LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI don’t know if something like this has been posted before, anyway here goes….
Just out of curiosity what make of processor do you prefer, Intel or AMD?
I don’t know if something like this has been posted before, anyway here goes….
Just out of curiosity what make of processor do you prefer, Intel or AMD?
Intel chips are giving AMD a spanking across every market at the moment.
so Intel is my pref at the moment.
I (and the missus) are AMD fans...I've had one Intel (Celeron FCPGA), and that was enough. Until recently I ran a Duron 1.8 OC'd to 2Ghz (don't laugh), and that was excellent (had a K6 333 before that), then I upgraded to my current AM2 X2 3800 EE chip (Turion in a desktop, basically), that's been just as painless, and just takes whatever I throw at it.
Jem went from a K6-2/350 to an Athlon 1500+ in her VAIO, and from there she's gone for a Vostro laptop with an X2 4000+, and an Optiplex with the same at work.
At work I run an AMD Sempron64 currently..want to go dual though. We also prefer HP's Turion AMD X2 laptops for sheer go..although we do have some Intel C2Ds etc.
Can't say much about the new Intel kit really, but the old Single core generation P4/P3s get their arse handed to them on a plate by the Semprons at work..even the 3Ghz HT chips seem unable to match.
AMD are more cost effective vs performance. They also win on energy efficiency and heat dissipation.
Intel wins on pure horsepower and also hardware compatibility/stability.
So really it depends. We usually go for AMD, unless we need the grunt (like we did for our Citrix Terminal Servers).
At the moment, I choose Intel for most situations. The performance is higher than AMD at the moment, as is energy efficiency in the latest Xeon's compared with the latest Opterons (Beware of flawed CPU efficiency study | George Ou | ZDNet.com Fourth Quarter 2007 SPECpower_ssj2008 Results).
However, a couple of years ago, it was the opposite. AMD won hands down.
The only place AMD win is on price.
Last edited by localzuk; 20th April 2008 at 11:31 PM.
I voted AMD because the question asked which one i preferred rather than which one was better at the moment. I have found AMD chips to last longer overall and have a much longer usable (speed wise) life than the intel chips which always seemed to turn out to be junk a whole lot quicker. Their upgrade paths were also far more simple as if you had the right socket you were highly likely to be able to upgrade to another cpu in that socket line. There was no such stability with Intel.
The whole 64bit support years before intel was nice to.
At the moment though intel is quicker and use less power, they are technically better but I still don't prefer them.
been an amd fan for along time. but intel are killing them. so intel....for now
boot not i agree with synack
It used to be that architecturally the AMD design, Athlon XP vs P4, was a far superior processor design. Since the release of the Core processor intel have almost, if not in fact, reversed this situation.
If you'd asked two years ago I'd have voted AMD without thinking. Now, It's Intel all the way. An E4xxx or E6xxx series Core2 is the way to go IMHO.
We have a few AMD machines here at the school and to be honest, they are the most trouble some. Just got a new AMD/ATi Athlon X2 5000+ based HP on the bench. New out the box. Window blue screen while installing the OS - not right. It's off back to Misco for a replacement!
Very few who buy Celerons have a positive experience! If you must have a budget processor I'd rather use the Duron to.I've had one Intel (Celeron FCPGA), and that was enough.
what about Cyrix chips :-)
Are Via still making those? What were they, P3's made to run at early P4 speeds? What about a Transmeta Crusoe? Why have a Pentium processor when you can emulate it? surely that's be faster!?!
[QUOTE=tmcd35;180763]Are Via still making those?QUOTE]
dunno but were my favourite in the past......always overheated though
Or how about Power6 vs Ultrsparc T2.......both are light years ahead of intel and amd's respective server processors, and neither of them can run windoze. Yay!!!Originally Posted by markcuk
Via specialise in the low power/low heat market now. Ideal for embedded type devices. Our phone system runs off a Via C3.
Intel for me. Never been a big fan of AMD after a few horrible problems with machines with them inside.
Some interesting articles here:
http://techreport.com/articles.x/12091
AMD vs. Intel: What to Get? Which is Better? - PCSTATS.com
Intel vs. AMD power efficiency hinges on memory
Just remember a 'Core' processor is actually just two Pentium M's glued together.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
