AMD vs. Intel... any thoughts....

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: lchen66666
Definitely, I would go with AMD for the following reasons.

* AMD CPU + nForce2 is as STABLE and REALIABLE as any INTEL's offering.
* AMD CPU + nForce2 gives you HIGH QUALITY on-board Sound ouput.
* AMD CPU + nForce2 platform is much CHEAPER than INTEL's

If you go with INTEL, you have to spend more on
* CPU(probably $50-$80 more)
* Sound card(unless you don't need high quality sound $50-$80)
* MotherBoard(You have to get INTEL chipset based motherboard for high quality).

You can use the money saved from above items to buy high quality
memory(CAS2, DDR400 at least), or Video Card. These are also critical
factors have big impact to overall system performance.

1)* CPU(probably $50-$80 more)....This is if he goes with a much lower rated speed amd chip...it has been reiterated numerous times in this thread once you go up to 2400-2500+ the chips are real close to same cost...So Basicaly you must be ASSuming he is going to OC which I haven't seen him state.....If he doesn't OC and wants higher range chip your argument doesn't work...

2)* Sound card(unless you don't need high quality sound $50-$80)....HOw many ppl are running 5.1 off of their computer setup....You don't know his situation....Again more ASSuming....I believe there are a couple P4 mobos offering high quality sound beyond the AC97 onboard stuff...

3)* MotherBoard(You have to get INTEL chipset based motherboard for high quality). I think many with a very viable Sis655 and sis648 chipset may disagree with you. Even if he has to get an Intel chipset there are many that are as cheap as any nforce board out there...


4)* AMD CPU + nForce2 platform is much CHEAPER than INTEL's ....Go to pricewatch...You are so full of Sh*t....Many of the non micor boards are in the mid 80's and my Albatron P4 i845Pe mobo was cheaper then that.....

 

[lchen66666]

Of course, I expect to overclock CPU.

These days very few people spend over $200 to buy a CPU.

Most of Tbred B stepping XP1700 or XP1800 can be eaily overcloekced to 2.1-2.2GHZ,
which is equalvent to XP2700-XP2800 level.

 

[Duvie]

Yeah but when the author of the thread is asking you should assume he is not ocing unless he states he is....Have him go get that 1700+ tbred for $50.00 bucks and in performance in heavy encoding and video editing as well as some gaiming he will be severely behind other options. I have tested a 1600+ xp chip and compared to my 1.6@2.4ghz it was quite aways behind in feel of speed and all ares of encoding. Now I run 3.2ghz with 450ddr and it isn't even close anymore....

He may get the best value at 1700+ but that is quite as way back if he is not into ocing, which still a mjority of Aters are not....

 

[SpideyCU]

Originally posted by: Duvie
I have tested a 1600+ xp chip and compared to my 1.6@2.4ghz it was quite aways behind in feel of speed and all ares of encoding.

Um...is this a revelation that a 1.4 GHz processor doesn't "feel" as fast as a 2.4 GHz one? Different architecture or not, an increase of over 70% in raw clock speed will do a little something-something.

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: SpideyCU

Originally posted by: Duvie
I have tested a 1600+ xp chip and compared to my 1.6@2.4ghz it was quite aways behind in feel of speed and all ares of encoding.

Um...is this a revelation that a 1.4 GHz processor doesn't "feel" as fast as a 2.4 GHz one? Different architecture or not, an increase of over 70% in raw clock speed will do a little something-something.

Duh!!!! What I am pointing out is that he may recommend a slower cpu at 1700-2100+ but if the user above does not oc he is really get far less power then he could be with a higher chip...That is all....I am just showing the gap in performance. I don't want the user to jump on a chip that is discontinued and falling way down on the list of performance...Heck most reviews barely show this level anymore....

If he wants to oc the 1700-2100 is a great option....otherwise the speed of 2.4ghz or 2400+ AMD chip is as low as "I" would go..IMO...

 

[rogue1979]

For a low range (price) cpu to get midrange power, AMD is the obvious choice. $50-$60 to end up with a 2400-2600+ is a hard deal to beat.


In the midrange cpu's, it is almost a dead heat, both at stock speeds and overclocked speeds, even with the price factored in.


Top of the line cpu's are getting pricey, and if you pay the most for Intel's 3.06GHz, you get the best.

 

[DivideBYZero]

These threads should have an automatic lock.

I'm amazed at how many regular posters on here are letting the 100-200 post n00bs drag them in......

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: DivideBYZero
These threads should have an automatic lock.

I agree, It is a reasonable question for someone looking to build now that hasn't been keeping a close eye on the market but unfortunately due to the strong emotional attachment most have to a particular brand these threads always degenerate Perhaps AMD vs Intel should be on the banned words list so you get a error code or warning message when attempting to post.

 

[SpideyCU]

Originally posted by: Duvie
Duh!!!! What I am pointing out is that he may recommend a slower cpu at 1700-2100+ but if the user above does not oc he is really get far less power then he could be with a higher chip...That is all....I am just showing the gap in performance.

(a) You're saying "what if he doesn't overclock?", but you weren't comparing it to a higher end chip, you were comparing it an overclocked chip, which kinda negates what you said you were trying to do in the first place. I still don't get the point of your post.
(b) No one's arguing that a higher end chip won't outperform a lower one.
(c) DivideBYZero is right, someone shoot me for ever attempting to respond in this thread. I know I've made a mistake in even looking in here when the responses I see include phrases like "duh". I feel dirty...need to shower...

Again, rommelrommel got it right the first time around when he said "I just see it as if ya only got $50~ for a processor you get a lot more from AMD. But, by the time you're at the $100-200 level or above it's a tossup."

Perhaps there should be a FAQ in this forum, stating how silly it is to ask this question, so we could just refer people to that.

 

[PhoenixOfWater]

Its EZer to put the HSF on a Intel chip than a AMD....
Just my thoughts

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: PhoenixOfWater
Its EZer to put the HSF on a Intel chip than a AMD....
Just my thoughts

You haven't used the sktA AeroFlow then

 

[Valvoline6]

I intended to build an AMD system this time, but after countless hours of research decided that Intel does give better overall stability, performance, and price / performance at the higher end. A 2.4b or 2.53b P4 is insanely overclockable and stable when overclocked. Not to mention they run cooler. My 2.53 now runs at 3.36 GHz at DEFAULT voltage with the memory at DDR 443 MHz and is at 35 *C idle 45 *C during P95. I don't see AMD getting anywhere near that for the money these 2.4's and 2.53's are at now. AMD rules the lower end no doubt, but when you get up to a $150+ processor Intel starts to look REAL good. Just the way it is now. I hope AMD does real well, we need competition in the cpu market..

 

[NightTrain]

Actually I enjoy these threads. You get folks from both camps making their case and you get alot of useful information along with all the flames

It's alot quicker and more entertaining than digging through a bunch of boring reviews

 

[Deskstar]

Freedom of thought and speech and processor. Lots of other countries would love to have it.

 

[DX2Player]

AMD up till the XP2400 because of the price performance after the XP2400 and starting with the P4 2.53 Intel wins because of price performance. At the top and the Intel 3.06 beats out the AMD 3000+ because its less expensive and also faster in 2 out of 3 applications. Now this is in terms of overall performance not specific to individuals needs.

Where the transition happens

AMD better choice up to this point
AMD XP 2400 =$130 Here
Intel 2.4B = $160 Here

Intel wins once it gets to the 2.53
The Intel 2.53 = $190 Here
AMD has no entry at this Rank look to next entry

Intel better choice at mid-high end in price performance
Intel 2.66 =$ 232 Here
AMD 2600 = $246 Here

Highest end Intel wins as its both faster and less expensive than AMD
Intel P4 3.06 = $545 Here
AMD XP 3000 = $555 Here