Rs588NY
Rookie Author
New York
Posts:16
Points:200
Joined:Aug 2012
|
Message Posted: Aug 16, 2012 1:51:13 PM
It depends on what you need computer for. If you just need it for daily web browsering or typing or office logistics, I would recommend AMD because it is more cost effective and power efficient. If you need it for competitive gaming like online multiplayer, then you would need Intel such as core I7 which yields the most performance during intensive actions. Light gaming would be alright on the AMD Phenom II line either 4X or 6X.
|
Gazstation
Champion Author
Montreal
Posts:4,098
Points:827,860
Joined:Dec 2010
|
Message Posted: Jul 17, 2012 7:54:07 PM
I'm using an Intel E8600 with a 333Mhz (10x333Mhz) bus.
|
KentuckyWildcat
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:9,207
Points:2,194,380
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Jun 28, 2012 4:30:39 AM
Intel
|
dptm4
Rookie Author
Alabama
Posts:42
Points:12,895
Joined:May 2012
|
Message Posted: May 22, 2012 7:48:14 PM
Intel
|
herbiepopnecker
Champion Author
British Columbia
Posts:13,596
Points:2,505,355
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: May 18, 2012 10:19:09 PM
Worked on a couple machines today, A AMD 2500+(1.8 GHz) with 786MB RAM someone had stuffed Win7 onto and a P4 2.8 with 512MB running Windows XP.
Guess which one was better?
If you said the Intel, you'd be dead wrong. The P4 running XP was like a slug, even though it was clocked almost 1GHz faster.
The AMD amazed me, I didn't think Win7 would run worth a damn on 768MB. It was actually as good as one of those little Netbooks!
|
MikeyP8
Champion Author
Massachusetts
Posts:1,072
Points:288,865
Joined:Apr 2012
|
Message Posted: May 11, 2012 6:02:52 AM
Intel
|
BlueberryFocus
All-Star Author
Rochester
Posts:553
Points:128,760
Joined:Feb 2012
|
Message Posted: May 10, 2012 2:51:34 PM
AMD - I like them because they are cheaper, and still give very good preformance.
|
MikeyP8
Champion Author
Massachusetts
Posts:1,072
Points:288,865
Joined:Apr 2012
|
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2012 12:06:04 PM
Intel
|
jwalkerh
Champion Author
Louisiana
Posts:6,127
Points:1,368,720
Joined:Oct 2008
|
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2012 5:38:46 AM
Intel
|
KentuckyWildcat
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:9,207
Points:2,194,380
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 12, 2012 3:36:22 AM
Intel
|
lightbulbman2008
Champion Author
Worcester
Posts:414,309
Points:1,586,660
Joined:Oct 2008
|
Message Posted: Apr 6, 2012 6:59:13 PM
they are equally good i am using intel an i5 no problems from it at all.
|
Titanic1985
Champion Author
South Carolina
Posts:6,252
Points:357,245
Joined:Dec 2010
|
Message Posted: Apr 3, 2012 3:12:13 PM
Hello Herbie. Once again you made my day regarding the 'typing one finger on each hand' comment. I have a friend who is a programmer who types this way. Good thing they have code debuggers because you know there will be (and are) errors.
[Edited by: Titanic1985 at 4/3/2012 6:14:03 PM EST]
|
herbiepopnecker
Champion Author
British Columbia
Posts:13,596
Points:2,505,355
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 2, 2012 10:23:34 PM
Oh sell them an 8 core Bulldozer and they'll gum it up in 2 weeks downloading every helper. accelerator, toolbar, fake antivirus and malware on the planet so it works as slow as their 486/25 did.
I'd cry at their ignorance but I've learned to just go next door, buy a coffee and drink most of it while I wait for it just to boot, and smile when I take their money.
