processors by a considerable margin. There is currently no market niche for which Intel has a better performing processor available than AMD.

[goldeagle2005]

No questions asked. AMD rules (Is that a cliche'd statement or what?)

As mentioned here, the P4s are extremely overpriced. Case in point. I can get a P4 3.04 GHz with an intel original mobo for Rs 8900 (I stay in India, hence the Rupees. Current exchange rate is Rs 45 to the dollar). However, for Rs 8500, I can getthe AMD 64 2800+ with an MSI K8MM mobo. I call that a steal. I also assembled an AMD 64 2800+ based machine with the following specs for approx $650 (Rs 29200)

AMD Athlon 64 2800+
MSI Via K8MM Chipset based mobo with AGP 8X, 3 PCI, onboard graphics, sound, LAN, 2 SATA ports, VIA RAID built in and 4 USB
Samsung Flatron 17" Monitor
XFX GeForce FX 5200 GFX Card with 128 MB RAM
512 MB System RAM
Pixelview Internal TV Tuner Card with FM
Microsoft Keyboard+Microsoft Optical Mouse (bought as a Keyboard + Mouse Kit)
ATX Cabinet with 350 W Power Supply and 2 extra cooling fans
Internal Intex V92 56 KBPS Modem
Intex 2000W 2.1 Speakers with subwoofer
Sony Internal DVD/CD-RW Combo Drive (52x/32x/52x/16x)
Sony FDD
80 GB Seagate SATA Hard Disk

Oh and the system is black color.

I say AMD gives you the best performance (benchmarks prove it time and again) and the best value for money. Go the AMD way.

[james_hartt]

This is a system based around AMD, built around a 3800+ venice proccessor and for the same price shown here but with 3.4ghz P4 LGA775 (the ones with the wierd completly ungrounded names) with a few things taken off, like slower RAM even though it was DDR2, i would have had to get a 5.1 sound system instead i wouldnt get 64 bit proccesing and wouldnt get SLi i sware there is more things that i fell down on just to get an intel, oh well AMD are cheap n cheerful and if i'm gonna spend £1500+ on a computer cheap is good :D

ebuyer Quote

Quote Date 16/06/2005

Qty Product Description QuickFind Cost Line Cost
1 x OCZ Performance Dual Channel Kit 2x512MB DDR550 PC4400 CL 3-4- 4-8 (LIFETIME WARRANTY) (OCZ5501024PFDC-K) £156.56
1 x 12" Blue Dual Cold Cathode Kit £3.49
1 x Belkin Tool Kit 36pcs £20.73
2 x Seagate Barracuda ST3200822AS 200Gb 8Mb Cache 7200RPM - OEM £118.62
1 x Antec Neopower 480 Watt Power Supply ATX V2.0 24pinUK £61.49
1 x Antec Plusview 1000 4x5.25 5x3.5 ATX Tower Case with Side Window £42.48
1 x AMD (Venice) Athlon 64 3800+ 939pin 512Kb L2 Cache 90nm Retail Boxed Processor With 3 Year Warranty and Fan Included. £215.82
1 x Creative Labs TD7700 7.1 Surround Speakers With Decoder £130.62
1 x Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64 Edition - Single Pack £79.49
1 x Acer AL1715S 17" TFT 450:1 8ms 'Slim Format' - Silver & Black - 3 Year on Site Warranty £121.68
1 x Abit Fatal1ty AN8 SLi SKT939 NF4 Retail box £110.62
1 x XFX GeForce 6800 GT PCI-E 256MB DDR3 TV + DUAL DVI £239.56
1 x NEC ND-3520A 16x DVD R/RW Dual Layer Internal IDE Black OEM £27.51
5 x Antec TriCool 80mm Red Led Fan £12.90

Carriage £18.34
Subtotal £1359.91
VAT £238.05
Order Total £1597.96

P.S. gonna buy this on a cool website www.ebuyer.com really good and cheap.

[nolimills]

I have AMD athlon 1600 it is getting hot after about 10 minute and the fan kicks in and it is too noisy. I have two other computer having pentium 3 and the other has pentium 4 both ran smoothly. I even never turn of my pentium 3 computer for a year now and never get hot and not even get noisy. it seems that my pentium 3 500 Mhz processor ran faster than my AMD athlon 1600. so I will vote for Intel. Intel is better than AMD

[WTF]

Fan too noisy. I think you fan life is going to end. Fan noise normally come from vibration of the fan not the wind. So you might consider to replace the fan.

