AMD vs Intel choose

Kaiser · Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:43 am Post subject:

It depends on what you are going to do.

Intel and AMD both have their strengths and weaknesses. AMD chips are better at some types of processing than Intel and vice versa.

Overall, I would go with AMD since although they have lower clock speeds, they still match or outperform higher speed Pentiums. AMDs also tend to be cheaper. An Althon 64 will probably last you a long time to come since we will be moving into 64 bit sooner or later (I heard there was a windows 64 bit available, is this not true?)

I don't follow PCs that closely, but I know in webserving, AMD's Opterons are absolute workhorses.... much better than Xeons, but Intel has a new 64 bit Xeon now.

Wark · Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:54 am Post subject:

intel has introduced their 64 bit desktop processors now as well. in the few test i've seen, the A64 beats it in almost anything, mostly because the intel chips generate a subtantial amount of heat. (wasn't this the other way around a while ago? o_O) in comparisom, the A64 still performs better, while it's still cheaper.

as for dual-cores, Intel will be making two versions of this, both with dual-prescot cores. the first one (forgot name) will be unable to have the cores directly comunicate, they have to do so through the memory. the second one, planned for next fall, will be a big upgrade, with more efficient handling of multiple tasks. there are also rumors for a dual core pentium M-based system, wich will hopefully take care of the heat-issues intel is facing right now.

as a disclaimer, this is all from what i could remember, i any of this is incorrect, feel free to correct me.

evofire · Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2005 2:48 pm Post subject:

Kaiser: There is currently a beta of Win XP Pro 64bit available. From the people I heard that are using it, they don't seem to have much problems with them other than the occasionally odd game. If you happen to have an A64, why not give it a go?? we can have a computer review section to A-Source then, lol.

Wark: Different versions of dual core?? Wonder what the Intel guys are high on.... Though dual core'ing a Prescott is rather scary, Prescotts are hot by themselves, now we double them?

Wark · Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:31 pm Post subject:

That's why i'm waiting for the pentium M based dual-core.

evofire · Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:25 pm Post subject:

I definitely won't mind taking in a PM if they weren't so expensive. The chip itself costs a fortune, and so do the motherboards.

Wark · Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2005 6:32 pm Post subject:

true. i wish i knew about AMD's Dual-core exploits though. i haven't heard much about that. only that they plan to have something ready before intel does.

Sigarius · Heimin (Commoner) Joined: Mar 08, 2005 Posts: 89

hmmm to bring into this equation, is the BTX power system any good I wonder? It just looks like an overgrown heatsink+ fan attactment

evofire · Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2005 3:52 am Post subject:

Nothing has come up of the AMD dual cores, but i have a feeling it will be based on the newer Venice and San Diego cores.

BTX is still very much of a legend right now, no off the shelf component uses BTX, and only computer system that I have heard using BTX is some model from Emachines. As a DIYer, I don't think I will be seeing BTX very soon at all.

DrJackal · Jikan Samurai Joined: Mar 14, 2004 Posts: 979

AMD 64 bit owns and in general AMD are better for value.

Kaiser · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 12:21 am Post subject:

evofire · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 3:06 am Post subject:

Dells.... yuck. Dells, given faster CPU and more ram, would run slower than a home brew machine, which I find really stupid. A friend of mine has a 2.8C at home, and a Dell 3.2 at school. THe home computer ran his work faster than the one at school.

Wark · Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:55 am Post subject:

well, i don't know about his school, but at my school we also use dells. and yes, they are annoyingly slow. but apparently, this is due to the fact that they are filled with primarily senseless programs. 20K network diag and monitoring programs, and lots and lots of restrictions. when viewing the system resources, it shows that these prograams take up just about everything the poor machine has. I've worked on a few dells outside of school ( ones i installed the OS and other software on myself) and those opperated quite well.

Fujiwara · newbie! Joined: Mar 08, 2005 Posts: 31

Hahaha....my school also using the crappy dell computers

Death_Scythe27 · newbie! Joined: Mar 28, 2005 Posts: 32

Is · Posted: Mon Mar 28, 2005 5:01 pm Post subject:

for A64 CPUs i recommend the MSI K8N Neo4 line of motherboards. they're PCI-E (PCI Express) and have the nForce4 chipset (the only chipset worth using with an AMD CPU)

the Neo4 Platinum has SATA2 support while the Neo4-F has only SATA support... then there's the Neo4 Platinum SLI but i'm not very interested in SLI... it didn't work when 3dfx tried it back in the late 90s and i don't think it's worth doing now either.