Intel Or Amd

[monochaser]

I'll be upgrading my desktop and laptop shortly and was wondering whether to go with AMD or Intel processors. Opinions or facts please. Thanks

[Jockstar]

I have AMD 3000 on my PC. Itwas recommened to me by a member on here about a year or so ago. I have had no problems with it. I cant tell you statistics/numbers/ facts etc/ But i am more tha happy with my system.

[raro]

Got one HP Intel system with 2.4 GHz and 256 MB RAM and a self-build (from cheapest components) 1.2 GHz AMD with 512 MB RAM. Can't help te feeling that the self-build comp is running faster...

[cobra]

I run both, but my favorite (and the cheaper to build) is my trusty old AMD1800 box, even though with a clock of 1.4mh, with the faster DDR ram the thru-put is still equivalent to Intel P4s running at 2.8mh, and they're very stable,

Save yourself some $$ and go with AMD, and if money isn't a concern go with the 64bit dual-processor, not much is written for it yet but will be.

Most gamers run AMD boxes,

[Firefoxx]

These days it's really just a matter of preference. The lines are blurred and not so distinct. You will find games/apps that will run faster on platform A than on platform B, and you will find those that will perform the other way around. Either way, the difference is not earth-shattering.

As for cost, single core AMDs are cheaper than their respective Intel CPUs. Dual core Intels are *much* cheaper (only a little more than single-core) than AMD dual cores. Intel mainboards tend to be more expensive than AMDs. Intel 8xx dual cores and single core 6xx series run very hot, but the newer 9xx are much cooler. AMDs run pretty cool.

AMD is changing their socket right now from 939 to AM2, so you might want to wait a bit. The new socket uses DDR2 memory, while the old uses DDR. Intel's current socket is the 775.

My personal preference has always been Intels, simply because the drivers seem to be more mature.

If you want a real bargain, you can buy the Intel 805 dual core processor for around 5xxx baht. It's a bargain since it can be overclocked to 3.6Ghz easily... and can even be overclocked to outperform the best AMD and Intel CPUs with water cooling.

[astral]

Check out HP for the laptop.

They have both AMD and INTEL offerings.

I ended up with the NX8220, but only because the AMD version was not available where I live. (outside Thailand).

[monochaser]

Interesting responses, thank you. I'm far from a puter geek and have been reading comparisons on clockings and the like on other sites but it's over my head for sure. My aim is to get the most updated processor available in the next month or 2. I noticed that apple decided to use intel chippers in their new products.

[francois]

hi'

intel and wait for the new generation called "conroe", dual core and shorter pipelines, as amd used to build, similar base that the yonah(mobile cpu) from intel too.

amd are made for gaming although now with the recent benchmarks made,

it seems that the "conroe" from intel buries amd easy ...

I'm on intel for years and my brother on amd, still for video and encoding/decoding intel is ahead

it's a bit like the fight between ati and nvidia

although we all know that the nvidia chip is far better, there are still some who will pretend the opposite

and the new mac is on Intel platform

francois

Edited May 27, 2006 by francois

[The Coder]

Features and price between Intel & AMD on the desktop are very comparable. In either case for x baht you'll probably get a dual core, 64-bit processor that runs neck and neck in speed (the days of AMD being cheaper and carrying more features are over, save for perhaps running a little cooler). It pretty much depends on which brand you like.

The upcoming Intel Conroe is an interesting technology to wait for and they are saying late July, but if history is any indicator, it will take even longer for the chip to show up in Thailand and when it does, it will carry a significant price premium. Same for the AMD AM2 stuff. If you want value for money, you don't want to be on the bleeding edge if buying your stuff in Thailand. It's always more expensive and a step behind compared to the USA.

Probably the best selector is go to tomshardware.com, and look at the benchmark of what's important to you and compre the AMD & Intel speeds of the processors in your price target.