[lasher511]

The P1 chips owns all those chips hands down

[jo2995]

Right now intel holds the place for fastest cpu, the intel core 2 duo extreme. But, as a lot of people say, amd processors are much cheaper than intel ones. Some time next year, amd will become faster again by creating quadruple cpu cores.

[hellbell_rulez]

As a card carrying AMD fan...I was shocked when INTEL introduced it's line of Core Duo processors..still I think it's great cuz that means we all get to watch for AMD response

[jo2995]

Amd has responed by making all of their processors much cheaper and affordable by about like $200 bucks or more!

[lightningdemon]

IF you have the money, and you're buying the cpu strictly for gaming, go with the CoreDuo2's from Intel. But, if you want to game on a budget, go with the Athlon64's. With the exception of dual core cpu's (and the XP's), all processors are relatively cheap right now. And if you are worried about heating issues, then you'll want to go with a 65nm Pentium 4. The Cedar milll chips are very favorably priced and perform quite well.
I have several flavors of intel and amd, and I personally prefer my Pentium III 1.4GHz 133MHz processor. BUt i use my AMD64 4000+ to play all my pc games with, Titan Quest, Battle for Middle-Earth II, Guild Wars. And I use my P IV 531cedar Mill for editing and rendering.

[rich_m]

which is the best AMD processor and how gud is compared to the latest pentium....forgeting the cost.

[jo2995]

Hey, does anyone out there no which amd cpu is better? I used to think amd 64 x2 and 64 fx were the same but i dont know anymore. which one is newer?

[Badtimbo]

Amds for a long time usually had more speed than what they was labeled i have used both pentium and amd and both perform well as for the celeron not my speed. I just purchased a pent d dual core 3.0 ghz and it smokes and performs great. No heat issues thus far so i'm looking forward to see how it holds up.

[Elias Saleh]

hi everyone i am new here i find your forum the best
anyway i am planning on buying a new pc i am a little bit confused between amd and intel, a lot of people have said that amds are faster than intels but how can this be possible when intel have much more GHZ and L2 cache

When you are talking the single core amd blows pentium away, but for dual core nothing touches the core 2 duo. I have amd dual core 4400+ but have just built 3 machines with core 2 duo and they rock. C2D will be my next build unless something comes up in the meantime.

[Elias Saleh]

thanks man
i was gonna buy an AMD 5400 x2
any idea about the intel competitor

[Badtimbo]

Thanks alot I didn't know much about the core 2 duo's i looked at the speed they said they was but i didn't like. Im sure the quads are gonna rock as well looking forward to maybe purchasing a new core 2 duo

[bryan1010]

I think the Pentium CPU is better than AMD CPU.because,AMD CPU's tempereture is higher.

[Elias Saleh]

well that isn't gonna be a problem because i will use a heatsink

[webbo]

well the new AMD quad core is a dead horse, (they should have waited and spent more time creating a decent chip worth contending with intels core duo, shame really!

probably too busy trying to sort out ATI!

the intel quad cores are only worth buying if you your using multiple programs at once which most people dont, (well not to qualify spending money on a quad core) unless your into graphic design or media editing..............(and most of them use Mac's) lol
also the intel quad cores are really two dual cores stuck together and arent really true quad cores.

so at the mo if you want a decent cpu the intel core duo is the one to get, i must admit i thought i was a AMD guy but to be honest i'll go where best performance for my pennies lies and at this moment in time its now with intel.

you can see my previous post i think that was back in 2006! how things change eh?

[webbo]

just looked at my post regarding me having an AMD chip it was back in 2005!!! thats what.........10 years in PC years!!!! lol

[madoverclocker]

right now the phenom is bust, in order to fix the errata you have to install a bios update that reduces performance by 5% - 50%! and the am2+ platform offers no real benefits other than pci-e 2.0.

i'm a huge amd fan (overclocking... duh), but i'm waiting for the am3 platform before i use amd again. they are just having too many problems right now.