AMD vs. Intel vs. ?

Hardware discussions that do not yet fit into one of the current Hardware fora.

Moderator: Hardware Moderators

Which computer processor manufacturer do you prefer?

AMD
4
44%
Intel
4
44%
Motorola
0
No votes
Other, please post and specify.
1
11%
 
Total votes : 9

AMD vs. Intel vs. ?

Postby Spock » Fri 2005 Mar 11 11:08

This topic resurrected from the old forum.

We all know what we like, and why but we don't all know the same why. Why do you like your favorite flavor processor?
Last edited by Spock on Sat 2005 Mar 12 2:36, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Spock
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 2417
Joined: Tue 2005 Jan 18 10:47
Location: MD, USA

Postby iissmart » Sat 2005 Mar 12 1:53

Intel. AMD's have a larger tendency to overheat.

BTW, this thread should be called AMD vs. Intel, since Athlon is a type of AMD processor.
--iissmart--
User avatar
iissmart
Plus Achiever
Plus Achiever
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed 2005 Jan 19 10:14
Location: West Chester, Ohio

Postby Spock » Sat 2005 Mar 12 2:14

Subject changed. I copied it over from the old forum and just left the Subject as it was there. :?
Last edited by Spock on Thu 2006 Jun 15 1:31, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Spock
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 2417
Joined: Tue 2005 Jan 18 10:47
Location: MD, USA

Postby iissmart » Sat 2005 Mar 12 2:16

Thats cool. So what is your preference on processor types?
--iissmart--
User avatar
iissmart
Plus Achiever
Plus Achiever
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed 2005 Jan 19 10:14
Location: West Chester, Ohio

Postby Spock » Sat 2005 Mar 12 2:23

I have now made this a poll. My real preference is Motorola as they are inherently faster, performing many more processes per clock cycle than either of the other two mentioned. I haven't used an Apple or a Mac in so long though that I voted for Intel as the AMD processors catch on fire if they lose cooling.
User avatar
Spock
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 2417
Joined: Tue 2005 Jan 18 10:47
Location: MD, USA

Postby iissmart » Sat 2005 Mar 12 2:26

Interesting. I didn't know Motorola made processors. I thought they only made cellular devices :oops:
--iissmart--
User avatar
iissmart
Plus Achiever
Plus Achiever
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed 2005 Jan 19 10:14
Location: West Chester, Ohio

Postby Spock » Sat 2005 Mar 12 2:36

What processors do you think are inside the Apple computers? [:)]
User avatar
Spock
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 2417
Joined: Tue 2005 Jan 18 10:47
Location: MD, USA

Postby iissmart » Sat 2005 Mar 12 3:46

Actually, I never really thought about that! I'm not really a big fan of Macs or anything having to do with Apple (Dell DJ > Apple iPod).

Wow, I really can't believe I actually never put a thought towards what's inside a Mac...it's mind blowing [:O]
--iissmart--
User avatar
iissmart
Plus Achiever
Plus Achiever
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed 2005 Jan 19 10:14
Location: West Chester, Ohio

Postby TarThoron » Sat 2005 Mar 12 6:30

I'm currently using a 2Ghz P4, and most my other computers have used some type of Intel chip. If I was going stricktly for performance, I would go with an AMD chip though. They may have heating problems, but they also tend to get faster average speeds, and the heating problems are solved by making sure your cooling systems are always running properly.

The Intel Celeron D looks like a decent chip, that will most likely be what the next computer(s). My brother wants to have a computer mainly for gaming, so he may end up with something from Alienware, which mainly uses Intel proccessors, although thier most powerfull un-customised system uses an AMD. My mom, on the other hand, wants something that she can use mainly for internet and e-mail with a little bit of graphic design. She may end up with some apple notebook, although as the home network admin, I would prefer she get something with a Windows OS, for ease of networking.
Learn something about everything, and everything about something.
User avatar
TarThoron
Junior Member
Junior Member
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed 2005 Jan 19 2:36

Postby Repr » Wed 2006 May 31 5:25

old thread, but i love it.
my personal favourite is AMD.
at first about AMD overheating. it used to be that way but it changed. modern intel chips easily hit 80 degree while a normal AMD only reaches 40-50. this means you need a heavier cooler for an intel wich results in the intels using more power. at 2nd AMD cpu's are usually faster then the Intel's. although the Intel cpu's now run around 3,5GHZ when you buy a new one 1 AMD cpu's give better results running at just 2,4GHZ.
User avatar
Repr
Posting Member
Posting Member
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat 2006 Jan 07 10:41

Postby Krank » Wed 2006 May 31 6:14

Same with me, stated out on a intel wich actually overheated....
:O

Got into how do i want to spend my money ergo how do i built my own machine and went AMD, its cheaper and for the cooling, well lets say im kiinda wrong on that part since i think that if i spend alot of time behind my system it might as wel look awesome, piccie commes later.

