Intel Vs AMD

I used to have alligence towards AMD back when the thunderbirds came out... (1 GHZ processor)

Now I wouldn't even consider buying AMD again after purchasing my hyperthreading p4 2.6 gig :>

heh,

In true Intel form the the first few chips in any of their Pentium series have been utter shite and the tail end of the range have been good fast stable chips

Personally I like the AMD chips, they represent great value for money.

I have to reserve my judgment for the moment though as I havn't seen any comparisions between the top of the line Intel and AMD 32bit offerings in a wee while

While I'd prefer to have an HT P4, budget contraints always push me towards AMD, they're invariably cheaper. Not that I've played with the 64bit ranges yet tho - I'm quite keen to get one.

My next PC is going to be a P4... they don't cost much more then a AMD these days.

800MHZ.

...... FSB.





stoopid submit button

But is an 800FSB marked processor acutally running at 800Mhz down the bus or is it simply twinning (Hyperthreading) the bus sequences at 2 x 400Mhz? That seems a lot more likely.

And where is the major performance boost? AMD Barton core Athlons running at 400FSB are barely outperformed by Intels of the same pricerange/performance ranking (I'm not talking clockcycles here) even if they are HT chips.

have never owned anything from AMD..... since my 286 its all been intel

Have you ever used an HT in a desktop environment and ALT+TAB'd between a game like BF1942, Outlook 2k3 etc.??? There's a noticable difference. _very_ noticable.

I think its actually 200Mhz x 4, quantispeed architecture or something.

I think tomshardware ranked the 2600+ (400Mhz) the best value 32bit chip at the moment. (if you dont need HT)

How much of a performance gain is there for a dual channel ram in an athlon system?? Ive read that theres little perfomance boost compared to a P4 system??

I won't trust anything from Tomshardware site. They get paid to say good things about products, doesn't matter how shit they are. The more you pay, the better your products review is.

Grrrrr ....

From building 100's of PC's over the years i have seen the changes in almost every CPU that has come out over the last 3 years or so. Performance wise you just can got past the new P4's, there hyper-threading and now 1mb cache features kick ass in almost every application. They are best for games too

AMD are made for those on a budget that are not fussy about speed performance in apps

Intel all the way. I think that AMD's only keep up because of the xtra strain they put on the chipsets - And their research just seems to focus on how to make their chipsets handle the strain (which they do most of the time). They run hotter (a lot hotter) and no matter how well they do on paper I've used both and can say the P4 just handles better under load. Where the AMD reminds me of a rotary towing a trailer.

Gotta love the freudian slip there, spelling all my extra's without the E thesedays. Dammit

Xtra - taking over your mind 1 day at a time

im gonna go AMD for my next one

at the moment got +2100xp and a p4 2.4ghz but those new clawhammer's look like they are pretty awesome

Well .. Intel vs AMD is like a v8 vs a rotary turbo (as I say to everyone) both do the same down the qauter mile ... until you put a load on them ..

well AMD has the best performing chip around at the moment..... but for everyday use definately intel...... i love my p4