Intel vs AMD

[CP]

I have read a lot and seen a lot of things about how intel are faster and vice versa. I was just wondering if there is any real difference aside from price. I don't do anything really intensive. Mostly just the net a few games and my music. I am going to be doing some programming soon though. I am planning on going into Java and C.

[ursidae]

AMD´s cpus are faster and cheaper. If I were you I would get an Athlon XP and a good KT266A mb now or wait for the t-bred. I would probably wait for the t-bred.

Here´s
a good review of the Athlon XP 1900+.

Intel´s cpus don´t suck but Athlon+DDR is a lot cheaper than P4+RDRAM. Whatever you do don´t buy a P4 with SDRAM, that´s like putting a Porsche motor in a Trabant.

[Ashcrow]

I would go with Intel now. I use to say AMD all the way when it came to ia32, but AMD is kind of misleading people by their Athloin 1900 which isn't 1.9 ghz, it's like 1.6. Also, Intel has much faster bus speed on P4 motherboards.

[popcorn]

I would go with Intel now. I use to say AMD all the way when it came to ia32, but AMD is kind of misleading people by their Athloin 1900 which isn't 1.9 ghz, it's like 1.6.

But a 1.6GHz AMD would out perform a 1.9Ghz Intel (In quite a few benchtest)

Intels aren't as likely to burst in flames if the heat sink dies, which is nice.

Some benchmarks and comparisons for you
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/01q4/011031/index.html

[stryder144]

I would go with Intel now. I use to say AMD all the way when it came to ia32, but AMD is kind of misleading people by their Athloin 1900 which isn't 1.9 ghz, it's like 1.6. Also, Intel has much faster bus speed on P4 motherboards.

Actually, this isn't really misleading. *They have been rather forthright about the change to the naming scheme they use. *Also, the faster bus speed doesn't seem to equate to a great increase in speed, unless you use 256mb of RDRAM. *

All things being equal, the best price/performance ratio is definitely in AMD's camp. *Though, having said that, Intel is still the "reference", which means that you can definitely not go wrong by buying an Intel chip. *I think that if you want stability and as close to a guarentee that all of your hardware will play nice together, Intel rocks. *AMD is catching up, but isn't quite there yet.

Of course, if you want to pay relatively high prices and get no performance, buy a VIA C3 chip! *Mhz to Mhz, they are pricier than a Duron while being a bit slower. *I am hoping that VIA can manage to make the next generation chip a really price/performance winner. *I kinda like the VIA/Cyrix underdog.

[ph34r]

Well, unless you are gaming, or doing serious 3d modeling work, CAD/CAM, or something similar where horsepower really makes difference, I'd say that anything above 300-400mhz would be a waste anyway


Go with whatever costs less for the cpu/mobo/ram combo and allows for the most expandability when the top-end cpu's your mobo can hold are in the bargin bin in 2 years, max out your ram, and you should be happy.

[CP]

Thanks. I was looking at second hand about 600 and was planning on putting at least 128MB on it, but probably 256. But as you can see from here I think that it is just a matter of opinion. AMD are cheaper but lots of benchmark say they are faster, and lots say they are slower. So I will go with cheap and hope for the best.

[boblucci]

Well, unless you are gaming, or doing serious 3d modeling work, CAD/CAM, or something similar where horsepower really makes difference, I'd say that anything above 300-400mhz would be a waste anyway


Go with whatever costs less for the cpu/mobo/ram combo and allows for the most expandability when the top-end cpu's your mobo can hold are in the bargin bin in 2 years, max out your ram, and you should be happy.

I totally agree with you! i have both and intel p3 500 and an amd 500 both have 256 meg of ram i have ever had any sort of speed problem.

[noblestknight]

AMD's chips are more powerful than Intel's. The new AMD XPs have Intel's SSE extensions now and they are just whipping intel's ass. The only advantage intel previously held over AMD was the SSE extensions. Now that XP chips use the extensions they show how much superior their technology is. Right now, go with XP (No T-Birds because the p4 2ghz bests them) because they are currently the better chip. But, I think this will change within the next year when software developers start using sse2 more.

As far as the reference to Tom's Hardware review above, the new XP or MP chips will not catch fire! I have no idea what sample of MP he was using but thats not true. I used to read Tom all the time but now I think he is a biased drunk renob who needs to do better reviews.

[Compunuts]

May be this will help answer Intel's nastiness ...

http://www.overclockers.com/tips634/