Intel vs. AMD

[Mchart]

I don't know why all you people still say that AMD's processors are better for gaming. That was a long time ago. The current lines of Core 2 Duo Intel processors blows AMD's current X2/FX line out of the water.

The only advantage AMD has over Intel is the pricing.

And how many of us gamers are that rich?

Even a little difference is a big difference for us.

Saving only 100 dollars extra for a system that in many cases performs 75% faster in both games and applications is definatly worth it. The bottom line, is that if you are building a system with a $1000 budget, you can for the same price, build a system that is much faster for the same price.

 

[moshii]

Wait til the prices of Intel Core Quadro comes down (4 freakin cores!!!), that will be outstanding for encoding.

4 cores is only good if your codec can being de-serialised, i.e. break the serial stages into parallel ones.. maybe read Tanenbaum's book on distributed computing if you don't get me.

 

[yee]

I don't know why all you people still say that AMD's processors are better for gaming. That was a long time ago. The current lines of Core 2 Duo Intel processors blows AMD's current X2/FX line out of the water.

The only advantage AMD has over Intel is the pricing.

And how many of us gamers are that rich?

Even a little difference is a big difference for us.



I'm just answering the topic, which is "Intel vs. AMD" and Intel is the clear-cut winner. Sure, a bill or two might be a big difference to some, but I believe that if you're going to upgrade or build a new system to get one that will last a few years. Usually a budget for a good gaming tower will be around $1500.

QUOTE(moshii @ Mar 9 2007, 05:36 PM)The Intel Vs AMD argument is pretty subjective... for example AMD always used to smoke Intel on FPU performance, but I doubt many people here know what that means. In the end it always comes down to fanboyism opposed to real facts.

m68k FTW!

A quick Google of Intel Core 2 Duo vs. AMD X2 will provide the facts.

 

[Harsky]

I just spent 8 hours processing 1 DVD with 2 hours footage (backing up my VHS) on my Pentium 4 laptop. Can fbetter processors make all the difference?

 

[yee]

I just spent 8 hours processing 1 DVD with 2 hours footage (backing up my VHS) on my Pentium 4 laptop. Can fbetter processors make all the difference?

Of course! P4 is so outdated I'm not surprised.

 

[Mchart]

I just spent 8 hours processing 1 DVD with 2 hours footage (backing up my VHS) on my Pentium 4 laptop. Can fbetter processors make all the difference?

Encoding a single pass xvid/mp3 from a dvd takes essentially the time of the movie itself on my E6600. It's able to encode essentially around 26 FPS's, and most NTSC DVD's are @ 29.97 FPS. And this is using software that is single threaded. If the official xvid codec was programmed to be multi-threaded, it would essentially take half the time then.

 

[ridgecity]

Go with Intel right now just avoid Dual Core. AMD64 is great also but intel is a lot faster right now. 4 cores is just TOO fucking expensive. Gaming is more dependent of your video card. my AMD64 and the core2duo run games the same since they both have geforce 7600gs, amd64 is agp and core2duo is pci-e 2.0.

for gaming what matter is the video card, for everything else, there's master card...

 

[moshii]

A quick Google of Intel Core 2 Duo vs. AMD X2 will provide the facts.

Yeah loads of synthetic benchmarks. The point people seem to always miss is that Intel and AMD processors pair up with different chipsets then confuse a lot of the results they've seen are due to the brand of processor. Aside from that a big factor in execution speed is actually the compiler used to create the code and the settings used, but is it mentioned anywhere? nope. For the record Intel's compiler is the tits and AMD got very upset.

In the end it doesn't matter because everyone is going to keep buying these stupidly "fast" systems to keep up with the Jones and the big companies will keep riding the wave and churning out shit code.

 

[moshii]

I just spent 8 hours processing 1 DVD with 2 hours footage (backing up my VHS) on my Pentium 4 laptop. Can fbetter processors make all the difference?

Um, get a better encoder .. one that uses the SIMD features of your processor maybe?

 

[Mchart]

A quick Google of Intel Core 2 Duo vs. AMD X2 will provide the facts.

Yeah loads of synthetic benchmarks. The point people seem to always miss is that Intel and AMD processors pair up with different chipsets then confuse a lot of the results they've seen are due to the brand of processor. Aside from that a big factor in execution speed is actually the compiler used to create the code and the settings used, but is it mentioned anywhere? nope. For the record Intel's compiler is the tits and AMD got very upset.

In the end it doesn't matter because everyone is going to keep buying these stupidly "fast" systems to keep up with the Jones and the big companies will keep riding the wave and churning out shit code.

Who cares? It doesnt change the fact that if I play FEAR using my E6600, it will run faster then the 500 dollar more FX-62.

 

[Kyoji]

Yeah loads of synthetic benchmarks.

Right, since benchmarks running the same games on multiple resolutions with identical machines besides chipset are synthetic. The thing is, the "fast" systems were synonymous with the ghz race, where 300-400 dollars more gave you a 2% increase in performance. With the Core 2 chips, we saw a 30% increase in performance across the board. This chip is the real deal, anyone who says the FX-2 is better is obviously ignoring the conclusion every review site out there came to.

 

[fischju_original]

right now, its a scientific fact that Intel has more powerful cores, but last time, it was AMD. The next battle is beggining. AMD is releasing a 6000+

 

[Dirtie]

Happy with my E6600 here, I wouldn't have considered any processor other than a Core 2 Duo.

 

[Mchart]

right now, its a scientific fact that Intel has more powerful cores, but last time, it was AMD. The next battle is beggining. AMD is releasing a 6000+

The only way AMD can take things back is if they release a very highly updated athlon CPU, or a completely new architecture like intel did. Simply increasing the clockspeeds and putting on more L2 cache won't change much.

 

[friedchicken]

people who are arguing which is better are stupid. fact is, last year AMD is king with their FX chip that spanked Intel core dou. This year Intel spank AMD. get over the stupid mind set that once a chipmaker makes a faster chip, it is forever the best chipmaker. who knows, maybe when the AMD chips comes out, it'll spank Intel.

And people who argue about price, yes AMD USED TO be cheaper but not at the moment.