You know how much a good CPU matters using Word when you type with one finger on each hand.
|
Hemond
Champion Author
Providence
Posts:8,175
Points:133,425
Joined:Oct 2006
|
Message Posted: Apr 2, 2012 3:09:35 AM
Can't see as there is a whole lot of difference among any computer from the present to the last 5 years. Just newer hardware. Less costly, more integrated, more optimized...
But as for performance, 99% of the typical user couldn't notice a difference between a dual core from 2007 to a quad core or i7 of today.
This fretting over CPU performance is kind of comical. I mean just how much horsepower does one need to open a web page? To watch Youtubes? To read an email? To pay a bill online? To view some photos? To buy a trinket at Amazon?
I do some basic video editing (cutting and occasionally re-encoding to .avi). xP era computers were quite capable of that so its a breeze for Vista/Win7 era hardware. Also do homemade music covers using Guitar Rig, same argument, any computer in the last 7 years can handle this easily.
I suppose if one were doing DNA sequencing, or star field searching, or high energy particle physics, or running a botnet, then an i7 CPU would be a requirement, but for looking at Facebook entries? Come now...
|
herbiepopnecker
Champion Author
British Columbia
Posts:13,596
Points:2,505,355
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2012 9:07:51 PM
Ordered a couple mobs and AMD FX chips to try. See how an FX 6100 stands compared to my X6
|
Eugenian
Champion Author
Oregon
Posts:1,857
Points:361,155
Joined:Oct 2009
|
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2012 7:47:40 PM
I currently use an old laptop with an Intel Pentium M single-core processor. It's painfully slow in Window$ but runs quite a bit faster under Linux. I'm planning to replace it this summer after AMD's Trinity processors hit the market. They'll smoke Intel in graphics performance and do so in laptops that cost a couple hundred dollars less.
|
KentuckyWildcat
Champion Author
Maryland
Posts:9,207
Points:2,194,380
Joined:Mar 2005
|
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2012 3:57:15 AM
Never had a problem with Intel.
|
CaptDave2012
All-Star Author
Arkansas
Posts:695
Points:24,735
Joined:Feb 2012
|
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2012 6:21:09 AM
Take your pick but select one with dual processors at least.
|
disciple2012
Rookie Author
Lubbock
Posts:43
Points:294,030
Joined:Feb 2012
|
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2012 4:56:55 PM
the new amd chips are out. amd successfully placed the video chipset on the cpu. you can get a quad or six core with the video chipset on the cpu. its supposed to be great for gaming since they got rid of one of the mobo chipsets ( north or southbridge not sure). AMD bought ATI so the video cards that are available for AMD mobos can be screaming fast for games. They developed a technology that allows the on cpu video chipset to work with one two or three ATI video cards to improve performance - called Crossfire. Intel chips are fast too. I too prefer AMD. I too am on a dual core 3800 cpu - its plenty fast for me, but then I don't game.
hth
|
herbiepopnecker
Champion Author
British Columbia
Posts:13,596
Points:2,505,355
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2012 11:46:21 PM
Not really lacklustre as the Sempron 3000 was rated as equal to a P4 3 Ghz, but ran at maybe 1800MHz. Plus they had 64 bit Semprons
|
aoklman
Champion Author
Texas
Posts:2,812
Points:405,025
Joined:May 2011
|
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2012 5:39:32 AM
Thanks herbie, Sempron was what I was trying to think of. So both brands do produce budget (low end, lack luster, under performer) procs.
[Edited by: aoklman at 2/2/2012 8:41:00 AM EST]
|
herbiepopnecker
Champion Author
British Columbia
Posts:13,596
Points:2,505,355
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Feb 1, 2012 8:54:53 PM
The X3 was a quad core with one disabled. The Sempron was just a budget chip that was even cheaper than Celeron.
|
aoklman
Champion Author
Texas
Posts:2,812
Points:405,025
Joined:May 2011
|
Message Posted: Jan 31, 2012 7:49:19 AM
I agree that I would not want a Celeron as it is inferior or partially disabled (as I understand it). But doesn't or didn't AMD also sell a line of processors with simular inferiorities to their main stream line? (I can't think what the AMDs counterpart to the Celeron was called right now).
