Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD vs Intel build

Last response: in CPUs
Share
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
May 4, 2010 8:40:00 PM

I have three possible builds to go wtih..keep in mind I'm trying to keep it under $1000, here are my three options..

System 1.
AMD X4 965 (3.4Ghz, four cores) with DDR3-1600 (8GB) SATA 6 (not 3) WD640, GTS250 w/2GB

System 2
AMD X6 1055T (2.8Ghz, six cores) with DDR3-1600 (8GB) SATA 6 (not 3) WD640, GTS250 w/2GB

System 3
Intel i7-860 or 930 (2.8Ghz, four cores) with DDR3-1333 (8GB) SATA 3, WD500, GTS250 w/2GB

Normally I would go with the Intel, however I wonder with the AMD with a SATA 6 hard drive and faster memory would it out perform the Intel

I have not see any bence marks with the x6. The X6 is suppose to support the same turbo technology as the Intel.

What is your thoughts?

Phill

More about : amd intel build

May 4, 2010 8:44:11 PM

what are you going to use it for.......cad?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 4, 2010 9:20:01 PM

Gaming or not, go for the i7 build. The i7 does well than both 965 or 1055t in gaming & simply blows them away when it comes to productivity applications - 3d max, photoshop, etc. The slower memory won't matter at all in games, while in applications, will only show a negligible drop.
Score
0
Related resources
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
May 4, 2010 10:45:10 PM

A mixture of eveything..gaming, CS4 suite, video rendering, etc..No CAD

May I ask what you are basing that off of in regards to the "blows them away"..what chart or data are you basing this off of..I have not see any data on the X6. I am not doubting this..I just would like to see some numbers crunching. Would a 945 or 1055T utilizing a SATA 6gb Hard drive out perform a i7 using a SATA 3gb hard drive? The intel chipset that use the SATA 6gb puts the cost well over the budgeted $1000
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 4, 2010 11:50:39 PM

I would pass on the X6 now only because most application don't even use 4 cores now and the x4 is clocked higher so will be faster in most apps as of now maybe 5 years from now that could change but nothing that I can see with in the next 2-3 year change (other than professional rending type apps)
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 4:11:28 AM

Quote:
A mixture of eveything..gaming, CS4 suite, video rendering, etc..No CAD

May I ask what you are basing that off of in regards to the "blows them away"..what chart or data are you basing this off of..I have not see any data on the X6. I am not doubting this..I just would like to see some numbers crunching. Would a 945 or 1055T utilizing a SATA 6gb Hard drive out perform a i7 using a SATA 3gb hard drive? The intel chipset that use the SATA 6gb puts the cost well over the budgeted $1000


Ignore ksampanna's rediculous claim. Of the 3 cpu's you listed, the core I7 are the fastest of the three, but only by about 15 percent. And they cost a lot more.

The best value in that group is system 2. The 1055T is the best bang for the buck and the AMD boards also cost less at the same quality level.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 4:19:06 AM

ikaz said:
I would pass on the X6 now only because most application don't even use 4 cores now and the x4 is clocked higher so will be faster in most apps as of now maybe 5 years from now that could change but nothing that I can see with in the next 2-3 year change (other than professional rending type apps)


I heard this same argument about quads. Most people you bought into this garbage 2 years ago, usually wish they had ignored it.

Real users don't run one benchmark at a time. Security suites, multitasking, compression, all sorts of trey apps. People make their own multithreaded environments.

Get the six core and a year from now, you will be glad you did.
Score
0
May 5, 2010 4:52:26 AM

/\ 1+ go for the six...go big or go home =)
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 2:33:11 PM

Quote:
A mixture of eveything..gaming, CS4 suite, video rendering, etc..No CAD

May I ask what you are basing that off of in regards to the "blows them away"..what chart or data are you basing this off of..I have not see any data on the X6. I am not doubting this..I just would like to see some numbers crunching. Would a 945 or 1055T utilizing a SATA 6gb Hard drive out perform a i7 using a SATA 3gb hard drive? The intel chipset that use the SATA 6gb puts the cost well over the budgeted $1000


Here are some benchmarks for the 1090T, i7 & 965. The 1055T performs worse than the 1090T, so you can gauge it's performance from the 1090T numbers.
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-89...

Unless you are using a super fast SSD, it doesn't matter if the SATA is 3 gbps or 6gbps, since no desktop HDD today can push even the SATA 3 gbps to its limit.


Quote:

FALC0N

Ignore ksampanna's rediculous claim. Of the 3 cpu's you listed, the core I7 are the fastest of the three, but only by about 15 percent. And they cost a lot more.


You mean, "ridiculous" claim. It saddens me that people cannot even spell their basic thoughts right, much less comment about the latest tech. Clearly you are an AMD fanboy, but try keeping your favoritisms to yourself & give an honest unbiased opinion. I've listed the benchmarks in the link above. Perhaps you will go through them, & assuming you have an elementary understanding of mathematics, you will do the number crunching & arrive at the conclusion that the i7 is much better than just 15%.
Score
0
a c 133 à CPUs
May 5, 2010 2:40:32 PM

Did we forget OP wants under a $1000 build so with that said get the 1055T system and OC it and it will perform nicely.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 3:09:30 PM

He also has a $1000 intel build listed, & it can overclock as well.
Score
0
a c 133 à CPUs
May 5, 2010 3:12:32 PM

ksampanna said:
He also has a $1000 intel build listed, & it can overclock as well.

But IMO I would get the cheaper 1055T processor OC it lose the 6GBs sata and get a better GPU.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 4:15:51 PM

Quote:
A mixture of eveything..gaming, CS4 suite, video rendering, etc..No CAD




For what your doing a Phenom II x6 Six cores will get the task done a little bit faster than a core i7 930/860 4 core and 8threads.


