|
|
#1
6th Oct 2008, 06:34
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm looking at upgrading my desktop in the next few months, and so the age-old question springs to mind. Intel or AMD CPUs?
I'll admit, my experience with latter-day intel chips is limited. I bailed on them a few years back, and have built exclusively with AMD since then. I prize the stability and efficiency they offer, and I still argue that you get more bang for your buck from an AMD chip than an intel. Does anyone care to put me back on the straight and narrow path of intel? If so, I'm open to discussion. I would prefer the AMD though, as I trust their stability and considerable overclock capacity for those occasions where I need to eke a little more out of my system. I remember intel cores being very unstable as you pushed them beyond their normal range. Beyond that, there's multi-core systems to consider. Quad cores for intel, tri- and quad-core Phenom systems from AMD. Now, the tri-core seems a bit of a gimmick, but again I'm open to persuasion. I'd like to move up to a quad system, as I like the parallel-processing ability, leaving me able to do complex tasks in the background with adequate capacity to browse, word-process and the like. Again, what's the advice? Save a few quid and stick with a high-end dual core, or splash out for a mid to high range quad? Thanks in advance for advice :) [EDIT] Just looked at how many other 'AMD vs INTEL' threads are bouncing around these boards... feel free to ignore me. |
|
#2
6th Oct 2008, 06:51
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
In my opinion they used to be fairly close, now Intel hold the lead firmly, out the box the CPUs are faster and then they are seriously overclockable too compared to AMD.
__________________
My System: Hybr!d
|
|
#3
6th Oct 2008, 07:08
|
|||
|
|||
|
Really? Well, I guess that's what happens when you don't pay much attention to these things for a year or so... In your esteemed (sic) opinion, I should buy Intel?
|
|
#4
6th Oct 2008, 07:14
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yep. Intel are quite a way ahead. That said I run AMD, because my laptop was a nuts deal, I don't need to overclock and I don't play games.
|
|
#5
6th Oct 2008, 07:30
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Brand loyalty past one generation of chips is utterly worthless, as one generation's benefits really have no effects on the others. If we switched AMD and Intel names on the Core 2 Duos, people would still be recommending them.
__________________
__________________
"I loved the P182 so much that, when my wife's system was all noisy and needed all sorts of cleaning, I bought her one. Then, when I wanted a cat, I bought a P182. The P182 is not a cat per se, but it's still an excellent buy."
My System: 日夏子
|
|
#6
6th Oct 2008, 07:53
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Depends what you want to do.
__________________
Intel definitely for gaming and processor hungry tasks but if it's just for word processing, surfing the net, e-mails etc then AMD will be fine - especially as they are much cheaper it will allow you to get a faster clocked chip (although it still won't be as good as a slightly slower intel). My System: #
|
|
#7
6th Oct 2008, 18:25
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
i love intel best cpu in my opinion a cheaper intel quad will beat a more expensive amd quad (dont quote me on this or anything)
__________________
My System: ubr gaming computer
|
|
#8
6th Oct 2008, 20:50
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#9
6th Oct 2008, 22:50
|
|||
|
|||
|
,4 years ago i bought my first amd athlon,also i have an amd dual core & recently i added an amd quad core phenom to my collection,over the years i have never had an ounce of trouble with any of them,but i have only had amd never even used an intel,so i can`t really compare them
|
|
#10
6th Oct 2008, 23:59
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Intel, like everyone else has said, are best, better value than AMD and OC alot better.
__________________
My System: First OC
|
