Which CPU do you like best?

 

Intel...for now. The P4EE is just a phenomenal workhorse chip and when combined with the proper components in a system, can produce obscene benchmark and real world performance.

The one thing about the AMD chips is that they have traditionally been at a heat disadvantage. However, huge strides have been made in recent years and I think they will allow AMD to continue to compete with the Intel chips. I think it'll be a while before AMD blows Intel away though.

 

Intel is superior at the moment.

 

My P4 is a monster, but I'm a computer n00b...

 

I've always owned machines with Intel. Not sure I'd know the difference with the standar apps that I use.

 

I say the comparisons right now are somewhat pointless until either one of the two happens:

1. 64-bit software really kicks in.
2. Multi-cores kick in.

Then we can come back and do some CPU comparisons.

Right now, it's just a "speed" competition, there's no real technology behind it.

 

So who wins in these cases? Or do we know?

Clutch, who can feel himself turning into Larch....

 

Then it depends on their implementation on their chips.

I mean, there's already 64-bit software out there, so it's a matter of making the chips either faster (relatively), more capable (dunno - like SSE4 or something), or cheaper.

As for multi-core, things like performance, heat and power are always there for comparison.

 

If you are building it yourself I woudl go with AMD because you get a better price on parts/motherboards etc. But from most major computer companies the AMD processors are only for their entry level computers.

The main point is that they will keep duking it out for a long long time and sometimes AMD will have an advantage and sometimes Intel but the main point that it's good for all of us as long as AMD and Intel both have a decent market share because they will both be working to come out with newer and faster processors.

 

But if you're building it yourself with an AMD, you need to make sure that you are good a setting up an effective cooling scheme. AMD chips are notorious for excessive heat and will likely create some issues for you.

 

I'll take the chip that will improve my PW speed...

I would go with Intel for now, but seems like AMD is making headway in the market.

Junkster, who would buy AMD to save cash

 

For that, you actually don't really need a new CPU.

What you really need are the following items:

Plane ticket.
Cash.
Lockpicking set.
Cat5E patch cable.
Decent laptop.

Now, how to use them:

Use the plane ticket to fly to the closest main router for A-TSX.com. Then use the cash to pay for the taxi ride or rental car to get to the router.

Then use the lockpicking set to sneak onto the facilities.

Use the patch cable to link up the laptop to the router.

Then, you go and PW away at maximum speed.

 

Cute.

 

Well said!

 

Intel > * enough said.

 

id get the amd as it is cheaper. the intel is better, but not much. amd is hands down the better bang for the buck. you cant really go wrong w/ either.

 

until intel lowers its cost for its processors i think amd is the best way to go.

 

Both of mine are AMD Athlons

 

The CPU brand doesn't matter to me. What I do care about is the choice of OS.

 

There's always a choice. And in your case, much more than one.

 

If buy my own computer parts, therefore I prefer AMD. I think of it like my TSX, great performance, good value. Intel would be like BMW, great performance, poor value

I like AMD based on brand loyalty more than anything, I see Intel screwing up/recalling chips too often. Plus, it helps to root for the little guy, if it weren't for AMD, who knows how much Intel would sell processors for.

And I hate Intel for supporting RDRAM

 

AMD all the way.

 

my computer (800 AMD Athlon MMX) is pretty old as i've had it for about 4 years, but still suits me for my day-to-day needs and is still pretty fast. AMD is an incredible value, though. i like intels, but my next computer (which i'll be getting in the near future) will be AMD as well.

if i'm not mistaken, doesn't the latest AMD still have a better FSB than the latest Intel? please let me know if that is not the case.

 

Currently, I believe Intel has the faster FSB, at 1066 MHz quad-pumped (up-coming chip, currently still at 800 MHz quad-pumped).

Though mind you, AMD's got their integrated memory controller, so FSB isn't really as important there.

 

I've flip-flopped (or is that mflop-ed?) between Intel & AMD over the years, depending on which one was offering the best bang for the buck at the time I was upgrading. My first AMD chip was a 386DX-40 when the fastest Intel 386 was 33MHz. I switched to Intels when the early Celerons were the OC ticket. My main PC at home currently has an AMD. I'll probably buy another next time around. Seems to be the best value when upgrading. I don't think I've actually bought a complete PC since about '89.

I think part of the reason I like AMD is not just that they offer a good deal, but that I just like the idea of the fiesty underdog David keeping Goliath on his toes. Competition is a good thing.

 

My first computer was a PII and the rest were AMD chips... But if I were to build a server, I'd use Intel. For an everyday use computer, I'd get whatever is cheaper.

 

I've been in the AMD camp since the 486 days. I'll probably build an Athlon64 rig next year when the price point of the chip drops below $100.

 

ahhhhh soooooo.......

thanks!

sleeper, who is just homer in the 1st line of this post, nothing more. "all hail king homer."

 

Just bought an Athlon64 based system... I'm no expert, but it's fast

 

Amd

 

That's no longer the case. The P4s dissapate more heat than AMD 64 chips do nowadays.

 

I personally just built a AMD64 system. The integrated memory controller and extra registers really help for day-to-day computing.

Intel turned me off when they went to their "NetBurst" architecture for the P4 series. Essentially they made their chip less efficient in an attempt to increase clock speed frequency...in other words, it's a marketing gimmick.

The revamped P3, a.k.a. the Pentium 4M is wonderous though. Very very cool.

All in all, Intel still has a significant lead in mobile computing. With desktops, it's 50/50. Although AMD chips, boards, and memory combos are typically cheaper by a bit thank Intels.

The nice thing is, in a year, once a 64-bit consumer operating system and hardware drivers are fully mature, instant 20-30% speed boost in dedicated processor apps.

 

I get in enough trouble with my trusty Celeron 500...