AMD or INTEL and why?

[Raven]

Which is better...AMD or INTEL and why??

Personally, I am an individual that believes strictly in AMD because of the quality and price. It also helps that I am a AMD authorized reseller too.

Reply with opinions!!!!

[Dante]

AMD is better for gaming purposes, but Intel's P4 are usually better on general apps. What did I buy? An AMD 1.4

[jettlag]

I perfer the Intel Chip.

I haven't seen the new P4 but these Athlon's are just hotter, not much better.

I don't think they have gotten any farther really in technology. They just cranked the juice up a bit more. Bigger heatsink? Bigger fan?

I guess they perform well but I think its time we see some new technology.

.JL.

[Daemon]

DONT EVEN GO THERE

Nah ive used AMD since the first 386 I got.

AMD Has always been faster and cheaper. I have never had any problems with AMD. All my friends had problems with there Intels. I also used to test hardware and Intel cpus. Intel spu's have a very big problem if it is used with a non intel chipset.

Looking at benchmarks my 1.2 ATHLON was either equal or below a P4 1.7ghz

[i3omberman28]

Hey,

AMD is just as good on applications.. maybe a pentium 4 has about like a 5% better performance thaN AMD on applications.. but are you willing to pay like double for Pentium 4 cuz of this 5% increase in performance?

I THINK NOT!!!

[Daemon]

[quote]Originally posted by i3omberman28:
<strong>Hey,

AMD is just as good on applications.. maybe a pentium 4 has about like a 5% better performance thaN AMD on applications.. but are you willing to pay like double for Pentium 4 cuz of this 5% increase in performance?

I THINK NOT!!!</strong><hr></blockquote>

WERD UP!

[Stalemate]

[quote]Originally posted by i3omberman28:
<strong>Hey,

AMD is just as good on applications.. maybe a pentium 4 has about like a 5% better performance thaN AMD on applications... </strong><hr></blockquote>

Even that is debatable! I've yet to see any P4 outdo an AMD. Don't forget the Athlon line is in the P3 range while the Duron was intended as a Celeron equivalent.

But performance of the Athlon puts it in par with the P4 while the Duron is often used in comparison tests to the P3.

The CPU subsystem also influences the overall result, but as for design, price, and performance AMD rules.

I don't own and AMD CPU yet and have used Apple's Macs and PowerPCs, 486s, Pentiums, Pentium MMX, Pentium Pros, Pentium 2, Celerons and Pentium 3 in the past.

My next CPU *will* be produced by AMD.

[Budster64]

[quote]Originally posted by Dante:
<strong>AMD is better for gaming purposes, but Intel's P4 are usually better on general apps. What did I buy? An AMD 1.4 </strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually all performance testing has proven the oposite, for programs optomized to use the P4 architecture they run great. Take for instance Quake 3, the P4 takes that hands down, on the other hand AMD's surpass the P4's in other games and even the Winstone business benchmarks.

I guess the point is this, if you're not running benchmarks you're not going to see a difference. Your AMD 1.4 is not going to put my Dual PentIII 1000mhz to shame ( I'm not picking on you just using this as an example)

I have also been using Pentiums since inception and the truth is I have never had a problem with them, heck I have a server at home that still uses dual Pent Pros without a hitch.
this is the veritable chevy versus ford argument.
I love AMD, I love my Pent's. right now the best bang for the buck are the AMD's. That could change all I can say is that as far as I am concerned I wish we had 3 more manufacturers out there truly competing with both AMD and intel cause I don't own stock in either of them, I'm just a consumer and I want a choice at a great price.

[Garak]

when people say AMD have always been faster that intel, that is a lie, IMO.

386 = true
486 = false
586/686 - mmx = false
686+mmx (K62 series) on par
duron vs pentium 2 = yeah i'll give u that
athlon vs pentium 3 = fair enough intel are getting sloppy.

