Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Intel or AMD?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 25, 2011 2:39:58 PM

AMD or intel?

Whats the difference?

I like AMD because of the prices compared to Intel, is there any reason to buy a INTEl i7 over a phenom x6?

Is intel to far behind the technoligy curve? AMD has the technology to make cheaper chips and more cores on the same die.

What is the thing that keeps intel making money? is it the TV adds?

INTEL motherboards cost more? why?

INTEL needs special Ram? why?

More about : intel amd

a c 103 à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 25, 2011 3:07:47 PM

The only advantage AMD has is price on lower end chips and cheaper motherboards. AMD Phenom x 6 chips are not a good buy for many people as for many purposes the Phenom x4s are as good or better. Intel makes money because it has a huge market share compared to AMD. Why Intel Boards cost more I think is due to them releasing new chipsets and sockets all the time while current AMD CPUs can use boards from a long time ago. Intel does not need special RAM.
Score
0
May 25, 2011 4:11:34 PM

intel core i7 needs triple channel ram , it cost more.
Score
0
Related resources
a b à CPUs
May 25, 2011 4:36:34 PM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
intel core i7 needs triple channel ram , it cost more.

actually no.The prices are cheaper for ddr3 than they were for ddr2.They use to be 5 times much more but now i feel ddr2 might be on its way to an end.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 25, 2011 4:37:59 PM

The Sandy Bridge i5s and i7s (2500k and 2600k) are hands-down the best gaming processors around. Intel processors work better; that's why they cost more. The number of cores affects only certain applications.
Score
0
May 25, 2011 4:39:51 PM

Intel offers the highest performance for its top of the line, while usually AMD offers the best price/performance for mobo/CPU under $350-500.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 25, 2011 4:41:23 PM

kajabla said:
The Sandy Bridge i5s and i7s (2500k and 2600k) are hands-down the best gaming processors around. Intel processors work better; that's why they cost more. The number of cores affects only certain applications.

Hi Kajabla!
I think they are the best performers but for gamers who need to save money the i7 2600k is a real real waste.
I think the i5 2500k should be the top priority on all gamers!
Score
0
a c 188 à CPUs
a b å Intel
May 25, 2011 4:42:46 PM

The 1st generation Intel® Core™ i7-9XX processors do use triple channel memory, the Intel Core i7-8XX uses a DMI or dual channel memory configuration, and the 2nd generation Intel Core processors all are using a DMI or dual channel memory configuration.
Triple channel refers to the fact that there are three pathways for the memory to travel down. The memory in use doesn’t have to come as a set but having the same speed and latency is important. So if buying a Kit of 3 cost more than buying three sticks of the same memory, don’t buy the kit.

Christian Wood
Intel Enthusiast Team
Score
0

Best solution

May 25, 2011 4:47:57 PM

If you see both companies roadmap, amd is just slightly slow than intel. In fact, intel now has more feared than amd from its market dominance. The Moore's law are out of date, world economic crisis had tighten our wallet, 60 series chipset stepping error and much more had help amd to catalyst its growth than intel.

If you guys still remember the FSB in the older days, which intel used to use but they now changed to QPI which matched amd's hypertransport which had used by amd a long ages. This prove amd has been better in buses than intel.

Another thing is that AMD has it's GPU division which intel never has. Everybody knows that creating a GPU can be profitable because GPU is some similar to CPU.

The 60 series chipsets are out to competitive with amd 900 series chipsets during this year which also are very tide for user to choose.

At last, amd are more enjoyable to work with if compared to intel in terms of working with them.
Share
May 26, 2011 1:44:04 PM

I have heard that the 2500k is a great overclocker, I like my athlon II and my ddr2 Ram. ddr2 ram is much cheaper then ddr3. ddr3 is berly faster then ddr2 it seems, a new computer with ddr3 will have 666mhz and the same priced computer with ddr2 will have 1066mhz +. how fast can the 2500k manage in ram?
Score
0
May 26, 2011 1:46:27 PM

ghnader hsmithot said:
Hi Kajabla!
I think they are the best performers but for gamers who need to save money the i7 2600k is a real real waste.
I think the i5 2500k should be the top priority on all gamers!



Do you have any benchmarks between the phenom II x6 and the i7 2600k ? how much of a difference does the price difference bring. for the price of the i7 2600k can't i go out and buy dual opterons?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 26, 2011 3:31:50 PM

For benchies, go to http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/203?vs=287

The i7 2600K wins quite handily in just about every bench.

