Intel vs. AMD

[slipk487]

what does everyone think is better

[aysiu]

Better at what?

[taurus]

First machine I built was Intel. The next two were AMD and it will be AMD from now on...

[5-HT]

From what I've read, my next system (oh so desperately needed but with no funds for) will use AMD. They seem to be outperforming Intel in a lot of factors at the moment.

[krusbjorn]

From what I've read, my next system (oh so desperately needed but with no funds for) will use AMD. They seem to be outperforming Intel in a lot of factors at the moment.

Yeah. And I'm also using AMD because their philosophy when it comes to how to run a huge company seems better than Intel's. But of course, that could just be imagination from my side.

Perhaps this thread should go to Ubuntu Cafe instead of Absolute Beginner Talk, by the way.

[KansasJoe]

Just got a new comp with the Pentium D dual core processor and it's smoking fast....don't know why but i prefer pentium over amd and nvidia over ati (even before i started using linux as far as video cards are concerned)....again no reason why just always used pentium and always will because i've never had any problems with them

[GoA]

Currently AMD but next one will probaly be intel Conroe. I want that baby soooo much.

[Derek Djons]

In my opinion this poll isn't right. Because as aysiu for example stated... better at what?

It's commenly known that AMD is usually better in Office and Gaming duties and the Intel is better in Sound / Video editing.

But for people there are even more aspects to to think about before chossing between the two processors. Money is such an aspect.

[Bandit]

In my opinion this poll isn't right. Because as aysiu for example stated... better at what?

It's commenly known that AMD is usually better in Office and Gaming duties and the Intel is better in Sound / Video editing.

But for people there are even more aspects to to think about before chossing between the two processors. Money is such an aspect.

I voted AMD as I have been using AMD since my AMD486DX-100. Built about 8 or 9 machines for my self since then all using AMD.


BTW, Derek has a very valid point as well. I mostly use AMD becuase I feel the qaulity is better and price/performance ratio that always hit my budget.

Cheers,
Bandit

[Iandefor]

I like AMD more than Intel, but Intel has the Core Duo... which just looks delicious.

[htinn]

Intel has more factories, otherwise AMD beats Intel at EVERYTHING.

[bjweeks]

Ford or Chevy? This thread is pointless.

[Bandit]

I like AMD more than Intel, but Intel has the Core Duo... which just looks delicious.
Huh??
AMD had Dual Core CPU's way before Intel..

[nickle]

pepsi vs coke, take your pick...

[angkor]

AMD, better at quality for price for my systems.

[GeneralZod]

I like AMD more, but I'm reserving judgement until the release of Intel's Conroe (http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=794&cid=1) :)

Edit:

For a laptop, I'd definitely go with a Pentium M.

[zenwhen]

Intel, because of this:

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713

AMD's performance leading days will grind to a halt when Conroe hits, and the days when AMD was a cheaper choice came to an end a long while back.

If I had bought before I heard of Conroe, I would have bought AMD, but I don't see the point when Conroe is going to smash everything they have to offer and do so while consuming less power.

[Spano]

The question should be "which chip runs linux better"

[Stormy Eyes]

Isn't AMD gear cheaper?

[NeghVar]

Isn't AMD gear cheaper?

Its getting more expensive, although right now I think they are pretty close.


AMD's performance leading days will grind to a halt when Conroe hits, and the days when AMD was a cheaper choice came to an end a long while back.

Ya they will lead for a week or two then AMD will release its next line and it will crush it. Its the way it works.

Also when buying a processor you need to consider other things light heat output and how well your cooling system can get it out of the case. Its all fine and dandy if you have the greatest gear but if you box if hot enough to boil water then you have some serious problems.

[ice60]

hi, here's an interview with Dirk Hohndel from Intel. it's really good :)

http://tllts.org/dl.php?episode=128

[zenwhen]

Ya they will lead for a week or two then AMD will release its next line and it will crush it. Its the way it works.
According to their own roadmaps, AMD doesn't have anything near ready to even compete with Conroe, so Intel will be holding the lead for a while.

[mstlyevil]

AMD has had the performance lead for roughly 1-1/2 years. I believe when the Conroe comes out it will have the performance lead for about 6 months to a year if you look at AMD's roadmap. Even though Intel is not adopting hypertransport yet, the very large cache sizes are going to make a huge difference in how well Intel CPU's perform. AMD is going to have to increase it's cache sizes and continue to improve hypertransport if they want the performance crown back.

