Processors

[awesomegamer]

Hey guys, I'm not too good with hardware. In class we were discussing AMD v.s. Intel and all that stuff. I stayed out because I don't know much.

Basically I think I hear them mention:

1. Intel has a higher clock speed

2. AMD can execute commands more quickly

which kinda balances out.

What do you guys know?

This is probably one of those functionality v.s. practicality things, it depends on how it's being used, right?

[Prash]

i recommend AMD but Intel is more popular.

 

AMD are starting to claw over on Intel and i think they do make better processors

 

 

 

what do you actually need it for? Gaming? internet surfing? watching videos?

 

 

EDIT: by the look of your name it seem you'd playing alot of games.

 

Go for an AMD dual core processor; 2.4gHz - if you dont mind me asking, do you have a budget and if so what is it?

[awesomegamer]

I'm planning on buying a computer maybe withing a year, about $1,000 to $2,000. I'm not really sure though.

Yeah, I like to use my computer to play games and I do some programming.

Thanks for your reply.

[Prash]

np mate

 

if your buying a new pc for that price:

 

as much RAM as you can get!! (2GB is sufficient)

nVidia 8800GTX - graphics

MSI video card recommended

and processor as mentioned above.

[Kyougi]

In a year, the 8800GTX will be nothing. Actually, you can get several competitively performing graphics cards for the price of one 8800GTXs. The DirectX 10 hype has duped many people into buying a Dx10 card.

Basically I think I hear them mention:

1. Intel has a higher clock speed

2. AMD can execute commands more quickly

Outdated info. This was true with Intel's Netburst microarchitecture, but things have changed since then. Intel's Core 2 Duo line will match Athlon's FX series and even exceed with Intel's Core 2 Duo Extreme line. On top of that, Intel supports the open source movement better than AMD (which they're grossly lacking in).

[Azgar]

I have been looking at new PC's too and you have to look at some of the bench marks out on somewhere like Cnet. I have been looking and am still unsure which to go with and this being a guy who has built several AMD computers

[euler]

The intel dual core are actually the best:

12 MB of total L2 cache

1333 MHz front side bus

[mafia-thug]

I think intel dual core are actually the best.

[teh silly]

Which processor is "the best?" For all intents and purposes, as has been posted above, Intel blows the competition away with its Core 2 line. But the "best" really depends on how much you know about this stuff and how much you're willing to pay. For instance, you can get an amazing chip and and accidentally buy a shoddy motherboard, and you won't get anywhere near full performance. You could get a AMD Athlon X2 Black Edition (unlocked multiplier on the 5000+) for a couple bones and overclock the bejeezus out of it. Also, there are other processors out there, such as the UltraSPARC T2 (8 cores), and Intel is working on the Polaris (80 cores). And there's more amazing stuff out there us mere citizens don't even know about.

[rct]

Why does no one talk about VIA processor which are very energy efficient.

[co1dfus1on]

Intel pwns AMD with Core 2, plus AMD (and ATI) are very lacking in support for open-source. *Shudders at memories of ATI graphics cards and linux*.

My advice is to go Intel (not quad-core if you're gaming -- there is very little support for multiple CPUs among games) and get a good nVidia card.

 

Why does no one talk about VIA processor which are very energy efficient.

 

Mainly because no-one will care about VIA until it becomes big enough to seriously compete with Inet and AMD.

 

[cypher]

intel is way faster than amd. that's for sure.