AMD vs Intel

wiscountryboy

Posts: 57   +0
hey guys ive read a ton about the core 2 duo kickin amd ***....but i was shopping and it seems that all the core 2 duos are so much more expensive for the realatively same ghz speed.....so i was wondering what were 2 relatively similar cpus in the performance category....

i am looking right now at the amd 5000 x2 just to give u guys a cpu that i would like 2 have...

Mike
 
I'm running a Core 2 duo 2.4 G, and an Amd 4800 x2, and I have to say both are awesome systems. Yes, when reading performance reviews on the net, the Core 2 does seem to perform better, but here in South Africa my Intel cpu is almost twice the price of the Amd. So, I think if you're looking for the best performance-to-price ratio, then probably go for the Amd.
 
Google up some benchmarks. Mhz/Ghz has always been a pretty worthless comparison for 2 different chips running on different technologies. So in other words you can't compare a 2.4Ghz Core2Duo to a 3.0Ghz Pentium D and expect the Pentium D to win. Similar applies comparing Intel to AMD.

Maybe somebody will do the research for you and post a comparable performing C2D to that x2, but your best bet is googling yourself.
 
I've always worked on (and actually tested) for comparability, the E6300 core2duo and the AMD 5000+. Both are about the same price and compare in performance too.
BUT, i'd choose the E6300 cos you can overclock it to hell and back. Put it in a Gigabyte DS3 mobo and you could get up to 3GHz with a stock cooler (if you're lucky). You'll definitely get 3GHz, with an AMC and decent ram though.
THERE is the difference in quality.
 
alright thanks guys....i had heard that anything intel had to offer was crap inside a given price range...but now im all cleared up...
 
Intel also uses less energy for its Core2Duo chips and they run at a lower temperature so you can overclock them more.
 
Yes, the Core 2 Quad Q6600 is supposed to go down to only $266 after the QX6850 is released.
 
That will make the quad a more appealing chip, but still not for the gamer, not enough multi threaded software available, good for the multi tasker.
 
Holy thread resurrection, Batman!

But seriously, try to look at the date of the last post in the thread before posting in it.
 
In my professional opinion, Intel makes superior products. AMD wouldn't even be around if it wasn't for Intel. AMD started out as, and is still, the cheap knockoff alternative to real Intel hardware.
 
That's not necesarily true zep, here's a did you know for noob comments. Intels architecture in their newest line of cpu's was done by who first, ooohhhhhh AMD.
 
And the Pentium 3-4 got smoked by similarly priced AMD processors (Athlon and up) several years ago. It wasn't until the Core series that Intel took the lead again.
 
wiscountryboy has probably purchased another new system since this thread was started:haha: but I still say Intel is better (at least for what I use my system for).
 
Back