Intel or AMD?

Why is there such a big price difference on the AMD quad core and the Intel quad core?

I mean the 2.66 amd costs around 163€ and the Intel 2.66 costs around 209€. Why is there such a big difference?
115 answers Last reply
More about intel
  1. the market unevened with the arrival of the core2 and intel has charged a premium for their cpu since.

    if intel thinks it can gouge you, it will.

    amd on the other hand, has been playing underdog for awhile now. they need to entice people to come back to amd. they do this with a superior pricing scheme. intel has severly lowered its prices because of this.
  2. so i should choose amd?
  3. tisello said:
    Why is there such a big price difference on the AMD quad core and the Intel quad core?

    I mean the 2.66 amd costs around 163€ and the Intel 2.66 costs around 209€. Why is there such a big difference?


    I assume the comparison is to a i7-920. The i7 will be faster. It has hyperthreading which giives it the appearance of 8 cores. It also has a different internal architecture that will let it execute more instructions per base clock cycle.

    Look for some benchmark comparisons of the workload that you will have:
    http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3551&p=11
  4. if u want to be a good person, you will choose amd. (lol not really, but *I* think its a good idea to support AMD when I can.)

    if you dont care about doing whats "right." go with whatever tickles your fancy.

    i for one, am a huge amd supporter... however all my heavy purchases have been intel and nvidia lately.

    i bought an amd HTPC... does that make me a good person? haha.
  5. ^amd is the better choice for htpc anyway, integrated audio

    if its an i7 2.6v AMD 2.6 i7 is better

    anything else is amd, overall build cost with i7 will be alot more than amd.
  6. i say via
  7. If you want to dish out the $$ then go with the i7, it is faster then all AMD has to offer.

    However you are paying a good price for 5-10% performance. I would say stick with AMD Phenom II unless you have the extra cash for i7.
  8. agreed with gxpbecker..
    It all depends on your wallet..performance wise, Intel (i7) is faster - more expensive. but I'm using AMD as it's wallet-friendly and I don't really need all that computing horsepower anyway.
  9. Quote:
    Go AMD, dont sway to the dark side and higher prices for nearly identical real world performance.


    Well since i know you like AMD alot, i thought i'd tell you this first Soldier (nothing bad i also like AMD) =). In 2010 there going to sell 8 core Opterons, then 16 core high end opteron in 2011. The article i read this in came out today or yesterday, i'll look through my history and post a link. And luckily for us am3 socket people, after the 965 they said there planning something special that will work with the AM3 socket, and compete with the i7 chips. And they apparently are 1 nm (no joke) ahead of intel now. Intel plans to release 33nm i7's and AMD's newer chips will be 32 nm. weird.
  10. In the states we have a word for people who use AMD. We call them "rednecks"
    There are some pluses though to owning one, such as...

    -In most localities they can actually be bought with food stamps

    -They're closest you can come to giving your computer a mullet

    -You can't play Crysis but who cares, you can play Minesweeper at 50 fps

    -When it breaks in a week you can use it to pluck your banjo
  11. yannifb said:
    And they apparently are 1 nm (no joke) ahead of intel now. Intel plans to release 33nm i7's and AMD's newer chips will be 32 nm. weird.

    Uh-huh... :pt1cable:
  12. J0SEPH said:
    In the states we have a word for people who use AMD. We call them "rednecks"
    There are some pluses though to owning one, such as...

    -In most localities they can actually be bought with food stamps

    -They're closest you can come to giving your computer a mullet

    -You can't play Crysis but who cares, you can play Minesweeper at 50 fps

    -When it breaks in a week you can use it to pluck your banjo


    Must...Not...Feed...the....Trolls....
  13. Someone needs a nick "trollcrusher"
  14. randomizer said:
    Uh-huh... :pt1cable:


    its at BSN
  15. JAYDEEJOHN said:
    Someone needs a nick "trollcrusher"


    You've probably just given soldier37 some trollbait

    I can't believe soldier hasn't been banned yet.
  16. Helloworld_98 said:
    You've probably just given soldier37 some trollbait

    I can't believe soldier hasn't been banned yet.


    Soldier37 is allowed his opinions, just as you are. Should you be banned?

    Me, I'm hardware-agnostic. Last build ended up as a 939 Opti 175, this build is an i7. Last build had NVIDIA 6800 ultra's in SLI, this build has a 4870 1GB. I could afford a pair of high end opti's or xeons but just really can't justify the $ for the few rare times that they would save me some time. I'll just go out back and feed the birds for a bit, drink another coffee, whatever...

    My paying job does give me access to quite a few very high end workstations, and I am tempted to keep one every now and then... And do, for a week or so, but then on-sell it to someone who really needs it (and will pay me what it is worth).
  17. ^ there's a difference between expressing opinions and trolling.
  18. Helloworld_98 said:
    ^ there's a difference between expressing opinions and trolling.


