AMD vs Intel??

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm going to be upgrading my computer soon, and I had my heart set on an AMD x2 4200+ Socket AM2 processor. But I've recently read that Intel's new Core 2 Duo processors are a force to be reckoned with, even defeating AMD in some instances. Any recommendations as to whether I should stick to the AMD, or seek an Intel alternative?
 
For $130, AMD would beat intel... because Intel's only really good processors are Core2 Duos... and you can't buy those for $130. An Athlon 64 would easily outclass a P4 or PD in that price range.
 
Yeah, but for "future proofing" a $130 LGA775 processor would be a good choice and wouldn't lose to an AMD equivalent too too bad.
 
Get the Core 2 duo when u get enuf Money, cuz its the best processor, the 2.4GHZ Beat the 3.6 of other processors, and the Core 2 Duo wud still beat other processors that will be made in 5 years
 
Ok, so let's say that price wasn't a factor, and it was a toss up between, oh....
this Intel:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115005
and this AMD:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103747
Looking at the specs tells me that I can get a faster operating AMD without the cache bottleneck for cheaper than Intel. However, Intel has a smaller process type, 65nm vs 90nm in AMD. Is there something about the new Core 2 Duo's (like a better architecture) that would allow it to outperform AMD despite its shortcomings?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819115004
Even with a similar operating frequency, I still see a cache bottleneck.
 
65nm is what gives the Core 2 Duo its massive performance advantage over AMD equivalents. Plus it runs so cool that u can overclock it almost 1 GHz more with stock cooling and it will still stay stable. I just got an E6700 and I OC'd it to 3.3GHz w/out any problems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back