sumant30 Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 What do you think which of these processors is better AMD or Intel ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martina Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 What do you think which of these processors is better AMD or Intel ?AMD and Intel are companies, no processors, and no CPUs ;-)anyway, better in regards to what? architecture, performance per Watt, speed, energy efficacy, performance per $...I don't think it can be clearly decided what is best or better per se, as these terms are always subjective (everybody has other needs and usage scenarios).so it might help a lot if you reveal the purpose of your question, i.e. maybe you want to buy a new CPU and don't know what to buy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumant30 Posted February 22, 2008 Author Share Posted February 22, 2008 What do you think which of these processors is better AMD or Intel ?AMD and Intel are companies, no processors, and no CPUs ;-)anyway, better in regards to what? architecture, performance per Watt, speed, energy efficacy, performance per $...I don't think it can be clearly decided what is best or better per se, as these terms are always subjective (everybody has other needs and usage scenarios).so it might help a lot if you reveal the purpose of your question, i.e. maybe you want to buy a new CPU and don't know what to buy?According to me Amd is way ahead of intel after it introduced its 64 bit architecture because perfromance of 64 bit Athlon X2 comes very much intel quad core also power consumption amd with its cool and quiet technology is better the only place they seem to be backtracked is thier quad core phenom which is having some problems. :sneaky: :dance2: :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martina Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 According to me Amd is way ahead of intel after it introduced its 64 bit architecture...AMD certainly had the much better product back then, as Intel was still selling rather inefficient (compared to newer products) Pentium 4 & D units.but this has dramatically changed with the introduction of the Core 2 Duo series by Intel. they are not only faster, but also more efficient then AMDs desktop offerings....because perfromance of 64 bit Athlon X2 comes very much intel quad core...sorry, I don't understand. are you saying that an Athlon64 X2 is comparable (in what eay?) to a Core 2 Quad?also power consumption amd with its cool and quiet technology is betterwhat makes you think that AMD's CnQ is superior to Intel's EIST? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dock98 Posted February 22, 2008 Share Posted February 22, 2008 i have intel core duo 64 bit on my laptop.i think intel is a better outfit but amd is cheaper.1 also had an intel p4 3.4 amd 64 on my desktop with wxp 64.both are pretty fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumant30 Posted February 23, 2008 Author Share Posted February 23, 2008 According to me Amd is way ahead of intel after it introduced its 64 bit architecture...AMD certainly had the much better product back then, as Intel was still selling rather inefficient (compared to newer products) Pentium 4 & D units.but this has dramatically changed with the introduction of the Core 2 Duo series by Intel. they are not only faster, but also more efficient then AMDs desktop offerings....because perfromance of 64 bit Athlon X2 comes very much intel quad core...sorry, I don't understand. are you saying that an Athlon64 X2 is comparable (in what eay?) to a Core 2 Quad?also power consumption amd with its cool and quiet technology is betterwhat makes you think that AMD's CnQ is superior to Intel's EIST?What i wanted to say was that the performance of Amd Ahtlon64 6000+ X2 is very much near to the Quad processors of intel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumant30 Posted February 23, 2008 Author Share Posted February 23, 2008 According to me Amd is way ahead of intel after it introduced its 64 bit architecture...AMD certainly had the much better product back then, as Intel was still selling rather inefficient (compared to newer products) Pentium 4 & D units.but this has dramatically changed with the introduction of the Core 2 Duo series by Intel. they are not only faster, but also more efficient then AMDs desktop offerings....because perfromance of 64 bit Athlon X2 comes very much intel quad core...sorry, I don't understand. are you saying that an Athlon64 X2 is comparable (in what eay?) to a Core 2 Quad?also power consumption amd with its cool and quiet technology is betterwhat makes you think that AMD's CnQ is superior to Intel's EIST?What i wanted to say was that the performance of Amd Ahtlon64 6000+ X2 is very much near to the Quad processors of intel.Also intel is far down the line in power consumption because a normal Amd processor consumes ideally 90 watts while intel is doing 130 watts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martina Posted February 23, 2008 Share Posted February 23, 2008 i think intel is a better outfit but amd is cheaper.I mostly agree. I would have gone for Core 2 Duo CPU for my current system, but 'had' to go with AMD because of my tight budget. not that I'm unhappy :-)What i wanted to say was that the performance of Amd Ahtlon64 6000+ X2 is very much near to the Quad processors of intel.I'd like to see some backup for your claim, as I think this is utter nonsense (no offense meant).Also intel is far down the line in power consumption because a normal Amd processor consumes ideally 90 watts while intel is doing 130 wattsthis is very, very misinformed in regards to Intel (Core 2 Duo).http://://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/28/int...er_consumption/http://://www.tomshardware.com/2008/01/30/pro...iency_compared/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumant30 Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 i think intel is a better outfit but amd is cheaper.I mostly agree. I would have gone for Core 2 Duo CPU for my current system, but 'had' to go with AMD because of my tight budget. not that I'm unhappy :-)What i wanted to say was that the performance of Amd Ahtlon64 6000+ X2 is very much near to the Quad processors of intel.I'd like to see some backup for your claim, as I think this is utter nonsense (no offense meant).Also intel is far down the line in power consumption because a normal Amd processor consumes ideally 90 watts while intel is doing 130 wattsthis is very, very misinformed in regards to Intel (Core 2 Duo).http://://://://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/...er_consumption/http://://://://www.tomshardware.com/2008/01/...iency_compared/AMD implements its energy-saving Cool&Quiet feature, which allows the operating system to throttle CPU voltage and clock speed when the processor is idle. In case of the Athlon 64 X2 6000+, the idle power consumption drops to 36 W by going from 3.0 GHz and 1.35 V to 1.0 GHz at 1.1 V. Since the switching happens instantly and on the fly, and it also serves to reduce cooling noise, we recommend that you turn Cool&Quiet on at all times. http://://www.tomshardware.com/2007/02/20/doe...left/page2.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sumant30 Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 i think intel is a better outfit but amd is cheaper.I mostly agree. I would have gone for Core 2 Duo CPU for my current system, but 'had' to go with AMD because of my tight budget. not that I'm unhappy :-)What i wanted to say was that the performance of Amd Ahtlon64 6000+ X2 is very much near to the Quad processors of intel.I'd like to see some backup for your claim, as I think this is utter nonsense (no offense meant).Also intel is far down the line in power consumption because a normal Amd processor consumes ideally 90 watts while intel is doing 130 wattsthis is very, very misinformed in regards to Intel (Core 2 Duo).http://://://://://://://www.tomshardware.com...er_consumption/http://://://://://://://www.tomshardware.com...iency_compared/AMD implements its energy-saving Cool&Quiet feature, which allows the operating system to throttle CPU voltage and clock speed when the processor is idle. In case of the Athlon 64 X2 6000+, the idle power consumption drops to 36 W by going from 3.0 GHz and 1.35 V to 1.0 GHz at 1.1 V. Since the switching happens instantly and on the fly, and it also serves to reduce cooling noise, we recommend that you turn Cool&Quiet on at all times. http://://://://://www.tomshardware.com/2007/...left/page2.html Require ne more Benchmarks!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rolleyes: :frusty: :dance2: :dance2: :dance2: :dance2: :dance2: :dance2: :dance2: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.