I've been thinking about upgrading from the current laptop I have to a desktop. Let's face it - with a dead sound card and a questionable IDE controller, this laptop isn't the most ideal, and neither is my other computer with a dying motherboard. With that in mind, looking at a budget-friendly laptop that will do just about anything I throw at it.

Trying to decide between the AMD Phenom II X4 955 and the Intel Core i3-2100. I'm leaning more towards the AMD, though. What I'm looking for is a computer that will run some of the older games I play flawlessly but still be able to run the occasional new game. I honestly don't do a whole lot of gaming other than League of Legends for graphics games, as I have issues with playing them for long periods of time. (though I burnt out a laptop with Hellgate London, hehe) I'm more into text based games, photo editing as well, need something that can run Adobe CS5 as well. (it's painfully slow on my dual core - could just be the RAM in it though)

Thoughts? AMD is more attractive due to the potential for overclocking, but I've also had bad experiences with overclocking before so likely wouldn't anyway.

The 955 will be a sweet buy and will overclock well, so long as you keep it cool (sub 55C).
Not sure that there is a mobile version of it though.

The 955 will be a sweet buy and will overclock well, so long as you keep it cool (sub 55C).
Not sure that there is a mobile version of it though.

Cool. Was just looking for an opinion. Cooling won't be an issue to rig since I'll probably be using an oversized desktop case. Thanks!

By cooling I meant the cpu's heatsink. A good after market heatsink would be required for a good OC.

The Intel core i3 2011 is better. It you are tight on budget, choose the AMD Phenom II X4 955 if not the i3 would be better in gaming performance.

Cannot see where the OP mentioned a 2011 cpu.
The Intel the OP mentioned is a dual core as opposed to the AMD's quad core too.

The Intel core i3 2011 is better. It you are tight on budget, choose the AMD Phenom II X4 955 if not the i3 would be better in gaming performance.

I am on a budget, yeah, hence why I was looking at the AMD. I don't need a top of the line processor.

By cooling I meant the cpu's heatsink. A good after market heatsink would be required for a good OC.

Ahhh, gotcha.

If that is the case then go with the AMD processor, it should fit your needs quite well.

@ crunchie

My mistake, I accidentally type 2011.

If you check the benchmarks, the Intel one rank more superior compare to the AMD. Most people know that Intel processor are better in game graphics. Second thing, no one compare processors by the number of cores. From the OP requirements, an Intel core would suit him fine unless he do video converting or multitasking all the time. Adobe CS5 will work well on an Intel core so is not the processor fault.

I also did pointed out that the AMD is cheaper which is what the OP wanted. Did you recommend AMD processor because you are using one now?

@ crunchie

My mistake, I accidentally type 2011.

If you check the benchmarks, the Intel one rank more superior compare to the AMD. Most people know that Intel processor are better in game graphics. Second thing, no one compare processors by the number of cores. From the OP requirements, an Intel core would suit him fine unless he do video converting or multitasking all the time. Adobe CS5 will work well on an Intel core so is not the processor fault.

I also did pointed out that the AMD is cheaper which is what the OP wanted. Did you recommend AMD processor because you are using one now?

Intels aren't necessarily better than AMDs - simply because Intel does have the cap they put on their processors that blocks most overclocking. An overclocked AMD can outperform an Intel. But let's not get into that argument. In raw, unoverclocked, I've read that they are about even for gaming. I do, however, multitask to the extreme which is why my current dual core just isn't doing it for me. (plus with it being a laptop I have no room to expand)