AMD or INTEL????

Currently Intel, but only the Core 2 Duos.

I'm a huge AMD fan. Never have owned an Intel in my life. MOstly because as you say AMD has ALWAYS been bettter for gaming...

That has changed though. The Core 2 Duo is the premier processor for EVERYTHING at the moment. I'm sure AMD will counter back soon, but if you want a new system now, the Intel Core 2 Duo is the way to go...

I am still torn, because for my new system I am looking at both. My loyalty puts me @ AMD, but my gaming sense puts me at Intel, so it's tough.. I'll probably break my rule though and go Intel.. b/c performance wise the C2D can't be beat right now.

It's a good CPU. I have been looking at that and the 4600+ as well

BUT


the E6400 Core 2 Duo out peforms them both pretty much..

All numbers aren't huge, but still the Conroe is a better performer.

Really?
so, no amd?
what's so bad about amd right now then?

When I build I tend to build whoever is the hottest at the time. I own Intel, and I've own AMDs, my last buy was an AMD 4800+. I have the same approach to video cards, I own ATIs and I got nVidias, who ever is scoring highest at the time I buy, is who I go with.(got the 6800GT, then the X800, then the x1900XTX, currently I'm seriously eyeing the 8800GTX)

Right now, Intel is top dog and is equally priced to anything AMD has. In fact, I still can't believe AMD is trying to sell the FX60 at such a ridicolus price seeing how it's beaten by a chip half it's price. But those die hard AMD guys will buy whatever AMD sells themI guess.

My advice, is to try and avoid ever becoming overly partial to a particular product, whether it''s AMD or Intel or nVidia or ATI (Now AMD). Just look at the different benchmarks and performance numbers and buy the one that gives you what you want. If that's the fastest thing out, then go for that. If it's the best bang for the buck, then go for that.

Sometimes, the line between AMD and Intel is pretty thin and so it doesn't matter, right now, the line is crystal clear. Intel just performs best,At games, apps, you name it. In 6-9 months AMD, might be kicking Intel's ass. Which we should all be hoping that Amd's next offering blurs the line again, as we all need for Intel to have some strong competition.

The Core 2 Duo > any AMD processor out right now... plain and simple. Gaming, General Apps, etc..

Nothing is wrong with AMD, the C2D just performs better.

If seen out of context then it is Intels new Core arch. If you take price into consideration amd is the company of choice.

this is my PC which i'm deciding to buy:

AMD athlon 64 X2 4600+
ASUS M2N-SLI DELUXE, AM2,NF570SLI,DDR2,2xPCIe16
Corsair 1024MB, DDR2, 128MX64, XMS2-5400, C4 DDR2, HeatSpread
ASUS EN7600GS,256MB TVout,DVI-I,PCIe,Retail,HDTV
ASUS DVD 16x48 IDE Retail E616A3 Dual Panel Black/Zilver
and Vista home i allready have

Until you bring overclocking into consideration. I would love to bring my chip up to 2.5-2.98 mhz range, but this motherboard is locked. Least I can get a little bit more out of my RAM for free.

Well, that's a fair enough argument, but then that means the other AMD processors are also inferior chips. As the AMD 4600+ is twice the price and doesn't offer twice the performance to the 3800+. So do we say that any chip over $100 is a waste of money ? Since it won't deliever twice the performance and that after x amount, that's all the performance we really need to worry about ?

But what happens when games get harder and demands more ? Spend another $80 to get to where you could have been a year early ? But if the question is, what's the best chip for under $100 ? Then I would totally agree, AMD owns that market, just like Intel owns the $300+ market

budget please...

Nope. Theres an echo. And its killing me too.

Can´t argue with that. I consider the 4600 too expensive for its performance.

Spending money on PC components is a rather wasteful exercise anyway. Most components are outdated before they are fully assembled and can be bought for half the price a few months later. But then again, that´s half the fun of it.

Isn't it required to have this debate every day on a tech webtsite. I'm thinking the number of video game forums I've participated in and this seems to come up every 2 weeks, why shouldn't it be a daily thing on a hardware website ? You aren't suggesting people search the forums and read previous posts are you ? Because, all those other threads are different, My needs are special and I'm asking it in a way that's never been asked.

Well slog, I can agree with your stance on that. It does feel a little like I'm the hamster in the wheel when it comes to keeping the PC up todate
Though I think your time frames are a little shorter than is reality, but I understand the need for exaggeration to add dramatic affect, after all this is a tech forum and you just can't have enough drama :x Else it wouldn't be a tech forum

Please No!
Yeah, I also need some additional help: nVidia or ATI pls? What's the R600 release date? Is the R600 going to beat G80?

I thought AMD made C2D, and Intel made Athlon 64s?

Just so you guys know, most games use the AMD64 instruction sets which are obviously not on the Intel chips. Intel also has a slower memory controller since its on the motherboard. AMD has always had two markets, servers and gamers. Intel has crept up in the server market with the Xeon series, but the Opterons consume alot less power being favorable for data centers.

Please No!
Yeah, I also need some additional help: nVidia or ATI pls? What's the R600 release date? Is the R600 going to beat G80?



*Runs around pulling hair*
*taps shoulder* Exuse me sir, but I heard that the PS3 totally pwns any PC. Is that true?

Stupidest statement in awhile...if you read Tom's...you'll know that the lower end Athlons are still a great buy compared to the Pentium D. I realize this is an enthusiast website but...

PERFORMANCE IS NOT EVERYTHING.

There are other factors to consider...particularly upgradeability and PRICE. Oh, and if you own stock in AMD then by all means, buy an Athlon.

I said that once in my early years ... I have since come to regret it.

It may not be EVERYTHING, but it is a big thing.

Why regret spending $60 on what is still a viable CPU? If it meets your need...

Well then Mad_Murdock, perhaps we should get so anal as to bitch out the OP for not posting WHICH games he intends on playing. I believe that he wanted deliberation as to what the strengths and weaknesses are as well. Anyone who has to ask obviously isn't up on CPU's...so why not give him money saving options as well? Furthermore, forums are a place to discuss, not just answer sentences in a word. My comment was specifically directed at the "If you're building a new system now ignore AMD"...AMD may will soon release more chips so wouldn't waiting a bit also be a viable option? Don't be so hasty to throw your simple answers out there, educate the guy instead. Let him know that for mild gaming, a cheap CPU on AMD's new socket might also be an option. I don't think there's any harm in it. I do agree with OCing being excluded, unless the OPer happens to want to learn about OCing as well, maybe we could ask him? Or should we just assume to know everything he wants once again?

Totally meant 3DNOW

Oh! the irony of your post.
The irony surely wasn't lost on me.

but i only have like $200 to spend on a cpu so..
like one of you guys said for upgradeability as long if it is upgradable for a not that high price it's good to me