Tech Stocking Stuffers: 18 awesome gifts under $50

The true question.. AMD or Intel?

By IH8PunkRok ยท 29 replies
Mar 4, 2007
  1. of course im talking about dual core processors.
    which one is better or are either of them worth buying?
  2. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 10,742   +419

    Oh Jeez, Not this <explicitive> again.

    These threads repeatedly and without fail turn into flames and get locked, and we just had one of these a week or 2 ago.

    I think most people will say the Core2Duo is better. Problem is nobody seems to do a very good job of backing up what they say, so I'd like to see people showing benchmarks so the thread stays as close to possible to civil.
  3. IH8PunkRok

    IH8PunkRok TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 114

    i agree i want proof of all the claims made
    i really want to know which one performs better
  4. KingCody

    KingCody TS Evangelist Posts: 992   +8

    no matter how many times this question gets asked and answered, people continue to ask again and again (I don't know why :confused:)

    If you ask such a general question like that on a forum (such as this one), you'll get various people's opinions as a result. if you need proof, then a simple google search will show you all the benchmarks and reviews you need. if you're comparing the latest dual core models from each brand, then try a search for "core 2 duo athlon 64 x2", here is one with 5 pages of benchmarks.

    the question [in the form it was asked] cannot be answered definitively for either side. both companies have had their ups and downs, both companies have held and lost the performance crowns. that being said, if you were to build a system today (March 4, 2007) then the Core-2-Duo series from Intel is the undisputed performance king. if you're not planning on building anytime soon, then the question is irrelevant, because what is better today may not be better tomorrow.

    my recommendation to you "IH8PunkRok" is to set a budget and then compare models from both companies that fit into your budget. unless you have a money tree in your backyard, then most likely there will always be something better than you can afford.

    cheers :wave:
    1 person likes this.
  5. MetalX

    MetalX TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,388

    Exactly. As of this moment Core 2 is better, but any time in the future, we just can't know.
  6. F1N3ST

    F1N3ST TS Rookie Posts: 596

    Im stayin out of this one, _Fake_ please do the same so i dont have to respond
  7. wolfram

    wolfram TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,967   +9

    If you want low priced, high performing processors, get AMD CPU's. Athlon 64's and X2's are very good, and are generally cheaper than Intel ones (the cheapest Core 2 costs $169 right now))

    Cheap Intel processors(P4's etc.)= Netburst= BIG CRAP :unch:

    But if you don't care about money, and want the highest end CPU available, Intel is really a winner.

    Regards :wave:
  8. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 10,742   +419

    This is why someone needs to put a price per performance chart together much like with hard drives cost per gigabyte. I'd do it, but I don't really have the desire right now.
  9. CMH

    CMH TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,039   +9

    Price/performance charts are hard to come by, because there's just so many ways of measuring performance.

    Also, prices change, making this so much harder. And prices differ form one place to another.

    But as a general rule today, 5th March 2007, budget CPUs you're most probably looking at AMD offerings, while higher end CPUs you'll definitely be looking at the Core2Duos.

    If you really want those price/performance charts, make them yourself. Performance charts can be found at, and you should be able to grab the prices off your local computer shop, or wherever you want to buy your rig from.
  10. _FAKE_

    _FAKE_ TS Rookie Posts: 116

    LMAO, i was about to say the same only replace _FAKE_ with F1N3ST.

    I've decided to not take sides, i suppose its because of what "KingCody" said. I agree with him almost 100%.

    Threads like this should be closed, It leads to different peoples perspectives and no-one wins. Just go with what you like, or what fits within your budget range, than STFU and enjoy what you got.
  11. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 5,443   +38

    Also it depends on what you need the PC for. A computer that would be mainly used for surfing the net and general work like listening to music would do just fine with a Pentium 4, while one that will be used for heavy-duty video editing will likely need a Core 2 Duo E6600 or the like.
  12. SNGX1275

    SNGX1275 TS Forces Special Posts: 10,742   +419

    Right. I was thinking of the PCMark tests or Sandra benchmarks and also 3dmark tests all in seperate charts vs price. Could also throw in power consumption. Like I said I don't want to do it, but if people are going to argue in a thread, stuff like that would be good to back up their point.
  13. MetalX

    MetalX TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,388

    All we really need is for to include prices of CPUs in their CPU charts. That would be exactly what you guys are looking for.
  14. CMH

    CMH TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,039   +9

    Lol, while they're at it, they might as well provide real time pricelists right? :D

    It just becomes real hard to make such comparisons because of the fluctuations in price. They do provide price/performance charts for HDDs, but you have to realise that CPU prices change on a daily basis, while HDDs remain quite static.