Quote:
May I ask what you are basing that off of in regards to the "blows them away"..what chart or data are you basing this off of..I have not see any data on the X6. I am not doubting this..I just would like to see some numbers crunching.


http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/147?vs=108

Quote:
Would a 945 or 1055T utilizing a SATA 6gb Hard drive out perform a i7 using a SATA 3gb hard drive? The intel chipset that use the SATA 6gb puts the cost well over the budgeted $1000


As someone else said, unless you're going for an ssd that can use sata 6gb/s, you dont need it.

Even the most powerful Sata desktop HDD are just starting to reach sata 1.5gb/s limits under sequential read and write. (burst read though goes into the middle of sata 3gb/s though.)

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd6000hlhx-velocira...

Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 5:42:38 PM

Does the 930 not put you over budget? Remember, you need a 1366 socket motherboard for the 930. 1366 also uses triple channel memory so you'll want(not NEED, but its a plus) triple chan ram in a size divisible by 3 (3GB/6GB/9GB).
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 5:52:20 PM

Quote:


For what your doing a Phenom II x6 Six cores will get the task done a little bit faster than a core i7 930/860 4 core and 8threads.


For all the applications which he's listed, I'm pretty sure that the i7 930/860 performs better than the 1090T
These are the benchmarks based on which i'm saying so -







The only thing where the 1090T manages to win against the i7 would be the video transcoding apps, but that too, by a small margin.
Overall, the i7s win


Score
0
May 5, 2010 5:58:34 PM

but the price =D
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 6:12:46 PM

Again ... the i7 build is within his $1000 ceiling, so price is not an issue
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 6:52:43 PM

ksampanna said:
Gaming or not, go for the i7 build. The i7 does well than both 965 or 1055t in gaming & simply blows them away when it comes to productivity applications - 3d max, photoshop, etc. The slower memory won't matter at all in games, while in applications, will only show a negligible drop.


Go on and trust him, your dreams will come true. With sarcasm mode off I can say that the second build is the best option, but since you would "normally" for Intel you can't go wrong getting two less cores and lower performance for a bigger price. Right? Maybe not... Oh what the heck, just get Intel, it is... Intel!

Rape Phenom way:

Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 5, 2010 8:07:18 PM

ksampanna said:
Quote:


For what your doing a Phenom II x6 Six cores will get the task done a little bit faster than a core i7 930/860 4 core and 8threads.


For all the applications which he's listed, I'm pretty sure that the i7 930/860 performs better than the 1090T
These are the benchmarks based on which i'm saying so -

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/amdphenomiix6_042610231918/22618.png

http://media.bestofmicro.com/E/J/245467/original/Photoshop%20CS4.png

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3674/amds-sixcore-phenom-ii-x6-1090t-1055t-reviewed/6

The only thing where the 1090T manages to win against the i7 would be the video transcoding apps, but that too, by a small margin.
Overall, the i7s win


I think you forgot rendering. :whistle: 





On a more serious note, Just because the core i7 can be fit into the budget doesn't mean he needs to spend money on it. You have to look at the overall picture.

Now for performance, Phenom II x6 has nearly same performance or exceeding core i7 930. Look at all the benches for all the things, around the web. you'll find in overall that core i7 wins stuff that can use 4 cores or less (like games) and phenom ii x6 wins in stuff that can use 5 or 6 cores (like rendering).

Now why spend more on something that earns a few points extra or shave off a few seconds? Core i7 930 $294. Phenom ii x6 1055t only $204.

@OP

If you going for gaming, although the core i7 is better in this area, i would say save the $90 from getting a core i7 and spend it towards an even better gpu than gts 250 as that will make a bigger impact than the cpu.

if this is the GPU the your wanting to get, http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... (only 2gb gts 250 i can find)
i would recommend getting one of these instead as ther more powerful,

Nvidia: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Ati: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

The Hd 5770 is the most recommend of the 3 due to it's price and performance. but i like to give choices or you can used that save money for something else than the computer. ;) 


overall though, you cant go wrong with any of the set ups.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 6, 2010 2:18:04 AM

ksampanna said:

You mean, "ridiculous" claim. It saddens me that people cannot even spell their basic thoughts right, much less comment about the latest tech. Clearly you are an AMD fanboy, but try keeping your favoritisms to yourself & give an honest unbiased opinion. I've listed the benchmarks in the link above. Perhaps you will go through them, & assuming you have an elementary understanding of mathematics, you will do the number crunching & arrive at the conclusion that the i7 is much better than just 15%.


Yes, the fact that I was too lazy to correct a typo is clear evidence that I am an AMD fanboy and incapable of intelligently commenting on technology. By this logic. No AMD or Intel engineer must ever commit a typo lest they be fired for incompetence.

philldmc, this is the type of logic you can expect from ksampanna. He can't properly asses the meaning of a simple typo. Would you trust him with your hard earned money?

By the way:

http://www.behardware.com/articles/789-11/amd-phenom-ii...

Like I said 15%. And behardware is one of the best sites in the world for cpu reviews. The site looks basic because they are french and the English
version is barebones. But they are good.
Score
0
May 10, 2010 8:45:33 PM

I also think the best futureproof build is the second one as it has a 6-core CPU (will have to be supported sometime soon) and the GTS 250 and about the price/performance issue .AMD always had the upper hand.

BTW,ksampanna, go easy on the people a little bit. Who disagrees with you isn't always wrong.

And for the Anonymous guy who started this thread,please provide full system specs (like MB model, PSU wattage,......etc) as this will enable the members of this venerable community to help you better
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 11, 2010 5:56:42 AM

If the OP wants to register their account and PM me I'll reopen this thread.
Score
0
!