Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 20

Thread: AMD or Intel

  1. #1
    Admin (Ret'd)
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    18,481
    Thanks
    1,016
    Thanked
    3,208 times in 2,281 posts

    AMD or Intel

    I don't want to ignote the old classic argument, but for a new system, I'm interested in knowing whether people recommend AMD or Intel, these days.

    I'm looking for a decent overall performance level, but not speed at any cost. In other words, what it costs isn't really the issue, but I want whatever it is to be cost-effective. It also wants to be reasonably future-proof, and certainly Vista capable. This purchase will include hard drives, video cards, new PSU, etc, but at the moment, I'm just interested in the mobo/processor choice.

    Usage will be generic stuff (office, accounting, browsing, etc), but with a few demanding applications, too, such as digital imaging (Photoshop), video editing and voice recognition. I play games, but am not an avid gamer so I'm not interested in high-end gaming video cards, etc.

    Whatever I get will be either dual core or dual processor, though.

    So ..... AMD or Intel? And why?

    If AMD .... 939 or AM2, and why?

    If Intel ..... Conroe? Which one, and why?

    Anyone got any thoughts or recommendations?

  2. #2
    Banned Smokey21's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Stafford, Midlands
    Posts
    1,752
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Conroe, no doubt, id go for the E600 myself, for price/performance.

    As for the board, im not sure, don't think there's much choice. Gskill seems to be the best memory, DDR2 of course.

  3. #3
    Moderator chuckskull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    951
    Thanked
    690 times in 463 posts
    • chuckskull's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • 3570k @ 4.7 - H100i
      • Memory:
      • 32GB XMS3 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Samsung 850 Pro + 3TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980Ti Classified
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 700W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus VG278HE
      • Internet:
      • FTTC
    Right now intel has a massive performance lead. AM2 is just 939 with DDR2 basically.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Derbyshire
    Posts
    115
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • philipbain's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Biostar Intel P45
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 @ 3.33GHz
      • Memory:
      • 8GB Corsair DDR2-800
      • Storage:
      • 64GB Kingston SSD + 4.6TB of storage across 4 hard drives
      • Graphics card(s):
      • ATi Radeon HD4850
      • PSU:
      • X-Clio 485W
      • Case:
      • Akasa Zen (black)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 22" Acer P225HQ LCD 1920x1080
      • Internet:
      • BT ADSL Max Option 3 Unlimited
    If you want to base your decision on benchmarks as well as people's advice and opinions then check out the Tom's Hardware CPU Charts that have just been updated with the lastest batch of Intel and AMD CPUs. From these you'll see a demonstration of the performance lead that Intel now have with the Core 2 Duo CPU, though I still wouldnt touch a Pentium 4 or Pentium D with a ****ty stick, they are massively inefficient and grossly underperform.
    "There's nothing nice about Steve Jobs and there's nothing evil about Bill Gates" - Chuck Peddle, father of the 6502 and the Commodore PET

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    101
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    • alcor's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P5W DH DELUXE
      • CPU:
      • E6600
      • Memory:
      • 4Gb (4X1GB) Corsair TwinX XMS2, DDR2 PC5400 (667)
      • Storage:
      • 320GB Seagate Barracuda + 2x 500GB Seagate Barracuda
      • Graphics card(s):
      • XFX 8800GTX
      • PSU:
      • 650W Enermax Infinity
      • Case:
      • ANTEC P180
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2407WFP
      • Internet:
      • 8MB SKY
    I just bought an E6600 Asus P5W DH Deluxe combo, absouluely stonking performance, and it runs Vista beta 2 with no problems (other than lacking the odd driver). Well worth it id say.

    Tho keep an eye on the new Core 2 mobos, they r gettin better all the time.

  6. #6
    Flat cap, Whippets, Cave. Clunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    11,056
    Thanks
    360
    Thanked
    725 times in 459 posts
    one thing that not many early conroe adopters seem to complain about (apart from me) is the heat generated by the overall setup, compared to an AMD 939 for example. the cpu temps are considerably higher than the 939 chips, add onto that a hot northbridge and you have yourself a toaster.

    the heat factor aside, if its the first upgrade you have done for a while, i reckon you will be happily gobsmacked with the speed of a conroe system. an example of video editing speed when compared to my old 939 system would be CCE 4 passes is now just under 40 mins, whereas on the 939 it was a couple of hours, and the 939 was no slouch, it was an opteron dual core @ 2.7ghz

    motherboards are a bit rubbish at the moment for conroe, they are getting better, but theres a bug to suit everyone it seems.

    if price is a major factor, then AMD is definately worth a look, but you can also build a conroe system for a relatively small amount, complete with swatter for the bugs.


  7. #7
    Banned Smokey21's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Stafford, Midlands
    Posts
    1,752
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    How are Conroe's hotter? They consume a lot less wattage, and they are 65nm. You must have a problem, as there a lot cooler than X2 939's.

