AMD vs INTEL

[jerjim]

I am deciding whether to acquire an AMD or Intel based system. Will appreciate any advice.

I develop programs in VB6 and Visual Interdev on Windows 2000.

Thanks in Advance.

 

[butchrecon]

This is a BIG debate on this and many other forums. You will have NO problem running either Processor with no problems. You will recieve points of view from many users. Some bashing AMD, some bashing INTEL. It all boils down to personal preference and proce. AMD processors for their price are VERY effective and strong processors. Great for gaming and home computers. INTEL are also very strong BUT more expensive. They are very effective for High end workstations and servers. So basically go with what you can afford and read many reviews before making your choice. I reccomend AMD myself.

James Collins
Computer Hardware Engineer
A+, MCP

email: butchrecon@skyenet.net

 

[butchrecon]

Also check out the FAQ RISC vs CISC/Intel vs AMD
faq602-788

Its a shameless plug (I wrote it) James Collins
Computer Hardware Engineer
A+, MCP

email: butchrecon@skyenet.net

 

[CitrixEngineer]

I was pointed to this article, which should be of great interest to anyone considering the same issue

http://www.emulators.com/pentium4.htm

This guy bashes Intel using persuasive benchmarks.

...looks like AMD for my next computer project

 

[Karl Blessing]

If you are considering a Athlon Tbird (which for some strange reason has outperformed the P4 with similar setups) I would look into that, because AMD currently are much cheaper, but performs as good or better than the Intel product.

I would stay away from DDR memory at this point, as the performance gain, and the price are not exactly worth it at this moment, for the best memory in my opinion, I would pick up a stick or two , of 256Meg PC133 7.5ns CAS2 memory (you can get ECC as well, slows you down just a tiny bit, but ECC = Error Checking and Correcting, good for a more stable system) from crucial.com.

my system specs are (and I am a developer, gammer, and Audio listening as well)

AMD Thunderbird 1Ghtz (200FSB)
(2) 256Meg PC133 7.5ns Cas2 ECC memory
126Gigs Total HDD space (60G ATA/100, 61G ATA/66, 6.4Gig Backup drive)
5xDVD/32xCD
16x10x40 CDrw
Visiontek Geforce3
SoundBlaster Live! X-Gammer 5.1
[with Cambridge DTT2200 5.1 Speakers]
Maxcool server tower case
10/100 nic for cable.
etc

you can see pictures of the system on my site (my signature) should be under "gallery" as "current machine..."

Prior to the K7 (athlon classic) I've been pretty much with intel, since the K6-2 were in my opinion as stable as a tetonic plate. The Duron is also a very good option to consider, the duron is the same as the Tbird, only with 64K cache, instead of 256K, much cheaper in price.

The watercooled system I had was a Duron 800. I got rid of that guy, as I felt more comfortible with air cooling, also wanted a faster processor Karl Blessing aka kb244{fastHACK}

 

[batchoychoy]

Stability and compatibility--- Intel. Speed and affordability--- AMD. Be warned though that if you live in a tropical country, your AMD might get a little too hot. Im an AMD user myself. A satisfied customer though I had to improvise a little by adding cooling fans to the processor and an exhaust fan at the back of the casing.

 

[AZeemeri]

I'd go for the Athlon. In fact I did several times...
Much cheaper and better accoring to several benchmark tests we done.
Just keep the AMD cool, and then it is cool

 

[age]

One comparison I read in a pro-music mag stated that the Intel P4 needed so much cooling that it produced a noise level that was comparable to heavy traffic road noise! Might also be worth considering when you make your decision...

 

[compuser]

Personally after using Intel for years I switched to AMD for price and performance.

 

[philanrandi]

price versus speed & usability my choice would be amd!))
youre choice is youres!!

 

[DeanSpencer]

I will keep it short as I have bashed AMD enough til I am blue in my face. Seen too many bad things happen with AMD chips. As far as price, I was comparing a 1.4ghz Intel and AMD. Found I could buy the AMD chip for 20 dollars less than Intel. The motherboard was about 20 dollars less than Intel mb. Ram was WAY more expensive for the Intel, but you also get a bus speed off almost double of the AMD and that is when you DO use RDRAM. A+ MCP
deans@bellsouth.net

 

[Guest_imported]

I have had the pleasure of pitting AMD against Intel for several years now. The DURON and ATHLON offerings are such great value-for-money that EVERYONE should be using them !
INTEL has had the monopoly in the CPU arena for so long that their pricing just is'nt honest. The question everyone should be asking themselves is : Do I REALLY want to pay 38% MORE for a CPU which is almost 40% LESS powerful just so that I can have the 'Intel Inside' logo on my PC ??
This little exercise in rhetoric will make the decision on your next CPU extremely simple .....