So i got myself a case with 3 extra fans, thats not incluiding the powersupply, graphiccard and proccesor fan, hence makes 6. The trick is to inmagine the airflow in your system and if needed reaarge it so that you get the lowest temp.:)


Image <---side


Image <----front


the pictures arent alll that clear but you get the idea:)
How to make a Direct-X File

new system:
Gigabite p35 DS3R
Award software international, F11, 01-04-2008
Intel E8200 "wolfsdale" intel core duo
OCZ ddr2 pc2-6400 Gold kit, 4 gig.
maxtor hdd, 80 gig, ide
Peak Radeon HD 3850 512 mb pcie
Liteon dvd rom, ide
Fortron BlueStorm 500w
Windows xp pro sp2
User avatar
Krank
Honored Achiever
Honored Achiever
 
Posts: 190
Joined: Sun 2005 Dec 18 5:01
Location: The Netherlands

Postby Repr » Wed 2006 May 31 10:52

my system looks like this

Image

it also has several extra cooling. not really needed but i liked the case and the coolers came with it :mrg:
User avatar
Repr
Posting Member
Posting Member
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat 2006 Jan 07 10:41

Postby cmptch » Wed 2006 May 31 2:43

I'm not into that fancy stuff. I'm using converted case from the AT days. I'mnow being taken back to when I built my first computer for myself...story time!

It was 8 years ago. I had just turned 16 and had been working for a few years already, so I had a lot of money saved up. I remember getting the all the parts in on the same day, from different companies, which is a miracle. I could afford the best of everything. an 8 gig harddrive, High end Asus mother board. Pentium two processor, and I built it into a cardboard box.
Last edited by cmptch on Wed 2006 May 31 8:27, edited 1 time in total.
________________
"Backup your data, unless you want to lose it." --Your friendly neighborhood Hardware Dude.
User avatar
cmptch
Master Achiever
Master Achiever
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Sun 2006 Apr 23 3:05
Location: Dalzell, IL

Postby Spock » Wed 2006 May 31 6:55

cmptch wrote:... and I built it into a cardboard box.


:rofl: :roflak: :roflak: :roflak: :roflak:
User avatar
Spock
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 2417
Joined: Tue 2005 Jan 18 10:47
Location: MD, USA

Postby cmptch » Wed 2006 May 31 8:26

Spock wrote: :rofl: :roflak: :roflak: :roflak: :roflak:


Hey, it was cool at the time. I was the only kid in school with his own computer...or the money to buy one.

I ran it in that cardboard box till my brother's cat knocked a speaker off the stand and onto my hard drive, about six months. Lost half the drive. come to think of it, it may have been an 8 gig. It doesn't really matter. I may still have that motherboard/processor somewhere. Still works...even though It did catch fire a couple times.
________________
"Backup your data, unless you want to lose it." --Your friendly neighborhood Hardware Dude.
User avatar
cmptch
Master Achiever
Master Achiever
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Sun 2006 Apr 23 3:05
Location: Dalzell, IL

Postby Spock » Wed 2006 May 31 8:49

cmptch wrote:Hey, it was cool at the time. ...


Don't get me wrong, it's still cool. I still have an Apple ][ kit that I built from discrete components. It's basically a motherboard and that's it. I added a power supply and keyboard and it hooks to a TV for output. It has a whopping 48 KB of RAM and uses Cassette I/O for storage. Still works as far as I know. ;)
User avatar
Spock
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 2417
Joined: Tue 2005 Jan 18 10:47
Location: MD, USA

Postby cmptch » Wed 2006 May 31 9:07

It's hard to fry that old hardware. They don't make em like that anymore. Well, most of the time. I've actually had bad luck with Asus Motherboards, though it could be good luck. Who knows. The first was a P2L97, and then a P2B. I was powering both with a screwdriver to "loopback" the power switch. I had actually welded the screwdriver to the board once. Before that I was using a jumper and burned my hand a couple times from the sparks, and caught the box on fire.

My current board, Asus P4B533, has had 2 power supplies running 220V 450W short, catch fire, and burn.
________________
"Backup your data, unless you want to lose it." --Your friendly neighborhood Hardware Dude.
User avatar
cmptch
Master Achiever
Master Achiever
 
Posts: 217
Joined: Sun 2006 Apr 23 3:05
Location: Dalzell, IL

Postby Saber » Fri 2006 Jun 02 4:09

Repr wrote:...at first about AMD overheating. it used to be that way but it changed. modern intel chips easily hit 80 degree while a normal AMD only reaches 40-50. this means you need a heavier cooler for an intel wich results in the intels using more power. at 2nd AMD cpu's are usually faster then the Intel's. although the Intel cpu's now run around 3,5GHZ when you buy a new one 1 AMD cpu's give better results running at just 2,4GHZ.