Here in the USA, the 2600K ranges from $315 downwards to like $250, the 1100T BE costs under $200. So my guess is that the price/performance ratio is about the same.
Score
0
May 26, 2011 3:42:05 PM

for $100 more the i7 2600k is not worth it, id rather spend my $100 on a bigger GPU or more Ram.
Score
0
May 26, 2011 3:44:48 PM

shouldn't we factor in that the phenom II are last years tech and the I7 2600k is this years tech? I wander how the I7 compare to the bulldozer???
Score
0
May 26, 2011 4:00:41 PM

my ddr2 is cheaper per GB (US) then ddr3.. and it overclocks to 1333 if i push it.

Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 26, 2011 10:33:01 PM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
shouldn't we factor in that the phenom II are last years tech and the I7 2600k is this years tech? I wander how the I7 compare to the bulldozer???


Heh, quite a few of us would like the same answer concerning the 2600K vs. Bulldozer question..

If you are strictly gaming (and it seems you are), then I would just get the 2500K unless it costs way more than the 1100T in your locale. In fact I would skip the 1100T and go with an X4 965 and oc if you are concerned about bottlenecking (which shouldn't happen unless you are using multiple high-end video cards). But you have to compare total prices of course, not just what a CPU costs.
Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
a c 119 À AMD
May 27, 2011 4:24:33 AM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
AMD or intel?

Whats the difference?

I like AMD because of the prices compared to Intel, is there any reason to buy a INTEl i7 over a phenom x6?

Is intel to far behind the technoligy curve? AMD has the technology to make cheaper chips and more cores on the same die.

What is the thing that keeps intel making money? is it the TV adds?

INTEL motherboards cost more? why?

INTEL needs special Ram? why?



1. They are different companies. That's the difference and they have different architectures.

2. Generally speaking there is no reason to buy an i7 or Phenom x6 for the average person. i7 have Hyper Threading technology, but games don't use it. The Phenom x6 has six cores, but games have just barely started to even use 4 cores. Barely...

3. Technically speaking, AMD is behind the technology curve, not Intel. In terms of general perform, if you compare equally clocked Intel CPU to AMD CPU, the Intel CPU can process more information than the AMD CPU making it more powerful.

4. Market dominance is the reason why Intel makes money; it gives them an edge when negotiating pricing contracts. Most brand name computer companies use Intel CPUs, not AMD CPUs. Advertisement is good to make people aware of the Intel brand name.

5. Similar to #5, market dominance allows Intel to charge more for their chipsets.

6. Intel needs special RAM??? No, it only needs DDR3 RAM, same as AMD.
Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
a c 119 À AMD
May 27, 2011 4:29:09 AM

If you are on a budget, then go with AMD.

If you want better performance for not too much more money, then go with Intel. Generally speaking, an Intel CPU based system gives you a better bang for your buck. Of course if you are looking at high end parts, then the price difference can be significant.
Score
0
May 27, 2011 5:25:52 AM

Honestly it does not matter if DDR2 is cheaper than DDR3 bc you NEED DDR3 if you plan on using a new processor...but to prove a point

G.SKILL 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) $159.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 $94.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

If you plan on gaming and would like to use a video card like the AMD(ATI) 6950 2 BG then Id buy the i5 2500K with a Z68 mobo bc you already going to be forking over a decent amount of cash anyway

If your on a budget then I guess you could settle for a Phenom 2 X4 with an AM3+ mobo however I wouldnt let 100-150 stand between me and getting the best system I could get for the money especially if you plan to keep it for 3 years or so

if you want an AMD Board id get this...usb 3.0 sats 6.0Gb/s no onboard video $99.99
GIGABYTE GA-870A-UD3 AM3 AMD 870 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

If you'd like the onboard just in case something goes wrong then spend 5 more bucks
GIGABYTE GA-880GA-UD3H AM3 AMD 880G HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

AMD CPU
You could go with this
AMD Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition Deneb 3.5GHz $149.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
or
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition Thuban 3.2GHz $189.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Intel Mobo
GIGABYTE GA-Z68A-D3H-B3 LGA 1155 Intel Z68 $129.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Intel CPU
Intel Core i5-2500K Sandy Bridge 3.3GHz $224.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

So your going to be spending between 60-105 more for the intel system and be gaining 20%-35% performance increase in many situations...not to mention Ive heard that the ivy bridge processor can go in the Z68 mobo when they are released

I would no doubt get the Intel system...105 is nothing for something you plan on keeping a few years
Score
0
May 28, 2011 12:11:07 AM

jaguarskx said:


6. Intel needs special RAM??? No, it only needs DDR3 RAM, same as AMD.


AMD does not need ddr3.. ever heard of AM2+
Score
0
May 28, 2011 12:14:21 AM

wormy said:


So your going to be spending between 60-105 more for the intel system and be gaining 20%-35% performance increase in many situations...not to mention Ive heard that the ivy bridge processor can go in the Z68 mobo when they are released

I would no doubt get the Intel system...105 is nothing for something you plan on keeping a few years


the new buldozers WILL work in the Am3 + mobos and cost less then the intel Z68 mobo, i call that a plan on upgrading.. cheaper then intel and better?

Also the motherboards with Am3+ slots are older then the z68?? So there old tech can handle the new proc? Why can't intel let me put the new proc into the old slots?? SO I HAVE TO SPEND MORE TO GET INTEL<NEW MOBO EVERY GEN>
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 28, 2011 12:26:50 AM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
intel core i7 needs triple channel ram , it cost more.


Since no one else mentioned this, while most the first i7 chips "could" use triple channel memory, they weren't limited to triple channel memory. They could use dual channel should they choose to.

It was so widely considered an advantage to use triple channel memory, that most people ignored the fact they had dual channel as an option. I bought triple channel memory because I was initially told I had to, but my motherboard and other users on these forums have shown it can be used in dual channel.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 28, 2011 12:29:16 AM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
shouldn't we factor in that the phenom II are last years tech and the I7 2600k is this years tech? I wander how the I7 compare to the bulldozer???


Well... considering Core2 was faster than Phenom II core vs core/clock vs clock, and OC headroom was to similar clocks. I think that alone gives plenty of argument. AMD is quite a ways behind.

xx_pemdas_xx said:
the new buldozers WILL work in the Am3 + mobos and cost less then the intel Z68 mobo, i call that a plan on upgrading.. cheaper then intel and better?

Also the motherboards with Am3+ slots are older then the z68?? So there old tech can handle the new proc? Why can't intel let me put the new proc into the old slots?? SO I HAVE TO SPEND MORE TO GET INTEL<NEW MOBO EVERY GEN>


It's very much too soon to call BD faster than Intel's current CPUs at its release (Sandy/Ivy). And if it is, it certainly will be priced as such, not cheaper.

AM3+ isn't a new socket built for the new gen?

AMD does not need ddr3.. ever heard of AM2+ said:
AMD does not need ddr3.. ever heard of AM2+


Lol... Heard of LGA775?
Score
0
May 28, 2011 4:31:34 AM

Intel is by far better, for many reasons. The Intel processors cost more because they have better specs and are better quality. Some use even less power than their AMD counterparts. You get what you pay for, and when you buy Intel you buy quality. I am not saying AMD is bad, but they are not as good of quality. The new Sandy Bridge i7 2600k CPU will out do a Phenom x6 any day. AMD is a lot farther behind compared to Intel. AMD has just released their first 32 nanometer architecture; while Intel has had some on the market for awhile and is currently working on their 22 nanometer architecture CPUs .Plus Intel has 10 core Xeon CPUs that are hyper threaded so the processor can see 20 virtual cores, can AMD do that? Modern Intel CPUs need DDR 3 ram, so does AMD processors, there is really nothing special about it. Intel Motherboards cost more because they are better quality. Intel has TV ads and website ads because they have the money to advertise and they make money from it. So in the end Intel is the better choice.
Score
0
May 28, 2011 5:46:03 AM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
AMD does not need ddr3.. ever heard of AM2+


ok and socket 775 will use ddr2 as well but it wasnt included in the discussion just as AM2+ wasnt because it would be foolish to buy a motherboard that does not support USB 3.0...does not support SATA 6.0 Gb/s and has out of date onboard graphics...you NEED DDR3 if you WANT a decent setup...if not then you might as well buy something off craigslist
Score
0
May 28, 2011 6:32:48 AM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
the new buldozers WILL work in the Am3 + mobos and cost less then the intel Z68 mobo, i call that a plan on upgrading.. cheaper then intel and better?