If you abosolutely need a high performing pc right now, there is no other choice but a AMD X2 processor. If you can wait 3-6 months for that high performance computer, then Intel will be the right choice when they release the Conroe. Personally, I am not loyal to either company, though I have owned more AMD systems than Intel. I choose what will give me the best price vs performance factor at the time of my purchase.

Laptops are Pentium M all the way unless it is a desktop replacement.

[xXx 0wn3d xXx]

In terms of performance, AMD wins. Their processors are cutting edge while Intel is still using technology from 2-3 years ago. I think that AMD will eventually start selling more cpus then Intel. BTW: I have used only Intel machines up tothis point. This is my first computer with an AMD processor.

[Sirin]

I'm reserving judgement until the release of Intel's Conroe (http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=794&cid=1) :)


Forget that. Give me the Kentsfield. :cool:

[ice60]

if you listen to the ogg i linked to Dirk Hohndel talks about something from Intel which out performs everything by a long, long way. it runs very, cool and very fast without using much power. i don't think it's Conroe, but something far better, but as i'm not really into harware i'm not sure if he mentioned the name :rolleyes:

[htinn]

AMD beats Intel in the *real* world. Intel wins in the phony PR BS world.

[Ob1]

People who argue of things like this are just the hardcore gamers

I'm using a modern Intel CPU it's fast enough for me.

[Qrk]

I have an Athlon XP 2600 ... arguably the chip that let AMD take Intel's lead away from them. I think the XP was AMD's rebirth, Intel couldn't get it's Pentium 4's to match.

I've always heard that Intels are better for laptops as they tend to run cooler. I have a desktop... but it does seem to run hot with the AMD. As an aside, thats probably why Apple went intel instead of AMD, as Apple seems to sell more laptops.

In a couple of years I may upgrade to a nicer processor. But with Linux, why should I? I don't need anything to run Vista. As long as I can run XFCE, I'll always be able to get a modern desktop.

[dasunst3r]

While Intel has a broader instruction set, it is expensive. I prefer AMD because they are cheaper and offer pretty much the same performance (if not better).

[John.Michael.Kane]

AMD has it market, and use. INTEL has it's market, and use. there will never be a onesize fits all cpu. you will always have those who feel one is better then the other. both cpu's have their shortcomings. at the very least you can hope for a happy medium.


Just my thoughts.

[NeghVar]

Just a little to the side here, not to much though. Anyone here any more about the anti-trust suit against intel? I havnt seen anytin since they first submitted the complaint

[rado_london]

I voted for Intel simply because I love them. They support the CPUs I need.

[Omnios]

I talked to a teckie a few months back and he stated that AMD purchased intell teck to make there chips run cooler wich is an issue as he stated he gets a lot of AMD in where the motherboard is litterly melted. Other than that AMD seems to have a lot of advantages but is pricier. So back to the comment better than what or rather what do you want and what do you want to spend.

[Lovechild]

I think Intel has the idea right, lower power consumption - however that is a recent change from years of the P4 design.

I just got a new machine and it features an AMD64 X2 chip because for the entire system the best bang for my buck was the AMD64 X2 if I wanted a dual core system. The Intel dual core setups were simply to expensive and impractical.

I'm very happy with my system, I just wish it was quieter under load

[drizek]

holy crap, intel is gettings its *** handed to it in this poll.

The one thing i like about them is their centrino thing. They have opensource linux drivers for their wifi and integrated video, so it is much easier to use than amd turion which has discrete ATI chips and broadcom wifi.

[sophtpaw]

holy crap, intel is gettings its *** handed to it in this poll.

The one thing i like about them is their centrino thing. They have opensource linux drivers for their wifi and integrated video, so it is much easier to use than amd turion which has discrete ATI chips and broadcom wifi.


Someone made the point earlier - better for what? and what suits Linux best should be the question. I'm not an AMD or Intel devotee. I've had both. This last weekend i bought a new system at a computer fair, as my previous system (Athlone XP this time as it happens-Intel before that- melted down)
I'm not a hardware geek and hadn't kept up with teh changes.