1st: Yea, I was reading about the new AMD processors and I'm not sure the fire hazard still exists? Can anyone confirm this?

2nd: I've been looking, but has anybody found a true speed, performance, etc... comparison site to accurately compare and AMD to an Intel processor?
Seeker of Wisdom & Computer Knowledge :hypno:
User avatar
Saber
Consulting Member
Consulting Member
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue 2005 Feb 01 1:41

Postby Repr » Fri 2006 Jun 02 6:43

Saber wrote:
1st: Yea, I was reading about the new AMD processors and I'm not sure the fire hazard still exists? Can anyone confirm this?

2nd: I've been looking, but has anybody found a true speed, performance, etc... comparison site to accurately compare and AMD to an Intel processor?


1: there is no fire hazard. when the chip runs too hot it will just shut down or worst case, start smoking. actually setting fire to anything it very unlikely
2: this is kinda harder. both intel and amd make chips but they work different. amd never got above 2.6 ghz while pentium is up about 4ghz. this does not mean that the intel chips are really faster. its very hard to compare since, unlike with normal hardware, you dont have the basic chipsets and just have to setup different brands against each other. about a site, i use http://www.extremetech.com a lot these days. if you can read benchmarks youre good to go. or just skip till the conclusion. im not sure it will answer all your questions though, but you can look around
User avatar
Repr
Posting Member
Posting Member
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Sat 2006 Jan 07 10:41

Postby Spock » Fri 2006 Jun 02 11:02

Repr wrote:... i use http://www.extremetech.com a lot these days. if you can read benchmarks youre good to go. or just skip till the conclusion. im not sure it will answer all your questions though, but you can look around


Thanks for the link. Once I get a chance to take a look and verify it, I will probably add it to our links section, probably under Education. :)
User avatar
Spock
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 2417
Joined: Tue 2005 Jan 18 10:47
Location: MD, USA

Postby Halenthal » Thu 2006 Jun 15 1:23

Intel or AMD...what an interesting question. And my highly simplified, distorted and biased answer:

It all depends on what you're doing with the computer, of course, and also on the time at which the purchase is made (i.e., 3 years ago, Intel ruled, last two years, AMD is supreme, in a couple of months, Intel takes the title back) and if you're asking about specific chips or an 'overall' type of question.

As of now, before that sweet Intel chip comes out, overall AMD is the winner. For servers, they've got Opterons that are superb. Desktops, you've got the Athlon series. Athlons use less power, produce far less heat, and produce more work than most Intels. On a computer system that is not used for heavy graphics rendering or serious multitasking (serious as in compiling a database while rendering a 3D movie and ripping a DVD at the same time, not to be confused with having IE and Outlook open at the same time) or a computer that is used for gaming, the AMD wins. Multitasking, the Intel wins, due to hyperthreading.

Basically, it's hard to beat an FX-62, or an X2 4800. It's just really really hard to do. HOWEVER! Intel does have chips that can do it, it's just that they tend to warm up the room...and the rest of the planet. Or am I the only one seeing the connection between number of Pentium processors in use and global warming? Eh. It's a good theory, really.

Then again, we have the occasional oddball which throws a curve like no other. The Intel Pentium D 805 chip, to be precise, a dual core P4 at 2.66Ghz. That cute little chip goes for about $120USD at NewEgg right now. With a STOCK P4 cooler-STOCK mind you-and a motherboard that will let you tweak the settings, you can over clock it to 3.6Ghz. Stable. With something like a Zalman fan, you can get to 3.8 or even 3.9Ghz. Above 4Ghz, though, you pretty much have to have water cooling, and 4.1Ghz has been reached. And stable. Tom's Hardware, you really rock. And you're insane, but still, a dual core 4.1Ghz Intel chip for $120...wow.