    ORLY? That also is an opinion.... In my opinion Soldier37 is just an AMD fan. a hardcore AMD fan, as are a few others I could name, but a fan. I barrack for the Wallabies, my partner prefers the All Blacks. That makes us fans.

    In my opinion, JOSEPH is a troll... But that is just an opinion.
  19. yannifb said:
    its at BSN

    Can they show us the existence of a 33nm node?
  20. ... amd... if you are mid budget... by a good AM3 board... that mean that you can upgrade... i have a AM2+ board... i upgraded form Ax2 6400>Px4 9600BE>Px4 9950BE> PIIx4 940 and i can still upgrade to AM3 Phenom II x4... longer lifespan and more upgradeable... if some body says, that i7 is better in video coding/decoding... they are not in to new... i transcode video with my HD4870... a video 1:34 long from MPG2 to iPhone in 8 minutes... and in the higher resolutions the i7 evens out with Phenom II 955... the physics in new games are calculated with video card anyways... and OpenCL kick's off...
  21. Quote:
    Go AMD, dont sway to the dark side and higher prices for nearly identical real world performance.


    Identical real world performance in games only, in everything else the
    i7's has no equal.
  22. neon neophyte said:
    the market unevened with the arrival of the core2 and intel has charged a premium for their cpu since.

    if intel thinks it can gouge you, it will.

    amd on the other hand, has been playing underdog for awhile now. they need to entice people to come back to amd. they do this with a superior pricing scheme. intel has severly lowered its prices because of this.


    ANy company will gouge you when they can and if they can. AMD is no different. Its because of Core 2 AMD has had to lower their pricing scheme, yes.

    But comparisons wise, if it is the 920 i7 its a faster overall CPU. In gaming they will do the same.
  23. Quote:
    Go AMD, dont sway to the dark side and higher prices for nearly identical real world performance.


    For gaming yes. But for pretty much everything else the i7 would beat anything out there by quite a bit. Don't let your favortism sway you.

    xaira said:
    ^amd is the better choice for htpc anyway, integrated audio

    if its an i7 2.6v AMD 2.6 i7 is better

    anything else is amd, overall build cost with i7 will be alot more than amd.


    Depends. It could or it might not. Some builds are just $100 more for a Core i7 build. Thats not too bad.
  24. Quote:
    Go AMD, dont sway to the dark side and higher prices for nearly identical real world performance.


    xaira said:
    ^amd is the better choice for htpc anyway, integrated audio

    if its an i7 2.6v AMD 2.6 i7 is better

    anything else is amd, overall build cost with i7 will be alot more than amd.


    yannifb said:
    Well since i know you like AMD alot, i thought i'd tell you this first Soldier (nothing bad i also like AMD) =). In 2010 there going to sell 8 core Opterons, then 16 core high end opteron in 2011. The article i read this in came out today or yesterday, i'll look through my history and post a link. And luckily for us am3 socket people, after the 965 they said there planning something special that will work with the AM3 socket, and compete with the i7 chips. And they apparently are 1 nm (no joke) ahead of intel now. Intel plans to release 33nm i7's and AMD's newer chips will be 32 nm. weird.


    Um..... 33nm? Yet the Core i5s in testing are 32nm.... and AMD has no plans for 32nm in the near future.....

    And I missing something???
  25. Theres rumblings of some kinda AMD surprise, whatever that means. Could just be, dont buy Intel now, who knows?
  26. JAYDEEJOHN said:
    Theres rumblings of some kinda AMD surprise, whatever that means. Could just be, dont buy Intel now, who knows?

    The return of BM and the joining of forces between Sharikababoob and Scientia is the surprise I heard.
  27. during AMDs reign, with the Athlon, they didnt hike their prices like intel does.
  28. No they didn't did they?

  29. randomizer said:
    The return of BM and the joining of forces between Sharikababoob and Scientia is the surprise I heard.

    Now thats funny LOL
  30. Having those higher prices, which were matched by the lessor performing Intel heatbursts, I think upset alot of people when C2D came out, and those prices were cut by over 70%
  31. I agree, and if performance isnt either needed or even if needed, its not that different, Im supporting AMD as well, until theyre back on their feet at least.