I told people at the stall that i'd be installing a Linux os and what i'd be doing with it. Again and again i heard. "go with Intel," "More than what you need and it's more stable."
For the same same system, comparatively, the Intel came out cheaper by some £30/£40 so that swung it for me too finally. I now have an Intel (R) 4 processor on a 775 socket, on an Asus motherboard, in a small case and it is humming away very quitely in the corner. I'm happy enough. The impression i get with AMD's is that they are particulary suited for gaming; now that isn't exactly Linux's forte now is it? so i'm surprised so many on this thread are that keen on AMD's. What games are people playing on AMD that they couldn't on an Intel? but a discussion of games is probably another topic/thread alltogether


--
sophtpaw

[mstlyevil]

Someone made the point earlier - better for what? and what suits Linux best should be the question. I'm not an AMD or Intel devotee. I've had both. This last weekend i bought a new system at a computer fair, as my previous system (Athlone XP this time as it happens-Intel before that- melted down)
I'm not a hardware geek and hadn't kept up with teh changes.

I told people at the stall that i'd be installing a Linux os and what i'd be doing with it. Again and again i heard. "go with Intel," "More than what you need and it's more stable."
For the same same system, comparatively, the Intel came out cheaper by some £30/£40 so that swung it for me too finally. I now have an Intel (R) 4 processor on a 775 socket, on an Asus motherboard, in a small case and it is humming away very quitely in the corner. I'm happy enough. The impression i get with AMD's is that they are particulary suited for gaming; now that isn't exactly Linux's forte now is it? so i'm surprised so many on this thread are that keen on AMD's. What games are people playing on AMD that they couldn't on an Intel? but a discussion of games is probably another topic/thread alltogether


--
sophtpaw

With the release of the Athlon64 X2, The AMD is best for gaming just isn't true any more. Go look up the benchmarks on the net including at Intel fan sites and you will see the X2 outperforms all Intel chipsets in almost everything. Also the current generation Athlon64 cpu's run far cooler than the P4 and consume quite a bit less power. That is the current situation when it comes to cpu's.

In a few months this is changing because Intel is scrapping the antiquated P4 for a new generation CPU called Conroe. The Conroe is based on the Pentium M and the Pentium III. It is going to have less and shorter pipelines and a lot bigger cache's. The preliminary benchmarks so far show a 10-20% increase in processing power over current champs the Athlon CPU's. Your tech friends really need to brush on their facts before giving anymore advice on current cpu architectures.

This is why I just did not vote in the poll because it is ever changing on who has the overall best cpu's. I personally recommend what has the best price vs overall performance at the time.

[rfruth]

Its 6 of one half dozen of the other for day-to-day use if money and heat output is no object ...

[drizek]

yes, mstly is right.

the p4 is a hot, inefficient and slow single core 32bit cpu.

the A64 is a cooler, faster, dual core 64bit cpu.

If your p4 cost more than a similair A64, there is a damn good reason for it. For a desktop, AMD is by far the best choice for just about everything.

For laptops, i know that intels are great(which is why i bought one). Ive never used an amd turion but i imagine it runs quite well with linux as well. Once amd releases their new line of turions i think they will have the upper hand. Compared to intels core duo, they will be 64bit and they have a far better memory architecture due to their on-die memory controller. Intels FSB is a huge bottleneck and amd's mobile cpus are going to pwn intel until they start using an on-die memory controller. This feature was on their roadmap but they took it off recently.In a couple months, amd will take the mobile crown from intel and they will keep it till halfway through 2007 at the very least.

[sophtpaw]

With the release of the Athlon64 X2, The AMD is best for gaming just isn't true any more. Go look up the benchmarks on the net including at Intel fan sites and you will see the X2 outperforms all Intel chipsets in almost everything. Also the current generation Athlon64 cpu's run far cooler than the P4 and consume quite a bit less power. That is the current situation when it comes to cpu's.

In a few months this is changing because Intel is scrapping the antiquated P4 for a new generation CPU called Conroe. The Conroe is based on the Pentium M and the Pentium III. It is going to have less and shorter pipelines and a lot bigger cache's. The preliminary benchmarks so far show a 10-20% increase in processing power over current champs the Athlon CPU's. Your tech friends really need to brush on their facts before giving anymore advice on current cpu architectures.

This is why I just did not vote in the poll because it is ever changing on who has the overall best cpu's. I personally recommend what has the best price vs overall performance at the time.