[monochaser]

Thanks guys, always good to get comments from people who understand this tech stuff. On AMD running cooler, is this a proven fact and can be noticed by the user? Wonder if that Conroe will run cooler yet

[phuketsiam]

whatever you get will be out of date in few months anyway, however I think overall AMD gives more bang for your buck, but all the above comments are also true, my Bro is a game freak and and a hardware buuf and he swears by AMD but he also says there's not much wrong with Intel.

as a further point, spending money on memory is cheap way to speed up the whole PC, the clcok speed of the chip is only a small part of the overall picture, spend less on the chip and get 512 - 1024 memory or more

[Firefoxx]

It's a proven fact that AMDs run cooler. However, as I have said before, the newer Intel 9xx dual-core CPUs also run fairly cool. If you want *really* cool, then you can buy (or try to buy... probably not available in Thailand) a Core Duo processor and compatible mainboard. It's the CPU used in notebooks.

Of course, how cool the CPU runs doesn't really affect much, unless you're going for a silent PC (and then you could use a water block) or really into overclocking (again, waterblock.. and the best overclocker is the really hot 805 dual core).

If you're going for a performance system, it's good to have lots of ram. The more the better, especially if you plan to play graphics-intensive games. I currently have 2GB, and would like to install more.

[rio666uk]

amd - yeah i know the overclockers are waiting for conroe to make its mark - but in my opinion all who know the chip performance history will know that amd will answer conroe with something new

they always have and im sure they always will - they have been at the top of the gamers and enthusiasts market for years - conroe will take the lead and level the playing field for a few months then amd will return with something better..

its tit for tat

[francois]

hi

conroe temp : 32°c on load

bus 667mhz, dual core with 2mb cache(bs speed) ...

amd still have some wotk to do to arrive there, all the benchs put the best amd far behind ...

anyway, it's not so much of which budget you have, it's mainly what you are going to do with it ...

gaming, might want to stay with amd others go for Intel

and choose your ram well, useless to buy a fast cpu with low ram

and keep in mind that 1gb of ram is not this much

francois

Edited May 28, 2006 by francois

[monochaser]

Thank you francois, gaming is not my game so Conroe looks like the one for me. I suppose that AMD will have answer to Conroe and then intc will answer that yet again. I've used AMD twice in the past and intel the rest of the time. I've been on an intel diet for a few years now and looks like I will continue. I posed this question because I have heard an awful lot of hype about AMD the past year and watched intel stock crash 35% the past 6 months while watching AMD stock double. I wasn't sure if there was something deep rooted happening with intel products that I didn't know about. It would appear on the surface that intel has answered amd's attack with some solid new products; happy to hear about it. OK, I admit that I am dabbling in the Intel stock a bit here also

Edited May 28, 2006 by monochaser

[Tywais]

Some interesting reading regarding AMD and Conroe:

http://voodoopc.blogspot.com/2006/03/if-on...me-machine.html

[monochaser]

No, you are mistaken, that is not interesting reading, but rather a spam blog run by a guy named sharikou who attempts to manipulate AMD and INTC stock through web board spam.

[The Coder]

Could be, but I sure bet Intel could have a few decisions back:

1. Pentium 4. It allowed Intel to win the "megahertz" war because P4's were designed to clock really high and people bought cpu's solely based on the clock speed. Not anymore. Megahertz/gigahertz ratings are nearing obsolete in the ability to measuring the performance of a cpu and people care about cool & quiet. Intel has about got the ship turned around now and is even shelving the word Pentium for good. New processors are called "Core 2 Duo".

2. Itanium. Intel thought they could force people to a brand new processor architecture designed for 64-bits at huge price premiums while keeping budget users running cheap 32-bit Pentiums. AMD knew the answer was much simpler and simply extended the existing instruction set to 64-bits just as the 80386 extended it to 32-bits. No brainer because it is cheap and you can run existing stuff with 100% compatibility plus without performance penalties. Strangely, Intel refuses to give up and is still pouring even more billions into Itanium that no one seems to want to save face as far as anyone can tell.

The money and years wasted in developing the wrong kind of processors has got to be a huge set back to what could have been. As far as I can see now, both AMD and Intel are guilty of building too many niche processor lines instead of focusing on a couple main stream ones. As Intel has found even with Dell recently, you can't be everything to everybody.

[Tywais]

No, you are mistaken, that is not interesting reading, but rather a spam blog run by a guy named sharikou who attempts to manipulate AMD and INTC stock through web board spam.

