Can someone tell me the difference between Intel and AMD? What exactly makes these two types of processors distinct? Tests show Intel is faster and more efficient but why? Any helpful info would be greatly appreciated.
Yeah but AMD compensates the lower performance with lower price.
Anyway if you want the best, fastest CPU's, then the Core i7 series are your best bet. AMD is more orientated to budget CPU's (they have better price/performance ratio)
Very true. For what its worth, I'm deciding between the Core i7 930 and Phenom II X4 965. All I plan to do is internet, Star Craft II, and SWTOR. I'd go Intel but I don't feel like paying nearly twice as much when the AMD will do just as good. The last AMD processor I used was a 1.4ghz T-Bird and it did fine. Right now I have a Pentium 4 Prescott that works but won't play those two games as smooth as I want. 6 years later and its time to upgrade.
StarCraft II only takes advantage of dual cores, but still processing power plays a major role in this game. For example, the Core i3 540 processor only has half the L3 cache of the Core i5 750 and this makes the latter 27% faster when comparing the clock for clock data at 3.70GHz.
The extra threads of the Core i7 920 processor are no advantage when compared to the Core i5 750 in this game, but the additional memory capacity and bandwidth is. The Core i7 920 was 11% faster when comparing the clock for clock data at 3.70GHz which is quite significant.
An older processor like the Core 2 Quad Q6600 suffers compared to the other CPUs tested, serving as a bottleneck to a high-end GPU such as the GeForce GTX 480. The Phenom II processors delivered average performance and we saw no real difference between the Phenom II X2 (dual-core) and Phenom II X4 (quad-core processors).
It is a shame that StarCraft II can only utilize two cores, as this really hurts older quad-core processors such as the Core 2 Quad Q6600. Furthermore this will also mean that those with budget quad-core processors, such as the Athlon II X4, will also suffer.