Intel vs AMD comparison

[javalord]

Multi-tasks, absolutely winner is intel but in gaming, AMD is the best choice. However, intel has released Intel 6xxx which maybe improve in gaming.

Thats not even true anymore, most those "multi-tasking" tests are very synthetic and simplistic for what I've seen. If hyperthreading was so damn good, apart from the fact that they've hit manufacturing limits, why else are they releasing dual core CPUs , and why havent AMD released a HT CPU?

Reason? The AMD's pipeline is being utilized more of the time than Intel's, so it has no spare space to allow another process to quickly get a bit of work done whilst its waiting for its pipeline to clear.

[StormPC]

Also, take a look at the number of processes every Win XP (Win 2K, etc...) computer runs and then you'll get an idea of just how silly HT is. There are anywhere from 15 to 50+ processes and as many as 200+ threads running even when no user applications are launched. All of these get their slice of time. Having two virtual processors instead of one that runs twice as fast simply makes no sense. It is a marketing gimmick and nothing more. Most applications run faster on a P4 when HT is disabled.