Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
AMD vs Intel Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AMD vs Intel

    In an effort to occupy my time, and stay an active member here, thought illd try a new debate.

    So wich do you prefer and why? Im an AMD man myself(running a a socket940 Fx-53) . There just overal better processors, with shorter pipelines, vastly superior memory controllers etc.

    Come on i know there are other computer dorks on this forum(actualy i go a step beyond dork, im a proffesionaly certified tech but hey....). I might also have to post pics of the new casemod im fixing to start(have to get the link cable for my phone)


    BTW flames may not be were you would first think of for a thread like this,But if you think that, youve never seen a computer dork battle royale.........techno babble is a fun language to argue in

  • #2
    This is definite flame topic. It's fully as much religious zealotry as the Mac vs Windows vs Linux topics.

    I'm using AMD where possible, I use Intel for my high powered embedded toys, VIA on low power embeddeds. AMD is currently my personal CPU choice for price/performance. Yeah, I might squeak an extra 5% performane out of a similar Intel system, in some cases, for only 80% more cost.

    I'm also on the lunatic conspiracy theory fringe with the Wintel empire, especially with the timing of WinXP 64... just after Intel starts shipping and over a year after I had my AMD64.

    And Drizzt... just ignore that other thread...

    Comment


    • #3
      I am a "I don't give a shit as long as it runs fast" kind of person. I am currently running a Pentium 4 of 3,2 GHz which I am very pleased with.
      Next processor might very well be a AMD, but that will be in quite a few years. Probably after I get my Masters in Computer Engineering (only three and a half years to go, weee!), until then I don't think I'll have the money. Especially not since kendo and iaido takes up a lot of my money

      Comment


      • #4
        Dont worry im ignoring more than that thread(btw i haent put anyone on my official ignore list......but im not going to respond to certain people but on a limited basis....like this thread)

        Yes, the jackasses at microsoft have been in cahoots with intel for a lng time. look at the xbox, its nothing but a crappy p3 setup. However thats changing.....the new one is an IBM processor they use in the g3 i beleive lol.

        I wonder how many people can actualy explain the difference in the two procesors lol. What system are you running btw?

        I love how loyal intel fan boys are when the amd's outbench them at every step

        Comment


        • #5
          I'm an AMD convert actually. I used to be an Intel fan-geek but thats a different story. I'm running an AMD64 which is great, and operates at a low temperature. And the best thing of all, the price is right.

          Unless Intel can pull off something totally cool that outstrips the AMD, I think I'll be sticking to AMD.

          And why slag off the XBOX? Yeah sure it's a P3 733, but the XBOX makes such a nice little network fileserver once you've removed the cut back Windows 2000 OS and installed something like GentooX (Linux).

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by drizzt
            Yes, the jackasses at microsoft have been in cahoots with intel for a lng time. look at the xbox, its nothing but a crappy p3 setup. However thats changing.....the new one is an IBM processor they use in the g3 i beleive lol.

            I wonder how many people can actualy explain the difference in the two procesors lol. What system are you running btw?

            I love how loyal intel fan boys are when the amd's outbench them at every step
            Don't dump on the xbox, unless you're talking about gaming, in which case dump on all consoles evenly... I won't discuss my xbox setup, but suffice it say it's very efficient at it's function and I like it. A P3-733 is a lot of horsepower for such a small number of pixels (although I'd lik3 128mb instead of 64).

            You have to take an interest to understand the tech under the hoods, and spend a lot of time at it. I don't know much about autos, but I do understand CPU's to a certain level. MIT has a couple of guest speakers that lecture about things. They've had a couple of good ones there, like one of Intel's architecture guys discussing marketing and it's effect on CPU design... Blue Crystals....

            As per the other thread, my gaming rig is still an aging Biostar IDEQ 200(?), AMD64-3200+, NF3, 1GB, 300GB SATA Raid0, ATI9800Pro-AIW. Strangely, my 2+ year old machine isn't dusty enough to require an upgrade, but I'm still shopping for newer video cards.. (but I'll probably skip that and get bogu this year)

            Most of the Intel fans love the stability argument. Which since everyone codes from Intel's cheat sheet isn't terribly off the mark. Some things are more stable on Intel. I really love the Intel P4 heat system; the way it scales back on power rather than power off when it overheats. It was a good thing to put that into the desktop CPU. Fortuneately they can always find a tweaked benchmark that shows some Intel CPU that might even be shipping next year (ignoring cost completely) beats that AMD CPU you can buy now.

            Sharky Extreme does a cute little ~$1000 game system design article every month or so. They do an Intel and an AMD system; one typically has a bit more power for the money...

            Comment


            • #7
              yea ive seen the shakry artices . And im not knocking the xbox perese, i was commenting on the fact A.)they fanboyed for intel, and B.) they could have had better hardwar for a comparable price at the time .


              THe thing i have issues with is thrown together design of the p4. the chip wa designed to produce the big numbers, but it was weaker than the older p3's(note the guys who designed the thing actualy admitted to that). AMD kept the right idea by using a 12 step pipeline vs a 20 in the p4. plus that sweet little dual 800mhz FSB shure makes things nice. I wish I had waited now on this fx until the s939 version came out though.its a great chip but i wish i could look forward to pci-e video cards .....

              i want a fx-57 though .....god i want one

              Comment


              • #8
                Mac User

                I'm quite happy with my PowerPC G5.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by drizzt
                  In an effort to occupy my time, and stay an active member here, thought illd try a new debate.