    Even if they did provide price/performance charts, nobody'll really look at them, because the sweet spot for price/performance changes depending on which aspect of performance you're looking at.

    If you really want to know which one will be better for you, the basic guideline for today (6th March 2007) is Core2Duo for high performance chips, AMD Athlons for mid range chips (great value there, no overclock potential IMO), and I won't mention anything for budget, cos thats not where my interest lies :D

    BTW, for general use, Pentium 4s are pretty overpowered :p. Celeron Ds would be much easier on the wallet. If those aren't easy to come by, AMD Semprons work too. Heck, if you can get your hands on a Pentium III, it'll do all those office apps easy (as well as watching movies and listening to music), just don't try to install Vista on it.
  15. Exonimus

    Exonimus TS Rookie Posts: 77

    I almost totally agree with CMH.

    except with the above. My 3000+ overclocked 800mhz easily. That's no overclocking potential? and if you're talking about x2, my friend's x2 overclocked 700mhz without any problem. so that's not entirely true :p
  16. CMH

    CMH TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,039   +9

    I'll rephrase that:

    The higher end chips have no overclock potential. Try overclocking a 5000+

  17. _FAKE_

    _FAKE_ TS Rookie Posts: 116

    What are you talking about, i have an X2 5000+ and overclocked it 500MHz with stock cooler. I must admit, a couple of days ago my cpu became unstable, the room temperature was 40 degrees Celsius or more (my room temperature is usually hotter than outside temperature) and when i went to play a game my cpu temp went a little above 60 degrees and my games suddenly stopped responding, or at least took 20 odd seconds for the game to reply to my KB movements. But on an average day it works perfectly fine. I reckon i could overclock it another 100-200MHz with a tuniq tower 120 or Thermalright Ultra 120 installed as my cpu cooler.

    But im not sure if it was the cpu that was unstable, cause when i exited the game windows worked fine. I'm thinking it was the gpu as it tends to get hotter than my cpu
  18. CMH

    CMH TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,039   +9

    Well, I've been going by some reports that AMD's chips are being pushed to their limits, so I'm quite surprised you can get those overclocks.

    Alls good then, AMD's for the value range!! :D
  19. _FAKE_

    _FAKE_ TS Rookie Posts: 116

    I'm not saying you are wrong when you say high end X2's a not good for overclocking. I took my side of my pc case off for better airflow, not to mention im using an M2N32-SLI Deluxe, and all the benchmarks and reviews i have read about that mobo it that it is a very good overclocking mobo. And not to mention that all mobo's and cpu's a different, so for all i know, i could just be the lucky one who can get that extra limit out of his cpu =)
  20. CMH

    CMH TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 2,039   +9

    hmm... no matter what you do, you're still bound by what that chip can do on air.

    I suppose when Core2Duos came out, anything less than 50% overclock seemed like a crap overclock to me :D

    And yes, I am very much aware of the different capabilities of each individual chip/mobo, I wrote that guide which is a sticky now :D

    p.s., thats in the cooling section, cos thats where I mainly stay :D
  21. Rage_3K_Moiz

    Rage_3K_Moiz Sith Lord Posts: 5,443   +38

    This is turning into an OCing discussion now, which it isn't supposed to be...
  22. Exonimus

    Exonimus TS Rookie Posts: 77

    you're right, although I just wanted to state that he wasn't really correct. Back on topic! :p
  23. nickc

    nickc TechSpot Paladin Posts: 923   +11

    I am an ADM fan and will now put my vote to Intel core2duo.
  24. F1N3ST

    F1N3ST TS Rookie Posts: 596

    AMD cant overclock well, intel is better at OCing, it is a FACT.
  25. _FAKE_

    _FAKE_ TS Rookie Posts: 116

    Yea i agree with you. But anyone who can gain a 500MHz+ overclock on an AMD is pretty good. But yea, F1N3ST is right, even with a liquid nitrogen cpu cooler, and AMD will only be able to overclock 1.5-2GHz, whereas an Intel could overclock a massive 4-5GHz, well atleast the P4's can. C2D's aint as good as overclocking as the P4's, but wield better performance, and results.
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...