For some time I have wondered which is the better of these two fighters? Im purchasing a new PC at the Taipei computer faire and still have not decided. I’ve had experience with both processors, and have this to say:
I found Intel to be amazing at windows and gaming. A super processor, except for the high voltage usage(bad for laptop users). It was rather difficult to overclock too.
The AMD(Athlon XP) was the most recent processor I had. I found it quite a hassle, for some reason it would register 100% usage while I was in Internet Explorer!! And the gaming performance was only slightly better than the same speed Intel chip.
Another thing was AMD’s running temperature. It’s ridiculously high, something like 53 degrees Celsius.
So after much deliberation, i’ve decided its time to let the Pentium rule again and put the Amd to rest. RIP
Currently, its the pentiums that run really hot and draw a lot of power. the AMD64 are much faster for gaming and priced competitively as well. At this tyme, there is NO reason to buy the current generation of pentiums.
You should dbl check your facts from sites like anandtech.com,
I was all over Intel until I read up on AMD from sites like TomsHardware.com or the previously mentioned Anandtech.com.
AMDs gets ya more bang for the buck. That’s mainly for desktop systems. Although AMD is making large strides in the laptop/notebook market, Intel just beats them by a nose. Give it another year or two, I can see matching or beating Intel in the laptop market as well. AMD has already proved itself innovative and foresighted enough with its AMD64 chip.
If you want a desktop that won’t go obsolete in the next year or two, I’d recommend buying an AMD64 system. Don’t skimp too hard on your video board either else you’ll be wasting the AMD64 system. That and you’ll blame the AMD64 for weak gaming performance when it’s prolly the POS video board ya installed that’s at fault.
Athlon64 for desktops.
Pentium-M for laptops. Turion’s still don’t compare well to Pentium-M’s for battery life and performance.
If you’re running at 53C that is too high. Re-apply your thermal grease on the CPU (arctic silver or something like that) and also make sure you have 1 or 2 case fans. Low ambient case temp and case air flow is very important.
Computing architecture will probably see a lot of changes in the next 100 years. I wonder if you had to bet, who would make most of these advances. Intel, AMD or IBM? So far we’ve seen Centrino and now viiv. There’s gonna be a lot more. The future most likely belongs to Intel.
Intel’s motto has always been “first with the worst”.
In a hundred years, it is highly likely that all of these companies will be historical footnotes and that some new players will take over. Besides, who really cares? I want to know what I can get NOW, or maybe NEXT YEAR. Currently, AMD is the leader and is expected to be for at least the next two years, because Intel has dropped the ball on multi-core chips and on their version of the 64-bit architecture.
Intel’s motto has always been “first with the worst”.
In a hundred years, it is highly likely that all of these companies will be historical footnotes and that some new players will take over. Besides, who really cares? I want to know what I can get NOW, or maybe NEXT YEAR. Currently, AMD is the leader and is expected to be for at least the next two years, because Intel has dropped the ball on multi-core chips and on their version of the 64-bit architecture.[/quote]
ah well. So far we don’t even have basic things like instant-on. Or real crash recovery. If any app or server crashes, do you really want to loose unsaved? data? Someday, we won’t. The future is what I care about.
What does that have to do with AMD vs. Intel? I want chocolate cake. Same deal.
Data loss and crash-recovery are largely application-level issues. A journaling filesystem, such as Linux’s EXT3 or ReiserFS, can help with them. After that it’s an issue with the application. And maybe with the design of main memory – fast nonvolatile memory is maybe five to ten years out. Again, nothing to do with AMD/Intel.
Instant-on is mostly a matter of politics; someone actually did that with one of the older versions of Windows – embedded it into ROM in a homemade computer – and it worked. I hear Microsoft sent a legal hit team to execute the guy. You can do that legally with Linux if you want to build your own little laptop/PDA doohickey.
Still find AMD to be better on gaming systems and Intel for workstations and business application.
AMD chips tend to get really expencive in the high end server lines as well, so they tend to lose the value arguement here. That’s pretty much and even field, though has always carried that market.
Haven’t played with the 64bit stuff yet as it was pretty expencive when I put together this machine and the HT 3.0E was closer to my price range.
Pentium-M for laptops. Turion’s still don’t compare well to Pentium-M’s for battery life and performance.
[/quote]
I used to think that until I read this article yesterday: laptoplogic.com/resources/articles/42/1/1/ After 21 benchmarks, 2 comparisons, and a detailed architecture analysis, the conclusion is clear. Unless battery life while performing CPU-intensive tasks is paramount, choosing a Turion-based laptop over a Dothan-based laptop is recommended.
HP/Compaq offer AMD laptops (models that end in Z) Dell and IBM do not.
The Athlon X2 (dual core) is best for desktops, unless you’re a gamer.
For servers, use the Opteron dual core CPUs.
The Intel dual core chips (both server and desktop) are simply 2 chips duct taped together, and you can fry eggs on them.
In 2006 both AMD and Intel will have dual core for notebook.
I dont understand the need for using notebooks as a gaming device. Unless your income is very disposable, there are cheaper ways of playing games on the go (a PSP only costs around 6000NT). That said I think notebooks are really meant for businesspersons that needs to type reports or whatever on the go, and just about any processors today can do that. Besides gaming on a notebook eats so much power you wouldnt be able to play for long at all…
I think P4’s and its deravatives are good as an intelligent typewriter as well as cooking breakfest…
Not only did they over-trumped their current release (Intel Core i9-10980XE),
next year AMD Ryzen Threadripper 3990X - 64Core/128Threads monster is coming.
Intel just got hit by a truck, only to see a tank rolling in. RIP
Intel thought they had fixed all the hyperthreading related security issues but another paper just came out finding there are still more, even with all the latest Intel security updates installed. It is the opinion of the authors of this latest paper that the only safe option is to disable hyperthreading on Intel processors, which basically makes them uncompetitive with AMD.
Personally, I think it may not be wise to buy anything with an Intel processor in it now given all the security issues…
They have implemented in proprietary firmware the ability to “split” a core into two and process two streams of instructions, in parallel.
Trouble is they have been cheating, and one process can see the other. Happy to explain more about how that occurs, or you can just trust me. That is particularly important when one of the processes can see and references important data, for example password files.
And the gaming performance was only slightly better than the same speed Intel chip.
That is particularly important when one of the processes can see and references important data, for example password files.