  8. #8
    Moderator chuckskull's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    7,713
    Thanks
    951
    Thanked
    690 times in 463 posts
    • chuckskull's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z77-D3H
      • CPU:
      • 3570k @ 4.7 - H100i
      • Memory:
      • 32GB XMS3 1600mhz
      • Storage:
      • 256GB Samsung 850 Pro + 3TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 980Ti Classified
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic M12 700W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 500R
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus VG278HE
      • Internet:
      • FTTC
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey21
    How are Conroe's hotter? They consume a lot less wattage, and they are 65nm. You must have a problem, as there a lot cooler than X2 939's.
    I'm guessing at 3150mhz they're hotter

    At stock clocks with decent cooling they dont rise much above ambient, but who wants stock clocks

  9. #9
    Senior Member kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    28,997
    Thanks
    1,473
    Thanked
    2,904 times in 2,353 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte X58A UD3R rev 2
      • CPU:
      • Intel Xeon X5680
      • Memory:
      • 12gb DDR3 2000
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2311H
      • Internet:
      • O2 8mbps
    Actually I wouldn't recommend a conroe - I think you're still paying a price premium for them. Better to get an allendale (2mb cache core 2 duo) as they are very good value for the performance - you don't *need* anything faster really.

    As for why.. they're not much more than the AMD chips, but they do have a significant performance increase. They run cool, use little power, and now we're beginning to see a better range of motherboards from people like ASRock total system price will begin to come down as well.

  10. #10
    Banned Smokey21's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Stafford, Midlands
    Posts
    1,752
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by chuckskull
    I'm guessing at 3150mhz they're hotter

    At stock clocks with decent cooling they dont rise much above ambient, but who wants stock clocks
    Well, well my P2 400mhz, runs cooler than my Prescott at 6Ghz.

  11. #11
    Flat cap, Whippets, Cave. Clunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    11,056
    Thanks
    360
    Thanked
    725 times in 459 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey21
    How are Conroe's hotter? They consume a lot less wattage, and they are 65nm. You must have a problem, as there a lot cooler than X2 939's.
    do you have a conroe? im interested to know what temps you get at stock clocks.

    im on decent water cooling, and i can tell you now that even at stock, the system as a whole i.e. the overall case is hotter that when it had an AMD system inside it. thats aside from the asus boards reading around 6c more than they should.

    have a look round, theres very very few people that report temps of 26c idle 33c load, like with the AMD 939 chips.

    also, the AMD 939 chips just had a chipset, and that didnt get very hot, well with a stock cooler on, it did, but even when replaced with a passive zalman cooler, it was much less than the northbridge on the conroe boards, especially when overclocking.

  12. #12
    Banned Smokey21's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Stafford, Midlands
    Posts
    1,752
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    You gotta compare like for like.

    Conroe- Dual Core
    AMD 939- Single Core

    Of course 2 cores are gonna get hotter. And no i don't have a Conroe.

  13. #13
    WEEEEEEEEEEEEE! MadduckUK's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Lytham St. Annes
    Posts
    17,293
    Thanks
    649
    Thanked
    1,580 times in 1,006 posts
    • MadduckUK's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus A88XM-PLUS
      • CPU:
      • AMD 860K @4.45
      • Memory:
      • 16GB (4x4GB) PC3-12800
      • Storage:
      • 1x240GB Sandisk Extreme / 3x500GB RAID0 / 3GB Backup
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon 7870XT
      • PSU:
      • Corsair TX750w
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master Galdiator 600
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • DELL S2409W
      • Internet:
      • 3 One Plan
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey21
    Well, well my P2 400mhz, runs cooler than my Prescott at 6Ghz.
    and my via epia 800 runs cooler than your p2-400

    and why is the 939 your comparing a single-core as a like-for-like?!
    Quote Originally Posted by Ephesians
    Do not be drunk with wine, which will ruin you, but be filled with the Spirit
    Vodka

  14. #14
    Senior Member charleski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,586
    Thanks
    7
    Thanked
    52 times in 45 posts
    AMD and Intel are for wimps. Real men use a PDP-11.

  15. #15
    Flat cap, Whippets, Cave. Clunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    11,056
    Thanks
    360
    Thanked
    725 times in 459 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Smokey21
    You gotta compare like for like.

    Conroe- Dual Core
    AMD 939- Single Core

    Of course 2 cores are gonna get hotter. And no i don't have a Conroe.
    since when was an opteron 165/170 a single core?

    my point is that the system as a whole runs hotter with the conroe, that is simply going off the amount of heat that the pc chucks out.

    to illustrate the point....

    system is idling now, cpu is at 49c (asus probe) or 43c (core temp). no idea how accurate these are, but there is heat.

    northbridge is showing as 38c

    southbridge heatsink is warm to the touch, as are the heatsinks that cover the mosfets round the cpu, under load, these can get quite hot to the touch.

    admittedly, this is overclocked, with 1.4v going through the cpu and the rest is stock, apart from the ram which has 2v (stock is 1.9v).

    AMD setup.

    chipset always under 40 (with passive zalman heatsink mod)

    cpu 25-30c idle unlikely to go over 40c under load, again 1.4v

    ram @ stock

    this is in the same case with same airflow and same watercooling. the temp readings aside, i can feel the heat much more from the conroe system, even at stock.

    make of that what you will

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    305
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    0 times in 0 posts
    if you fancy a gamble consider buying an AM2 system now while theyre not wanted and wait for K8L to come out

    it is a big gamble though from the rumours... and DDR2 seems to be improving by the minute, but you could have the last laugh at the bandwagon-jumpers

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. PSU Calculator
    By Hullz-Modz in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 146
    Last Post: 10-04-2008, 07:07 PM
  2. AMD: We've got a two year lead over Intel
    By Steve in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-09-2005, 02:44 PM
  3. AMD Japan Files Claims Against Intel in Japan
    By Steve in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-07-2005, 03:58 AM
  4. AMD vs. Intel: Intel CEO Addresses AMD Lawsuit
    By Steve in forum HEXUS News
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-07-2005, 01:03 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 28-06-2005, 11:06 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •