Intel or AMD?

[IgoByte]

Thinking about maybe building a pretty solid, reliable workstation (not a gaming PC, sorry), budget's around $700 let's say. I've been partial to Intel CPUs since having reliability issues with AMD way back in the day but I see some good deals on cpu/mobo bundles at micro center, which are tempting (MSI 785G-E53 AM3 & Athlon II X 640 for $110 for example).

So, my question: does it make sense to go the AMD route for a work PC and how do their CPUs stack up against Intel's core i procs? If you prefer Intel, which proc/mobo combination would be good considering I'd like to have on-board video/NIC/sound?

 

[darkewaffle]

If you're just doing office tasks/browsing, there's no sense going Intel since it's substantially more expensive and there will be zero performance difference.

Unless you're doing some heavy duty computing, it really makes no difference either way, AMD is simply kinder to your wallet and you can get four cores for the price of two, which may affect your multitasking.

And virtually every modern mobo will have onboard NIC/sound, and (virtually) all Intel mobos will have onboard video. AMD motherboards are distinguished more by the chipset used, and only certain models have an IGP. You can get what you need going either way though.

 

[khansolo]

Yeah, AMD is gonna be cheaper for the performance here. I don't really see any reason to go the extra mile for an i5/7 in this situation unless your work just happen to be video editing or something.

 

[IgoByte]

No, the work is fairly mundane, so I'll be happy to take the advice. My concern is reliability. In the past I've found AMD procs unreliable and have completely given up on using them. How is their lineup and what are the differences between the Athlon and the Phenom?

 

[Enhancelogic]

I agree with the two above me. It all depends on the purpose of you having a computer. If you're only doing stuff like typing documents, printing, viewing pictures, emailing, and scanning then go with AMD. You will save a lot of money.

However!!!!!! If you want to still go with Intel, you can get something sleek looking like this. It's ran by an Intel Atom, stuff that's usually inside of a laptop. It should do you good for just office work. Actually, I think you should go with the Intel Atom setup. It'll look a lot nicer inside of your office instead of having a huge tower around your desk.

This one looks even nicer!
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883103266

 

[darkewaffle]

No, the work is fairly mundane, so I'll be happy to take the advice. My concern is reliability. In the past I've found AMD procs unreliable and have completely given up on using them. How is their lineup and what are the differences between the Athlon and the Phenom?

An unreliable system is very, very rarely due to the processor

Athlon = Value
Phenom = Performance

Athlon II X4 is probably your best choice, plenty of power per core and four cores to handle any multitasking you throw at it.

 

[IgoByte]

An unreliable system is very, very rarely due to the processor

Athlon = Value
Phenom = Performance

Athlon II X4 is probably your best choice, plenty of power per core and four cores to handle any multitasking you throw at it.

Cool. Thanks. I'd like to avoid making a Celeron mistake. In the distant past I did experience plenty of CPU related problems with AMD systems and I'm not the only one. On top of that extremely limited upgrade paths and relatively poor performance in the long run.

PS: I don't think that the Atom is the way to go for something like this. Definitely need a classic PC. Thanks for the suggestion, though.

 

[Enhancelogic]

An unreliable system is very, very rarely due to the processor

Athlon = Value
Phenom = Performance

Athlon II X4 is probably your best choice, plenty of power per core and four cores to handle any multitasking you throw at it.

I would argue that an Intel Atom is more then capable at multitasking desktop software and he saves a lot of space in the office.

 

[mfenn]

Cool. Thanks. I'd like to avoid making a Celeron mistake. In the distant past I did experience plenty of CPU related problems with AMD systems and I'm not the only one. On top of that extremely limited upgrade paths and relatively poor performance in the long run.

PS: I don't think that the Atom is the way to go for something like this. Definitely need a classic PC. Thanks for the suggestion, though.

I don't think AMD has ever made an unreliable processor since they started doing their own microarchitectures. A lot of AMD's bad reputation for reliability (complete unfounded today) came from the terrible Via and SIS chipsets that were out there.

 

[jacktesterson]

I would argue that an Intel Atom is more then capable at multitasking desktop software and he saves a lot of space in the office.

I have a friend with an Atom desktop and it drives me nuts that he paid $350 for it when for $450 he could have got a decent pre built with an athlon x2 or x4.

I could never recommend them.

The Athlon II are perfect processors for this persons needs. I actually have a Phenom II 550 BE on sale on ebay right now too. If you can get a Phenom II X2, even better, but the Athlon II's are more than enough, whether X2 or X4 IMO.

To be honest, I just built a PC for Office and Productivity use for my inlaws. They wanted as cheap as I could go with good performance for $400 for a tower.

Its a Athlon II X2 3.0 Ghz with 2 GB Ram, a 60GB SSD Windows Drive and 500GB Green Storage Drive. For everyday use other than gaming, it feels just as Snappy as my machines for office, web browsing, software, with Runnings Windows 7.

2GB of ram on Windows 7 works perfect. Even I was impressed, and it was a $400 build.

 

[piasabird]

All of my Intel Builds have lasted longer. They are a little more expensive, but I guess you get what you pay for.

 

[coolVariable]

Intel, until AMD can fix some of their issues with their platforms (I like their CPUs):

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2106423
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2083024

 

[jacktesterson]

All of my Intel Builds have lasted longer. They are a little more expensive, but I guess you get what you pay for.

No problems here since k6/2 days.

 

[crucibelle]

No problems here since k6/2 days.

Same here. Not one problem at all with AMD.

 

[lxskllr]

I like Intel chipsets, and to get an Intel chipset, you need an Intel cpu, so I buy Intel.

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

I would have low watt usage in mind if it's just a workstation.. What are you doing? email?

 

[coolVariable]

I would have low watt usage in mind if it's just a workstation.. What are you doing? email?

Which again points intel since the "unusued" wattage is generally much lower than AMD's (even on CPU's where the top wattage is lower for the AMD CPU)

 

[mtnd3vil]

wow, the cheapest modern socket intel is $93?
I haven't done comparisons in the low-end arena in a while and I'm shocked.
Looks like AMD is your best bet here, but I wouldn't skimp on the motherboard.

 

[coolVariable]

wow, the cheapest modern socket intel is $93?
I haven't done comparisons in the low-end arena in a while and I'm shocked.
Looks like AMD is your best bet here, but I wouldn't skimp on the motherboard.

What have you been smoking? Is that $93 of funny money?

 

[Davidh373]

To make this decision you should consider what apps you will be using. "Workstation" could mean anything from word processing (lightest workload) to 3D Rendering (one of the heaviest workloads). Different Brands and Core counts are better for different tasks. As for the rest of your build, that too will change considerably.

 

[mtnd3vil]

What have you been smoking? Is that $93 of funny money?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116283

G6950 is the cheapest processor for 1156 or 1366. I've confirmed it on ark.intel.com

Do you propose that the cheapest intel cpu costs more? or less money?

 

[master7045]

Since you stated that the workload is "mundane", then a lower/mid level AMD setup will suffice. I went with a Micro Center deal they were having and seem to always run some variant of and haven't had any issues in the ~1 year I've run the setup (see sig). Check out this page to see all of their deals.

For you, I would think the Athlon II X4 640 for $100 plus a free MSI 785GM-P45. You can go with RAM/Case/PSU/etc from there.

 

[Davidh373]

Dude, there is no way that pentium can outdo the Athlon II X4 at the same price. Why wouldn't they price it at the $60-$80 range?! That's where it belongs...