Looks like i wasted my money again then- darn ](*,) #-o

--
sophtpaw

[mstlyevil]

Looks like i wasted my money again then- darn ](*,) #-o

--
sophtpaw

Not really. If your pc performs to your expectations and you are happy with it, you got your moneys worth. :mrgreen: ;)

[nickle]

This is an amazing thread. It starts with a simple but ill-posed question which is impossible to answer rationally.

Nevertheless, a huge majority go for AMD over Intel.

It is my guess this must reflect the impact of market image ... It is frightening to think how hard it is to escape the subtle influence of advertising and marketing...

[psychicdragon]

I have intel chips in both my PC (P3 1 Ghz) and my laptop (1.66 Ghz Core Duo). They work fine for me.

When I was looking at laptops a few months back it seemed to me that AMD wasn't really an option. Very few laptops seem to come with AMD chips. I ended up getting a ThinkPad and am very happy with it.

[GeneralZod]

Nevertheless, a huge majority go for AMD over Intel.

It is my guess this must reflect the impact of market image ... It is frightening to think how hard it is to escape the subtle influence of advertising and marketing...

If this were the case, I'd expect a landslide in favour of Intel - Intel adverts are very common (even in adverts for Dell computers, you get the Intel "Dum dum dum dum!" jingle), whereas I don't recall ever seeing a single advert for AMD.

[dasunst3r]

Just an aside: I'm surprised how rational people are in this thread! I remember participating in a similar one about... five years ago in which Intel and AMD fans would have a flamewar whenever a thread like this started up (I started it -- I was wondering what processor to get... LOL).

[nickle]

If this were the case, I'd expect a landslide in favour of Intel - Intel adverts are very common (even in adverts for Dell computers, you get the Intel "Dum dum dum dum!" jingle), whereas I don't recall ever seeing a single advert for AMD.

Market presence and market image are two very different things...

It appears that AMD have the technological foot ahead at the moment in the development leap-frog game. They are also charging a premium price for this, in contrast to the past where they generally tended to under-peg Intel price wise. In any case we are simply looking at a snapshot of an interesting competion between two corporate giants. Real competition is good when it happens.

In terms of market image, it is my impression that AMD has somehow got the brand image of the underdog with the better technology. I am in no position to judge whether this image is justified, but I am certain it rings well with the linux community which will probably always back the underdog.

Incidently, I voted for AMD in the poll, although I really don't know why apart from the fact perhaps I have an XP. This is clearly not a rational decision. I am simply surprised with the contractions between my "emotional" (brand loyalty etc)assessment and the "rational" (real technical difference) assesment and that is the point I wanted to make....

[drizek]

AMD's chips ARE superior though. Its not about image, just look at the benchmarks and see for yourself. amds really arent more expensive than intels, and if they were then theres a very good reason for it.

I bought an intel pentium m because it was better than amd at the time, but if i were to buy a new laptop a few months from now i would probably go with amd.

[mstlyevil]

Just an aside: I'm surprised how rational people are in this thread! I remember participating in a similar one about... five years ago in which Intel and AMD fans would have a flamewar whenever a thread like this started up (I started it -- I was wondering what processor to get... LOL).

The original question and the poll could have been inflamatory (Even if it was not intentional). I am proud of the way people have responded and rose to the occasion to discuss the technical differences of the differing CPU's. It reflects very well on this community to set aside it's emotions and have a rational discussion about Intel vs AMD.

Now which one you would buy really depends on what you are going to be using it for and when you are going to buy.

For a laptop-Intel Pentium M or the Core Duo. AMD just can not match these (yet) in the laptop.

In the destop-AMD Athlon64 X2 if you are buying a new computer today. If you are buying later this year then the Intel Conroe may be the processor to have. I am still waiting for good benchmarks for AMD's new socket that supports DDR2. It could close the gap that Conroe so far looks like it is going to create in the preliminary benchmarks on the net. This is an exciting time when it comes to CPU technology now that Intel is going to make a come back in performance.

[didobuntu]

Well I think for Desktops, the best is AMD, at least the 4800X2, although I personally have a Pentium :confused:

And for Laptops, Definitely Intel (Centrino Core Duo oblige) ... the Turion evolution seems to be in a sleep mode (sadely:-k ).