 

[Maruis]

I will not say what is bad or good,there is a question I have......

Why is it that you mostly see questions/problems on AMD instead of Intel?
Then I ask which is the better processor?

Have Fun

 

[dakota81]

To answer the guy above me, you see more AMD questions/problems because AMD is the only chip that techies will buy. =)

Anyone who knows anything about computers will inevitably choose AMD over intel because you simply cannot beat the price/performance ratio. Those who buy intel processors are either businesses who just say "give me some computers that will run", or they are simple people who buy the fastest P4 just to play Solitaire on.

What I find interesting is that it was intel's confidence in it's complete dominance over the industry that led to Compaq helping out AMD to develop the Athlon processor.

I just can't wait until Nvidia comes out with their nForce chipset, built to support the Athlon only, because intel did not supply them with the needed technical documents. It's great seeing intel crash and burn; but that's just my opinion.

 

[butchrecon]

True AMD is more cost effective. True AMD is Faster in most cases than Intel. Without a doupt that AMD is an overall better processor than Intel for the Money. This unforyunatly at this point in time is more for the home PC market. I have yet to see very many STABLE AMD domain servers and standard servers. For this arena Intel is the DOMANANT one. Does that imply Intel is better? Yes FOR THE SERVER MARKET ONLY. The PIII and P4 Xeon processors are THE best server (NOT including RISC Servers). BUT....

AMD has plaans to venture into this market and HOPEFULLY take control of it as well. Does this mean that Intel should fall. NO. The competition from both AMD and Intel has produced the most cost effective PC market in history.

As I stated in an earlier post though I suggest MD for the Home PC. James Collins
Systems Support Engineer
A+, MCP

email: butchrecon@skyenet.net

Please let us (Tek-tips members) know if the solutions we provide are helpful to you. Not only do they help you but they may help others.

 

[butchrecon]

Sorry about the spelling abve. I forgot to proof read. James Collins
Systems Support Engineer
A+, MCP

email: butchrecon@skyenet.net

Please let us (Tek-tips members) know if the solutions we provide are helpful to you. Not only do they help you but they may help others.

 

[butchrecon]

oops I did it again. %-) James Collins
Systems Support Engineer
A+, MCP

email: butchrecon@skyenet.net

Please let us (Tek-tips members) know if the solutions we provide are helpful to you. Not only do they help you but they may help others.

 

[dakota81]

No stable AMD servers? That would be more of a Microsoft's NT problem.

Three and a half years ago I put in a Novell 4.11 server in where I work with an AMD K5-PR166 CPU as its brain. This server has been down for a grand total of one day since I set it up - a lightning strike blew out the motherboard's interrupt controller. It's a shame the corporate world went NT and left Novell behind...

Ah well, AMD has had it's troubles the past years - until the KT133A chipset came out, Athlon systems just were not a stable solution at all, and I would have agreed with the pro-intel arguements.

It's kinda fun, though, arguing AMD vs. intel, AMD people know that they have the better product, while intel people won't admit that they're ignorant. =)

For me, I don't like intel because all they seem to be doing is putting more MHz into their processors while AMD has been redesigning the inner workings of the CPU. This started back with 3D-Now which was what put AMD on the map as a true contender in the CPU market. The Pentium!!!'s (exclamation points instead of III) selling point was that it would accellerate the internet, which was a far cry because the biggest limiting factor is the modem, not the processor. The P3 was weak internally considering AMD's K6-III could give up 100MHz to the P3 and still outperformed it. AMD continues to develop the Athlon, giving it the fastest 200MHz bus speed, multiple floating-point pipelines, and other enhancing features. Intel develops the P4 which turns out to be an engineering flop, unable to outperform the Athlon chips. All intel has done with the P4 is gotten the Blue Man Group to parade around a giant orange 4.

Intel's itanium is finally a decent chip for a change, but AMD is getting set with their Clawhammer and Sledgehammer CPU's which will finally put intel behind by a long shot.

And don't get me started with the Celeron...