Sign In
Create Account
Opinions...?
Welcome to The OFFICIAL Pure Pwnage forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Intel Vs. AMD
Started by
Mopsicle
, Mar 08 2008 12:49 PM
-
This topic is locked
#1
Posted 08 March 2008 - 12:49 PM
Mopsicle
-
- GA Private
-
- 38 posts
- xfire:AKMopsicle
- Gender:Male
- Location:NY
- Interests:WoW, CS:S, BF2, HL2, TF2, Halo, CoD4, Guitar Hero, Zelda <br /><br /><br />Paintball, building computers, sleep
- Xbox / GFWL:Mopsicle
- Gamer Army ID:2062
Back to top
#2
Posted 08 March 2008 - 12:52 PM
Ezekial
-
- Members
- 313 posts
I've had the same question for a long time, like why does the intel cost $100more then the AMD processor that runs at the same speed??
#3
Posted 08 March 2008 - 01:01 PM
teh_pVp3r
-
- Members
- 299 posts
- xfire:guildy
- Xbox / GFWL:Mazy14
Well for one, Intel C2D have extremely good over clocking capabilities, they have more Cache than the X2 athlon and ones and more reasons I can't think of. The intel ones are just better.
#4
Posted 08 March 2008 - 01:29 PM
10100111001
-
- Members
- 609 posts
- xfire:molimo140
- Location:IRL
- Steam ID:steamacct002
- Xbox / GFWL:molimo140
- PS3:molimo140
Lol vs. Hell no.
Some mod please stop this thread before it turns in to fanboys yelling at each other...
Some mod please stop this thread before it turns in to fanboys yelling at each other...
#5
Posted 08 March 2008 - 01:33 PM
Mopsicle
-
- GA Private
-
- 38 posts
- xfire:AKMopsicle
- Gender:Male
- Location:NY
- Interests:WoW, CS:S, BF2, HL2, TF2, Halo, CoD4, Guitar Hero, Zelda <br /><br /><br />Paintball, building computers, sleep
- Xbox / GFWL:Mopsicle
- Gamer Army ID:2062
QUOTE (10100111001 @ Mar 8 2008, 01:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Lol vs. Hell no.
Some mod please stop this thread before it turns in to fanboys yelling at each other...
Some mod please stop this thread before it turns in to fanboys yelling at each other...
/fail
I think I'm going to get an intel core 2 quad Q6600 for my new rig, but i have people telling me AMD > intel. Stuck in a predictament. However, i do really want a quad, will save me money in the long run
#6
Posted 08 March 2008 - 01:37 PM
Starblaiz
-
- Global Mods - GA Brig. Genereral
-
- 5,287 posts
Here comes the sun!
- Gender:Male
- Location:United Britishland of Europe
- Interests:Games (obviously :P ), Programming, Physics (especially Astrophysics)
- Steam ID:virus52
- Gamer Army ID:225
- Company:Gamma
#7
Posted 08 March 2008 - 01:40 PM
Weiman
-
- Global Moderators
- 33,900 posts
Best HW&SW Cont. & PP Savant '09
- xfire:weiman
- Gender:Male
- Location:Netherlands
- Interests:Gaming, Biochemistry.
- Steam ID:Weiman
- Gamer Army ID:2452
- Company:Mu
In after the lock:
*educated person walks in the room*
Alright, speed is a relative term, and it certainly not as simple as a 2.4Ghz CPU > a 2.5 CPU. Every series is more or less efficient per clock tick. Basically, don't compare CPU's of different architectures with just the clock speed.
For high end applications, Intel CPU's take the cake easy. This was different back in 2004/2005 when AMD was owning bases with the Athlon 64, but Intel's Core architecture has completely reversed the roles since then. The only thing AMD's are good for now are budget or mid range builds. Cheap motherboards with high quality and top of the line tech also help this.
Basically, anyone saying AMD > Intel lives in the past, anyone saying Intel > AMD should know better that it's not that simple
*educated person walks in the room*
Alright, speed is a relative term, and it certainly not as simple as a 2.4Ghz CPU > a 2.5 CPU. Every series is more or less efficient per clock tick. Basically, don't compare CPU's of different architectures with just the clock speed.
For high end applications, Intel CPU's take the cake easy. This was different back in 2004/2005 when AMD was owning bases with the Athlon 64, but Intel's Core architecture has completely reversed the roles since then. The only thing AMD's are good for now are budget or mid range builds. Cheap motherboards with high quality and top of the line tech also help this.
Basically, anyone saying AMD > Intel lives in the past, anyone saying Intel > AMD should know better that it's not that simple
QUOTE (Weiman @ Apr 5 2009, 01:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
This is exactly what has been going on through the entire thread, and it's not the first time either.
You come to us for advice..you just spell out what you want to get, and then ask us if it is okay, and we have to explain why it isn't. That's the world upside down.. If you would just say 'hey guys, I have an X amount of money, what should I buy?' Then this would be over in 2-3 posts, not 2-3 pages.
You come to us for advice..you just spell out what you want to get, and then ask us if it is okay, and we have to explain why it isn't. That's the world upside down.. If you would just say 'hey guys, I have an X amount of money, what should I buy?' Then this would be over in 2-3 posts, not 2-3 pages.
QUOTE (Kazzerax @ May 21 2009, 09:01 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Every time someone goes against Weiman's sig I feel like they should be bludgeoned for a few minutes in the head to feel the headache I feel when I realize someone really IS that dense.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
