Intel or AMD for dual core processor??

[christiani]

I'm currently writing down lists of components to buy for my new pc build. However, I was always under the impression that AMD processors out-performed Intel processors. However, I've heard some people saying that Intel dual core processors vastly out-perform AMD dual core processors.
I just wondered what you guys think, before I go and buy the wrong type of motherboard

[k0nigen]

search for Intel Core2Duo - it outperforms the AMDs at the mo' but costs more

[danroyle]

if you are starting out a fresh build definitely go for intel core 2duo they do seem to be a lot faster than the amd x2 cpu's an c2d 6400 is on par with an amd fx 62 in benchmarks aand the fx is 500-600 while the intel is only £150 and they overclock well too

[jackvdbuk]

but costs more

hardly a Intel Core2Duo e6300 is about £110 and when overclocked is a beast! im saving up for this CPU so

[k0nigen]

hardly a Intel Core2Duo e6300 is about £110 and when overclocked is a beast! im saving up for this CPU so

I would say that C2D is much better value, but there's no denying that it costs more

[nichomach]

My system's based on an AMD dual core, but C2D hadn't been released when I built it. Based on the C2D Dell Optiplexes we've got at work, there's just no argument - C2D all the way at the moment.

[Fabula]

Until this summer, for the previous 5 years or so( awaiting refutation), AMD had the better processors.

Currently (and for at least 7months if not quite a bit longer) intel Core2duo (conroe) processors are better. Do not go for pentium4/8xx/9xx series as they are inferior to AMD systems.

AMD dual core processors were the best only 6 months ago, and are still very good for a budget system. Although they are only slightly cheaper than the core2s, the motherboards are significantly cheaper.

Unless you are on a very tight budget (sub £500 all in), you should be able to get a reasonable core2 system.

[john427]

Personally, I'd go for the Intel Core 2 Duo E6600, as it's the cheapest C2D processor with 4MB of L2 cache (rather than 2MB of all the models below it), and it costs significantly less than the E6700, which is the same processor, but with a multiplier of 10 instead of 9, giving a clockspeed of 2.67GHz as opposed to the 2.4GHz of the E6600. But using a decent cooler, you can overclock the E6600 to the same speeds as the E6700 and beyond. Although obviously you'll void your warranty doing so. Even without overclocking, the E6600 gets my vote on a performance-for-cost basis.
AMD 64X2 Processors are nowhere near the Core 2 Duos in performance terms.

[christiani]

I finally made my decision, and went for an Intel e6400 processor. It pains me to say it but it looks as though Intel are now the kings in town when it comes to processors