|
PopcornPirate
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:3,905
Points:1,170,645
Joined:Nov 2006
|
Message Posted: Jan 31, 2012 5:55:57 AM
""I wouldn't sell a Celeron to a vegetable. ""
Thank You Herbie. I have been toting that they are C R A P P for years. My work computer is a celaron & always has a severe hiccup at least 2-3 times a week. Can't get the boss to understand that AMDs are cheaper & in my opinion a better chip.
|
herbiepopnecker
Champion Author
British Columbia
Posts:13,596
Points:2,505,355
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Jan 30, 2012 6:47:43 PM
Just ordered some AMD A4-3400s as comparable Intels were significantly more expensive. Only the Celerons were comparable in price, I wouldn't sell a Celeron to a vegetable.
|
OceanArcher
Champion Author
Mississippi
Posts:5,703
Points:1,327,400
Joined:May 2004
|
Message Posted: Jan 29, 2012 10:50:18 AM
I'm still considering my options, but I did have one friend offer to sell me three linked GTX 260's for my video needs. Such a setup ought to really drive the CUDA processing on PrimeGrid as well. Haven't made any firm decisions yet ...........
|
phil42
Rookie Author
Dayton
Posts:48
Points:273,720
Joined:Jan 2011
|
Message Posted: Jan 26, 2012 5:03:30 AM
It's a race. AMD and Intel were neck-and-neck in performance for years. But when multi-processors, then multi-core processor started to appear, the two companies came up with entirely different technologies for inter-processor communications, and to be perfectly honest -- Intel's technology stank. So AMD got a huge jump in the performance race. Intel took a couple of tries to completely re-engineer their inter-processor technology, and with the Core series they got it seriously figured out. Also, Intel completely re-architected the processor guts with the Core. The end result is that Intel has taken back the performance lead.
Now, will you notice that? Only if you're pushing your system to the limits. High-end gamers and absolute performance junkies (photo and video editors) will see it. Everybody else, probably not so much.
|
herbiepopnecker
Champion Author
British Columbia
Posts:13,596
Points:2,505,355
Joined:Sep 2005
|
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2012 6:25:45 PM
I'm happy with my X6 1100. With 16 Gigs of RAM and two 80 Gig hard drives.
Yeah, that's right 80Gbs. That's 16 years of running a print shop, all the customer jobs backed up on one, and Win7 Pro, the programs and current files on the other.
Fiber linked, I love how it torrents Ubuntu CDs in about 8 minutes, and burns them faster than my first PC could format a floppy.
I update the CPU/mobo about every year, but not with Intel since the PIII days. Maybe if they're far ahead and priced sensibly come next fall, I'll try an i7
|
bytebug
Champion Author
Orange County
Posts:26,379
Points:4,122,655
Joined:Oct 2001
|
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2012 9:39:36 AM
>> Is it really worth building with an Intel Core i7
Only if you want the best performance.
|
PopcornPirate
Champion Author
New Jersey
Posts:3,905
Points:1,170,645
Joined:Nov 2006
|
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2012 5:44:13 AM
I agree...Stick to an AMD chip. Quad or 6 core.
It really depends on how much you want to spend?
I am waiting for my Mid level gaming machine from Cyberware. Should deliver tomorrow. ( They were offering free shipping on New Years Day )
Go to a couple of sites.
Run the build your own on them & compare. Some offer deals on mid level parts that the others don't.
Good luck
|
OceanArcher
Champion Author
Mississippi
Posts:5,703
Points:1,327,400
Joined:May 2004
|
Message Posted: Jan 25, 2012 4:36:35 AM
Right now, my "big" machine is running an AMD 64 bit dual core processor
Do plan on upgrading though, but haven't decided whether to stay with AMD, or switch to Intel. Will definitely be a multi-core increase. The video will be upgraded too (NVIDIA)
|