PDA

View Full Version : [SOLVED] AMD 64bit VS. Intel core duo



rattlerviper
November 27th, 2006, 05:58 AM
Can anyone give me the positives and negatives of these two processor types? I will be building a new system (already have amassed a few of the parts that rarely change in price at bargain prices) and want to build the best possible. BUT the problem is I don't quite understand which of these two is better for running Linux in the future??? My standard distro already supports dual core processors, but does not support 64 bit yet. They plan to introduce 64 bit before long. Where is Linux headed? Which of these 2 processors are more forward looking. I can deal with using a 64 bit processor as a 32 bit, but where is Linux computing headed as far as hardware needs?

RAV TUX
November 27th, 2006, 06:00 AM
not sure why this is in the backyard moving to the cafe.

foxmulder881
November 27th, 2006, 06:01 AM
Skip both of the CPUs you mentioned and go for a Core 2 Duo.

The way it's heading you ask, well that question could have a zillion different answers.

Basically, future for now is 64bit for both OS and CPUs.

My advice, don't go and buy a 32bit CPU when the option of 64bit is there.

rattlerviper
November 27th, 2006, 06:02 AM
not sure why this is in the backyard moving to the cafe.
I apologize...I forgot where I was at.

~LoKe
November 27th, 2006, 06:03 AM
No AMD processor can touch the core 2 at this point, and considering it supports both 32 and 64bit at the same time, you can't lose.

rattlerviper
November 27th, 2006, 06:08 AM
Skip both of the CPUs you mentioned and go for a Core 2 Duo.

The way it's heading you ask, well that question could have a zillion different answers.

Basically, future for now is 64bit for both OS and CPUs.

My advice, don't go and buy a 32bit CPU when the option of 64bit is there.Thank you...I had not even considered the core 2 duo. I was looking at my online retailer that I make most of my purchases through and was getting a headache trying to figure out Intel vs AMD let alone all the different chips that seem to be currently available. I just don't want to head down a path that will not last as long into the future. I love building computers, but I don't want to waste money building systems more often than necessary.

JLB
November 27th, 2006, 06:10 AM
Let the Chevy vs. Ford Debates begin !

My own opinion... My server systems get Intel and my desktop systems get AMD.
But it is really a Chevy vs. Ford thing. (to me).

~LoKe
November 27th, 2006, 06:18 AM
Let the Chevy vs. Ford Debates begin !

My own opinion... My server systems get Intel and my desktop systems get AMD.
But it is really a Chevy vs. Ford thing. (to me).

There's no debating it. I'm an AMD fanboy and I bought a Core 2 Duo because of the simple fact that the value to dollar ratio is just that much higher.

We'll have to wait for the quad core battle for AMD to come ahead.

Beamerboy
November 27th, 2006, 06:56 AM
No AMD processor can touch the core 2 at this point, and considering it supports both 32 and 64bit at the same time, you can't lose.
Yeah go intel and be hit with hardware DRM^W^WTrusted Computing.

Not sure if AMD are shipping it in their chips yet but I don't think they are. Someone will correct me if I am wrong though I expect.

Paladine

WalmartSniperLX
November 27th, 2006, 07:00 AM
AM3 IS ON THE WAYY!!!

But I would still go with the Core 2 Duo.

The main difference with the upcoming 'AM3' is ddr3 support, and the cpu will have memory controllers for both ddr2 and ddr3. And, its built to the exact layout as a am2 chip (940pin) so theyre backward compatible with am2 motherboards.

Well anyways enough said, the Core 2 Duo is the best thats out right now :mrgreen: 8)

chaosgeisterchen
November 27th, 2006, 07:22 AM
AMD really urgently needs a new killer processor to regain market share. At the moment there is no processor which can compete with the Intel Core2Dudo series. Even the 'small' E6300 processor beats the AMD FX-60 flagship in several benchmarks, the price of the former is around 180€, the latter costs around 600€+.

Yeah, you get get the power / price ratio?

rattlerviper
November 27th, 2006, 07:59 AM
I guess I am actually glad to here that Intel apears to be the way to go. when I was looking at CPUs they apear to have better pricing than AMD right now.

spockrock
November 27th, 2006, 08:19 AM
Actually I cant believe no one mentioned this but Intel Core Duos did not have EMT64 extensions officially, unofficially apparently the 64 bit hardware is there. The Core 2 Duos however do officially have the EMT64 instruction sets and is a feature.

So yeah if you want to compare 64 bit cpus, its the AMD64 or Opterons vs core 2 duo or pentium D.

ubeauty
November 28th, 2006, 10:02 AM
So yeah if you want to compare 64 bit cpus, its the AMD64 or Opterons vs core 2 duo or pentium D.
So, which of these will ubuntu run fastest on - given all else is equal...RAM, GHz, HDD, Apps, etc.etc.

drphilngood
November 28th, 2006, 11:24 AM
Yeah go intel and be hit with hardware DRM^W^WTrusted Computing.

Not sure if AMD are shipping it in their chips yet but I don't think they are. Someone will correct me if I am wrong though I expect.

Paladine

Sadly, AMD is also a member of the Trusted Computing Group (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing_Group).