Before the 805 was 'discovered', Opterons from AMD held the overclocking title belt. Probably due to them running cooler compared to the Intels, they can be overclocked to downright silly speeds (somewhere on the net is a video of a fellow using liquid nitrogen, I think it was, as a coolant, and reached around 6Ghz. I think. Been a while) Realistically, an Opteron at anything over 3Ghz is blazing fast. Really really fast. And you can actually afford to buy a board that sports FOUR of those cute little Opterons. (more than four, it gets kinda outrageously expensive rather than just really expensive)

Now, Intel's next chip that comes out is going to be really interesting. There's not a lot to go on so far, but everything points to a chip that is low power, low heat, and 20% faster than anything AMD has. I plan on using one in a box I'm going to build specifically for Vista. I also plan on snagging a nice AMD chip, one of the new socket AM2's with DDR2 support, put it in a box with Vista, and maybe run some benchmarks. (who am I kidding, I have no time for benchmarks. Whichever system feels faster gets to keep Vista, the loser gets XP)

Yep, I'm wishy-washy when it comes to CPUs. I'll take whatever is stable and does the job I ask it to do. Right now most of the computers in my house (there are, um, nine in operation) use AMDs, though two of my three servers use Intel. Next week, it could be a different story, as long as it works. :)
User avatar
Halenthal
Hardware Moderator
Hardware Moderator
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri 2006 May 26 1:04

Postby iissmart » Sun 2006 Jun 18 1:29

Halenthal wrote:...somewhere on the net is a video of a fellow using liquid nitrogen, I think it was, as a coolant, and reached around 6Ghz. I think. Been a while...
This video? (about middle of the page, click Server 1 or Server 2)
--iissmart--
User avatar
iissmart
Plus Achiever
Plus Achiever
 
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed 2005 Jan 19 10:14
Location: West Chester, Ohio

Postby Spock » Sun 2006 Jun 18 9:23

iissmart wrote:This video? (about middle of the page, click Server 1 or Server 2)


Thanks for that. I used to visit Tom's Hardware all the time. Once I even downloaded his entire database! I'm sure that would be out of the question today but his site is one of the best informational sites I found and used over the years.

While reminiscing and browsing through his site, I came across The Mother of All CPU Charts 2005/2006 which I would recommend as good reading to my Tech Students as well as anyone interested in the evolution of CPUs and computers.

There was even one section about flopy disks there!
The 3.5" Floppy Is The Last Surviving Dinosaur
One stalwart component has survived through all of these innovations: the 3.5" floppy. Originally designed by Sony, it quickly became a standard feature on IBM-compatible PCs (remember when they were called that?). The floppy is the only component that still remains in use today, practically unchanged in its 18 years of service, running at 360 rpm and offering a transfer rate of 34 kB/s. Once again, let's put that in perspective with regard to today's world: Transferring a file to your computer from a server that is 10,000 miles away on another continent is three times or even faster than getting it from your internal disk drive. And despite all this - the floppy lives.


Good solid educational material there. :)

There was even a section on the AMD which might have a bearing on this poll ...

AMD Platform Troubles

Since AMD no longer produces any chipsets for the desktop market, it has to rely on its partnerships with other companies to get them produced. The list is quite impressive, as it includes companies such as ALi/ULi, ATI NVIDIA, SiS and VIA.

Today, NVIDIA is considered the top dog in the AMD chipset market, and has thus become AMD's closest and most important partner. VIA, on the other hand, has often alienated both buyers and motherboard manufacturers in the past by providing chipsets suffering from a number of issues. ATI has not been able to provide AMD desktop chipsets in a timely manner, and those models that were announced sometimes never appeared.

As a result, AMD has not been providing a stable and mature desktop platform itself. Indeed, in our experience with test samples of new chipsets, we were often confronted with a number of problems. In some cases, the products had still not achieved an acceptable level of maturity by their official launch date, and continued to cause instability and crashes. Other products, such as VIA's PT880 Pro, which we tested in January 2005, never played an important role in the market.

We would like to see a full care solution such as the one Intel offers - chipsets and processors from the same company, tried and tested for compatibility - which would help to prevent teething troubles between the CPU and the rest of the platform.

Three chipsets were introduced with the launch of the socket 939 platform:

NVIDIA nForce 3
SiS 755 / SiS 756
Via K8T800
Of these, NVIDIA's nForce chipset achieved the greatest market acceptance. Of course, in this industry with its very short product cycles, just as motherboard makers finally get a chipset under control, the next one is around the corner already.

In October 2004, AMD made the transition to PCI Express technology with NVIDIA's newest chipset, the nForce 4. Once again, the platform got a rocky start, with retail boards only hitting the channels some time after the launch. Also, several board revisions were necessary before the motherboard makers finally got a grip on the chipset. However, today the nForce 4 is considered the most stable AMD desktop platform, a view that was supported by the lack of problems during our live stress test.

For now, AMD's CPUs have to make do without DDR2 memory as a result of the non-upgradeable integrated memory interface. Thanks to the very good memory performance, the need for an upgrade is not very pressing at present anyway. After all, AMD achieves 95% of the 6.4 GB/s bandwidth theoretically possible on the Athlon 64's dual-channel interface.


A mixed review there. :?
User avatar
Spock
Forum Admin
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 2417
Joined: Tue 2005 Jan 18 10:47
Location: MD, USA


Return to General HW

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron