Intel or Amd?

WTF are you talking about. It has already been proven that ATI/AMD's R600 are far better than nvidia's 8800GTX. And even if nvidia does bring out a 8900GTX it still wont be much of a match against the fastest of R600 gpu's. And by mid this year and in 2008 AMD are going to bring out far better cpu's. Dont you read the articles online F1N3ST??? And it doesnt matter if Intel bring out an upgraded version of the core 2 duo. They are only saying they are, and i have proven to you that Intel like to talk crap. And for what ive read on "Penryn" It's not a significant improvement on the core 2 duo. The new AMD cpu's provide up to 40% more performance than the core 2 duo (if what they say is true) not to mention that its only a 32bit quad core. Intels best are 64bit quad core, which should be better. So if AMD can pull of making a 32 bit cpu thats faster and better than AMD's 64bit processors and Intels core 2 duo 64 bit processors, just imagine how crappy the core 2 duo will seem when AMD makes a 64bit version of there new cpu's.

I think somebody(s) needs to get dates and get out from behind the computer for a bit! Arguing over which CPU is better is like arguing over which cut of meat makes the best steak! Rather pointless when it is all up to personal taste.

I like your analogy halo!

Um

Not saying your full of crap cause I havnt looked for any info on the subject, but can you post me a link showing a benchmark between the 8800GTX and the R600 in a production state card ? And Im not talking pre-release paper benchmarks either...CARD TO CARD IN THE SAME SYSTEM is what I want to see...

Edit: I did a quick search and this is all I came up with. It seems like a very bios article favoring ATI (just by some of the comments) but it does show the R600 ahead in mosts games....although this it does not show the 40-60% performance gain over the 8800GTX that everyone hyped that the R600 would do....Plus there where many variables in this test such as drivers. http://level505.com/2006/12/30/the-full-ati-r600-test/1/

So I dont know how credible this article is.....So anyone with a better one please post it because my curiosity is high now..

The only feasible theory on this is that the R600 has been touted by AMD marketing to have full 512bit memory interface vs. the 8800's 384 bit.

This should effectively provide a massive increase in memory bandwidth, which can then be assumed to yield better performance in things constrained by memory bandwidth.

Of course, we have no idea of the firm/solid ROP/PS/VS or overall architecture, nor the clock speeds nor memory... so the only real solid thing we have is the above marketing fluff. Without the other details, it's a fairly safe assumption but really not solid enough to go off.

Note that benchmarks are in for the R600 (X2900XTX)...somehow :suspiciou ...

Wooohoooo!! I have to agree. But I won't be able to get a date. Not even if I offered a thousand bucks :dead:

Nah I'm just kidding. I could, but I'm too much of a wuss to ask anyone out

Being in a thread like this one really makes me feel like a super-nerd.

Are you telling me that the marriage to my computer isn't normal?

lmao, all i got to say is what goes around comes around. Intel gets slapped in the face by AMD when they released the Athlon64's, now Intel are slapping AMD back in the face by bringing out the core 2 duos. I honestly dont care, like someone posted earlier, the competition between Intel and AMD is very good as it makes both companies push themselves harder to bring out better cpu's in an attempt to conquer each other. I quite like the fact that Intel brought out the core 2 duo's cause now AMD will bring out an even better cpu to squash the core 2 duo's, and Intel will respond to that by bringing out an even better cpu that will squash AMD's cpu. I just wished they hurry the f**k up so i can by myself a cheap quadcore

lol...Not at all my friend!

The new Celerons and Pentium E's are Core 2 solo and Core 2 duo. I believe the 1.8 Celeron will out perform a 3500+ Venice. I've seen no benchmarks.

The benchmarks at level 501 are bogus--the GTX is faster than their banckmarks show. No one knows how R600 will perform yet. The only thing that's certain is it will be late. So was RD600 and it failed to live up to expectations.

I think everybody forgot that not too long ago Intel bought AMD, and they are own by the same group of people. I think that for choices we have colors...

I rather have an AMD but not because of that I'm saying that AMD is better. It's like some of you have said it, they have their ups and downs.

But I definably said this, if you're a newbie save some money and headaches and don't go with a Celeron or a Semprom.

No, Celeron or Semprom for as many features they say they have will out perform any regular processor. Not even if it is a Pentium III or an old Pentium IV.

Because what's really it's been updating processors speed for quite a wile is the increace of internal cache memory and the way they help faster processing at CPU level is what Celerons and Semproms are missing.

Imaging multitasking with just a quarter of your brain. That's only good for less than average users which are only going to use a word processor, send some e-mails and browse the internet. Maybe for that a Celeron or a Semprom are worthy.

Actually AMD bought ATI. Intel does not own AMD.

LMAO, HAHAHAHA, man i was wondering what the hell that guy was talking about, Intel buying AMD, those to companies hate each other, I know, At some press conference Intel was showing of some of there stuff, and they had to use a username which said "i hate amd", im pretty sure there is a link of that somewhere in the forums, but who knows. And as for not knowing how the r600 will perform, well they will be using AMD's core processors in the GPU's, and im more than sure that an AMD processor in a GPU will be more than enough to outperform anything nvidia has to offer (at this time).

But prove me wrong AMD and nvidia, prove me wrong

Edited by Moderator: Removed quote. There`s no need to quote the post directly above your own.

AMD is not owned by Intel. I think you are talking about AMD aquiring ATi.

Basically...Yes.

It is all up to personal choice, but in terms of benchmarking, the core 2 duo's are the best cpu (****Right now****). So, if I were to buy a computer today (which I did 2 months ago), I would go for the core 2 duos (which I did).