    PS My troll comment wasnt about you btw
  32. usually amd takes about a year or more to relase a technology competing with intels top desktop dog, itd be kool if the something special had 6 cores running at 3ghz, maybe thell try an intel and glue 2 quads together, or glue a quad and a dual to make 6. if intel releases i9 and amd still cant compete with i7 we might see the cheapest era of amds existence. although i really hope they have a native 6 core with ddr2 support.

    and byt the way intel has nothing lanned in 33nm, i dont even think 33nm exists 32,28,22
  33. Ive heard better stepping/thermals/clocks. Ive heard a few nice tweaks etc. All rumor, tho I do remember someone from AMD saying the 965 wasnt just a faster 955. That may be pointing to a newer stepping, who knows?
  34. ^ or their version of SMT.

    and we haven't heard much news on 28nm in a long time from AMD, or 32nm.
  35. i recently checked out a web site and there was this guy claiming he clocked his Intel core 2 quad 2.83ghz to 3.8ghz and running stable, it was a Q9550 12mb cache. It costs lie 50€ more then the AMD Phenom™ II X4 810 Quad Core 2.6ghz 4MB cache. Is it really worth to pay that 50€ extra for 8mb more cache and a better OC stabile processor?
  36. tisello said:
    ...... Is it really worth to pay that 50€ extra for 8mb more cache and a better OC stabile processor?


    The l2 cache size is extremely important for modern cpu's because it's used as a way to sort of outsmart the bus speed
    bottleneck. That 12mb alone justifies the price, in my opinion. As for OC'ing I'm not so sure that the Yorkfield is any more stable than the Phailnom 810. This is one area where AMD seems to keep pace with Intel.
  37. JAYDEEJOHN said:
    Theres rumblings of some kinda AMD surprise, whatever that means. Could just be, dont buy Intel now, who knows?


    Ah yes the ATI 5800 series graphics cards,the 800 series chipsets and the 1.5 billion transistor Phenom III series CPU's
  38. J0SEPH said:
    The l2 cache size is extremely important for modern cpu's because it's used as a way to sort of outsmart the bus speed
    bottleneck. That 12mb alone justifies the price, in my opinion.

    You can't possibly compare the amount of cache on an AMD chip and an Intel (pre-Core i7) chip directly. This bus bottleneck you're imagining only exists on LGA775 and older, not AM2+, AM3 or LGA1366. HyperTransport and QPI both have extremely high bandwidth with direct access to memory, whereas LGA775 uses the much slower FSB which includes the added bottleneck of the chipset.
  39. so very true
  40. randomizer said:
    You can't possibly compare the amount of cache on an AMD chip and an Intel (pre-Core i7) chip directly.


    while running in terror from randomizer

    I'm not. I'm saying the 12mb L2 on the q9950 is a valid justification of it's price. I'm not denying the existence of HT3

    My deepest apologies however if my statement was not coherently written. I have shamed myself, my father and my father's father.

    mods=gods

    zay moykhl!
  41. So i have 3 options here.

    1 Intel i7 2.66ghz
    2 Q9550 12mb chache 2.8ghz
    3 AMD Phenom™ II X4 810 Quad Core 2.6ghz 4MB cache

    wich should i choose?

    !!!price matters!!!
  42. For what task?
  43. ^ +1

    i7 920 = The best in everything pretty much, and includes the usual high energy usage that top of the line tech needs.

    Q9550 = Not as good, cheaper because it's an EOL part, but still a fair contender with lower energy usage.

    X4 810 = Cheaper, not EOL but has a lower performance level than the Q9550, but has the lowest energy usage of the three.
  44. high end gaming
  45. tisello said:
    i recently checked out a web site and there was this guy claiming he clocked his Intel core 2 quad 2.83ghz to 3.8ghz and running stable, it was a Q9550 12mb cache. It costs lie 50€ more then the AMD Phenom™ II X4 810 Quad Core 2.6ghz 4MB cache. Is it really worth to pay that 50€ extra for 8mb more cache and a better OC stabile processor?


    tisello said:
    So i have 3 options here.

    1 Intel i7 2.66ghz
    2 Q9550 12mb chache 2.8ghz
    3 AMD Phenom™ II X4 810 Quad Core 2.6ghz 4MB cache

    wich should i choose?

    !!!price matters!!!



    Well, duh - :lol:

    It's all good. Depending upon your specific tasks one may be better than the other but for the most part you will be happy with either AMD or Intel. I always try to go 'low' in price because 6 months from now the 'new' tech will always be less expensive and more capable.

    You don't really have a good comparison - check out the Q8400 versus the Phenom 810 for 'bang for pound'.

    And as far as OCing it's the 'great equalizer' among price points (at least now that AMD has rolled the 45s). Anand took the Phenom 810 to 3.7GHz plus an IMC/NB at 2700MHz.

    YMMV - but any quad core microprocessor running 3GHz+ is more than any of us deserve.
  46. if its truly high end gaming then price shouldnt matter

    if its gaming on a budget, which u are, get the 810

    it makes no sense to get a i7920 and pair it with a hd4670/9600gt
  47. Might be better off with a 720 BE.
  48. xaira said:


    it makes no sense to get a i7920 and pair it with a hd4670/9600gt


    I'm buying a Sapphire Radeon HD 4890 2gb :P and well price does matter because i want to get the most preformance for the least price.

    And something struck me. I think i have a MOBO who doesnt support AMD >.<

    The 8400 you say, is it good for the money?
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Quad Core Intel AMD Product