Guess you didn't actually go to the site and read the user responses then. Unless you are trying to say that Sharikou and Rahul Sood (The founder of VooDooPC who runs the blog and produces some of the top gaming rigs around) are the same person which they are not. Sharikou makes a few comments in the blog that Rahul allowed but ignoring them the other user responses are interesting. And yes, Sharikou is a bit of a laughing stock out there but this link is NOT his blog.

[daleyboy]

I have always had seld build computers and have always gone for amd, on a cost basis. But their performance and reliability have been superb, and i really cant see myself changing to aything esle

[Hans Brix]

Here's a neat little article on Intel's manufacturing processes

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctime...te/14689737.htm

[Gary A]

The last desk top I bought was built by a guy who supplies different companies with computer systems. It is a powerhouse built with the best components available. I was very happy with it but recently had some problems. It turned out that the Pentium 4 three GIG processor crapped out. I live out in the boonies and the local shops didn't stock that chip because it was too expensive. The closest I could find that fit the motherboard was a Celeron 2.66. I am amazed that I simply can't tell any difference. The photo editing programs run at the same speed as before and I can't see any slowdown with anything I do. That said, I think that you get the speed from a fast hard drive (SATA) and more RAM. In my case one GIG of ram. A super fast processor is useless unless the rest of the computer is matched to take advantage of it. I would have no qualms about buying an AMD.

[John_Betong]

Hi,

A long time ago I read somewhere about the "Rule of Ten" applied to computer hardware and I seriously believe that it still holds true in this modern day and age. Maybe some whizz kids can confirm this theory?

Basically a computer's speed is dependant upon the transfer of data. Th follwoing list is topped by the fastest memory transfer. I am not sure of the exact position of the last three items but the majority of the other memory transfer devices are in the correct order.

1. Processors's cache memory.

2. Processor

3. Computer memory

4. Pluggable flash memory drives

5. Hardrive (big cache is better)

6. DVD/CD

7. Tape drives, etc

8 Networks

9. Floppy disk

10. Modems

Each hardware item has an approximate speed ratio "Rule of Ten" for the transfer of data.

Modern operating systems cleverly buffer data to alleviate the hardware memory transfer bottlenecks.

If you want a "fast" computer then it depends on overcoming the particular bottlenecks that your software uses. For example graphics programs gobble memory and when none is left the graphics program buffers to the harddrive (watch the hardrive light change from slowly flashing to being steady, not a good sign)!

I have Window's Task Manager constantly running as a background process. It displays the Processor Usage Icon in the system tray. When the computer starts to slow down, I check the icon. If this is a steady bright green then I know that some process is either hogging the processor or is not responding. If the latter then I select and "End Process".

The above screen dump is Window's Task Manager with Firefox, Crazy Browser (brilliant search facilities), Opera, Outlook Express, Wordpad all loaded. The blimps in graph are due to just loading Adobe Photoshop. As you can see in the lower right hand box there is still a large chunk of Physical Memory(K) available which acounts for the low CPU Usage.

When buying a system, load numerous applications, constantly monitor this Performance window, watch your resources reduce and see if your system slows or gets 'choked'

Anyway, hope this message gives you food for thought.

Cheers,

John_Betong

[thailand_property_search]

I always choose AMD, mainly because of better game compatability/performance.

Dollar for dollar the AMD's tend to be a better option. The choice is somewhat personal.

AMD's also have huge overclocking capabilities nowadays in comparison to the Intel but thats only if your an overclocking junkie like me (just replaced MB and CPU on my 3rd budget PC because the AMD Athlon 2.1 GHz fried itself. Overclocked the 1.8GHz AMD Sempron64 to 2.502GHz. It craps all over my old one and for only $85).

The bottom line for buying any PC....... Go by budget. Choose a system price and buy the highest frequency you can within that (intel or AMD). Don't try and keep up with the rolls royces, because they will be honda-civics in 6 months time anyway.

From experience it is more economical and a better strategy to buy a new mid-rang PC every 1-2 years than to buy top of the range every 2-3 years.

My thoughts anyway.

Edited May 29, 2006 by thailand_property_search