My point is, 10 years ago, how many of u actually owned an amd chip, my first 386 wos an amd 386dx40 (my intel 386dx33 ran faster than the 40.

in the 486 dx2 series, i have seen ibm and cyrix chips beat amd, i currently run a dual pentium 2 333, a pentium 2 266 and an amd 350
my p2 266 with 128 runs faster than my 350 with 256 meg, anyhow, please dont take offense to this post and dont flame me, its only opservations that i have maid whilst being in the computer industry.

thans u all and have a good night

[Fubarian]

since I've been learning how a processor really truly works, I can honestly say I'm not sure what intel is smoking recently but they need to bust out some bad !@#ed chips soon.

I have nothing but intel chips, only because I can dual them w/o having to buy a $500 mobo, but even then i don't know if I would buy an AMD dual, mainly due to heating issues.

I am looking forward to buying a 1.26ghz p3 with 512k L2 and see how that lil puppy preforms...I think the extra L2 will come in handy...

[Fierce]

I have done a extensive amount of research for standardizing CAD computers at my job, and have found that AMD processors excel beyond higher Mhz Intel CPU's, and for a fraction of the price. (I ran benchmarks to see the differences) The only standout between Intel and AMD is that of benchmarks pertaining to the P4 and Quake 3. Intel's P4 handles Quake 3 much better than AMD's CPU, but other than that, AMD all the way! (If I had my choice for a gaming system, I would be using AMD 100%, no doubt!)

Currently I have 2 computers that are both AMD processors....AMD Duron 800 & AMD Athlon 700. Love em both, never had problems and advise others to buy AMD machines. (But I must admit I use a Intel P3 450 for work )

Life is good!

[Ya_know]

[quote]Originally posted by Daemon:
<strong>DONT EVEN GO THERE
I have never had any problems with AMD. All my friends had problems with there Intels.
Looking at benchmarks my 1.2 ATHLON was either equal or below a P4 1.7ghz</strong><hr></blockquote>


Let's see, there was the problem due to limitations of the software algorithms with the 350 and above K62's. See: <a href="http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q192/8/41.ASP" target="_blank">Difficulties Using AMD K6-2 or Athlon </a> ; Microsoft took the blame, but never had a problem catering to Intel's PII's. There is the problem with fuzzy jpeg's, see: <a href="http://www.gordonfamily.com/AMD/" target="_blank">JPEG Display Problem </a> . Then there is the constant heat problem; to name only three known issues with AMD.

Let's be practical, if you know what you are doing, you can setup a PC with either chip and be satisfied with your own "Bench Mark". But facts are facts, AMD has had allot of headache problems when it comes to software support.

I always go with Intel because it tastes great, and is also less filling...

[freddy]

i refer u to this article (link) that was on the INTEL section ..........it makes very serious reading <a href="http://www.emulators.com/pentium4.htm" target="_blank">www.emulators.com/pentium4.htm</a> ....personally i DONT like AMD cpu,s because of the heat ,and other problems I was about to treat myself to a P4 ...but i think i,ll give it a miss ,as i,ve got a nice slot1 P111 (700) nearly 2 years old ,,running on an old abit bx board running at x100mz ...which is very happy (apart from scsi cards not regeresting) running at 933 ,,,,,,,,, I have built (only) 2 amd athlon 1g using asus/abit (cant remember now) k7 133 boards and both have had to be returned due to faulty CPU / boards .....(yes i did fit amd approved PSUs and VERY large HSFs).....to much agro/greaf .
yes athlons are quicker/cheaper .........but the OLD P111 (slot 1) are VERY reliable.

If u want to play games BUY yourself a playstation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Dante]

What I forgot to mention about AMD was the advantage of using the nForce chipset when it comes out. I'm not against Intel at all. For servers, there is no way I'd go with AMD while Xeons have been doing a great job.

[BIGGS]

for the last year or so amd hands down.

but recently i got hold of one of the new PIII's using the .13 micron technology, it is amazing, until they do the same with the pIV's (drop the microns and and the extra 16 pins, late december) id defenalty recommend the PIII 1.11 GHZ or the PIII 1.2 GHz but these chips are pricy, if your concerned about price definalty go Athalon or the new duron 1gig. other then that i guess im pretty much split on this topic