                  So wich do you prefer and why? Im an AMD man myself(running a a socket940 Fx-53) . There just overal better processors, with shorter pipelines, vastly superior memory controllers etc.

                  Come on i know there are other computer dorks on this forum(actualy i go a step beyond dork, im a proffesionaly certified tech but hey....). I might also have to post pics of the new casemod im fixing to start(have to get the link cable for my phone)


                  BTW flames may not be were you would first think of for a thread like this,But if you think that, youve never seen a computer dork battle royale.........techno babble is a fun language to argue in
                  AMD all the way. Cheaper and nicer. And some people say it is better for overclocking, but I wouldn't know that.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    ive had two different ones that overclocked well, and most of the serious oc guys use them...

                    whe i get my W?C stuff done, ima oc mine again

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Grenamier
                      I'm quite happy with my PowerPC G5.
                      That's a different war...
                      Originally posted by drizzt
                      im not knocking the xbox perese, i was commenting on the fact A.)they fanboyed for intel, and B.) they could have had better hardwar for a comparable price at the time .
                      <flame value=on>What are you talking about? When the xbox got put together it was a deal at $250-300-- P3 733, 64MB, 20GB HDD, nvidia GPU, 10/100NIC. I couldn't even source the parts that cheap then. It's not like it doesn't have a decent GPU too. Sure, by today's standards it's way behind, but at the time it was first popping out. There was no such thing as better hardware for the price at the time; common theme was that they were losing money on every sale (something sony never did).

                      Come to think of it you mentioned "vastly superior memory controllers". Are are aware that those improvements are very recent, right? Even while losing the CPU title, Intel's had faster RAM throughput on the mb. The real bonus is that they put the memory controller on die, thus it's closer which means faster and better controlled. </flame>

                      I can't think of any more argumentative contrary positions to take without becoming even more contrived in order to keep this going, so.... Oh wait...

                      Originally posted by drizzt
                      i want a fx-57 though
                      Amateur... I want a quad Opteron 854 rig (4GB of CL2.0 RAM/CPU) with a 7800GTX SLI config... and of course, with the fancy vapor cooling system...

                      Who needs to overclock when you have more power than you can use?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        actualy, a quad or even 8 processor system is nearly useless oin 99% of all aplications, unless you want to tear into source coding.

                        HAve you seen a Dual cahnnel A64 memory benchmark compared to an intels? the onboard controller nearly doubledthe memory bandwith. Ill look for a benchmark graph and scores for you. Maybe i should reword, not the controller but the bandwith. that was the big argument when my processor and the older EE came out, the fx's memory bandwith scores made the intels look like a joke. HAving duall 800mhz busses does that for you lol...

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          i just thought about something, we need to get a folding team running on this board......thats actualy a good cause and alot of people might get into it

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by drizzt
                            actualy, a quad or even 8 processor system is nearly useless oin 99% of all aplications, unless you want to tear into source coding.
                            You are somewhat misinformed.

                            Some explanations first:

                            1) CPU context switches are expensive operations.
                            2) A single core can run only one thread (hyperthreading isn't 'true' dual core)
                            3) Core = A single unit that can execute instructions. The die of a dualcore processor (Athlon 64 X2 for example) has two cores. There are even processors with eight cores such as Sun's Niagara.
                            4) Thread = A series of instructions (an application or part of it)

                            If you're have 8 running threads and just one core the scheduler will swap out the threads (costly operation) and let each of them run a certain amount of time, since this happens so fast it appears that everything is running at the same time.

                            If you have 8 threads and 8 cores available there will be much less context switches and thus more time to crunch numbers.

                            Most applications have only one thread that executes instructions. There are also multi-threaded applications that split work in two or more parts, for example one thread handles the drawing of a landscape while the other deals with user input. Applications such as these benefit greatly from multicore systems.

                            However twice the number of processes doesn't equal twice the performance. One thread will frequently have to wait for another thread to finish accessing a piece of memory. If both were to access and modify a number in memory at the same time chaos would ensue...

                            Since you can only make transistors so small processors are moving to a multicore design to increase performance.

                            I don't see why you keep mentioning a "sweet little dual 800 MHz FSB" because the memory controller of the Athlon 64 (and FX & Opteron) is "ondie" not "onboard", replacing the traditional FSB. There is however the HyperTransport bus that links the CPU to the northbridge and operates at 800MHz.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by DarQik
                              <flame value=on>What are you talking about? When the xbox got put together it was a deal at $250-300-- P3 733, 64MB, 20GB HDD, nvidia GPU, 10/100NIC. I couldn't even source the parts that cheap then. It's not like it doesn't have a decent GPU too. Sure, by today's standards it's way behind, but at the time it was first popping out. There was no such thing as better hardware for the price at the time; common theme was that they were losing money on every sale (something sony never did).

                              The xbox was made to be a game machine. Not a computer. Even if it does have good software, it was still much less popular than the PS2 (which might i add was released some years before the xbox.) So putting aside all the design flaws and functionality of the xbox, it still lost to Sony. Too much time was spent on useless features of the xbox that frankly, noone even cares about. I'd rather Microsoft copy the Playstation and slap the green X sticker on the side over PS2 than have them continue producing sub-par gaming machines. All the technology in the world means nothing if noone even cares about what it does. As for me, i'll spend 300$ less on a computer with slower components and wait a fraction of a second more on everything than the alternative.

                              Maybe with the money saved, I can buy myself RBSO bogu and fulfill my wildest Tom Cruise/ Uma Thurman dreams of recklessly swinging a shinai at a tree.

                              <flame-mode, deactivate>

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X