Also the motherboards with Am3+ slots are older then the z68?? So there old tech can handle the new proc? Why can't intel let me put the new proc into the old slots?? SO I HAVE TO SPEND MORE TO GET INTEL<NEW MOBO EVERY GEN>



First of all you have no idea how good Bulldozer will be...it will be far more likely that they are not as good as intel's current lineup of CPUs bc if they were we would already have seen benchmarks out to keep people from buying the current intel processors and forcing people to want to actually wait on bulldozer...if anyone is waiting for anything its Ivy Bridge...more than likely Bulldozer will have to be a bargain CPU to stay competitive...id like for them to be this amazing new CPU but most doubt that

Since your so high on this AM3+ board it looks like you better be ready to buy some DDR3..........it is beyond me why anyone would want to buy a mobo without the latest features and pair it with a new CPU like a month before it comes out bc the only way your going to save any amount of money on an AM3+ board is if you buy the ones with the outdated specs...on newegg there are only 2 AM3+ boards Id even consider buying and 1 is 104.99 and the other is the exact same price as the Z68 board I linked...theres even an AM3+ board thats 179.99 which I cant see buying...I mean you can spend 64.99 on an AM3+ mobo that has no USB 3.0, no SATA 6.0Gb/s, no HDMI output and ATI 3000 graphics if your just into wasting money...they only give you 8 to choose from...i went to tigerdirect but they dont have AM3+ in its own little category and I didnt feel like reading through every board on there to find 1...and zipzoomfly was down for some reason

Your plan on upgrading sounds like you'll be upgrading to something brand new..that isnt as good as something thats older....and even if I could put a Sandy Bridge CPU in a socket 775 mobo...why in the world would I want to

Your going to be spending 89.99 to 129.99 for a BD mobo thats worth a crap period...you are going to have to buy DDR3 ram whether you want to or not...you can OC a 2500k cpu to like 4.3-4.6GHz on air if you just want to and the odds of the BD CPUs being better than Sandy Bridge and cheaper is very very slim...although I would like for them to be bc I like AMDs mobos better (spec wise) however if I plan on doing any kind of video editting the I5 2500k is a no brainer with Z68 mobo but if your wanting to compare buying a BD set up over a Z68 setup then its best just to wait 2 weeks

I still have a socket 775 core 2 duo e6750 and Im waiting for ivy bridge bc of the PCI-E 3.0 so that I know I'll have a setup that I can keep for 3-5 years

Im glad theres a new chipset that comes out with new batches of CPUs bc that means I get to keep everything up to date...If I could put an Ivy Bridge CPU in this socket 775 I wouldnt do it
Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
a c 119 À AMD
May 28, 2011 8:24:45 AM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
the new buldozers WILL work in the Am3 + mobos and cost less then the intel Z68 mobo, i call that a plan on upgrading.. cheaper then intel and better?

Also the motherboards with Am3+ slots are older then the z68?? So there old tech can handle the new proc? Why can't intel let me put the new proc into the old slots?? SO I HAVE TO SPEND MORE TO GET INTEL<NEW MOBO EVERY GEN>



If you want to go with bulldozer, then go for it.

Ultimately, no one here is going to care if you go with AMD or Intel. The choice is yours to make.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 28, 2011 9:39:44 PM

Wouldn't be a hardware enthusiast forum without 'em! :) 
Score
0
May 29, 2011 1:55:24 AM

Quote:
feeling a fanboy apocalypse coming on.....


my thinking when i Built my pc (almost 4 years ago)

I got AM2+ which supports phenom x6... It has 790x chip set (super good for over clocking)
It has crossfire which will Run dual 6990's It supports over clocking your RAM and CPU in bios.

:non:  *example*At the time when i built I wanted a junky car that i could fix up (always getting faster), not a brand new one that will just get slower and slower (with no room for upgrades)... *example* :non: 

:ouch:  *moral* To upgrade AMD (junk car) its cheap.. to upgrade Intel (brand new maxed car) you have to buy another computer. *moral* :ouch: 

With intel, you can put only the latest with the latest.. I can't get an OLD CPU and over clock, I'm stuck with the latest and will need a new mobo next time the new CPU's comes out. With AMD there is upgradeable. I get a Athlon tri core now and later i get a phenom II x6.

---wait theres more! with AMD i take my phenom II x6 and pop it into a new mobo with ddr3 and USB 3, sata 6 ect..!

Also 775 was ddr and ddr2 (no ddr3 with 775 CPUs), Am2+ is ddr2 and ddr3... worlds apart yet about the same age??

So AMD in my book Is MUCH better for upgrading and for the money, who wants to spend thousands for every upgrade when you could just spend a few hundred?
:hello:  <----------------------------------------------------------------------------->
Also, why do i need a new chipset to have USB3? why not get a sata 6gbs with two USb 3 out the back expansion card?
Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
a c 119 À AMD
May 30, 2011 2:32:01 PM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
... who wants to spend thousands for every upgrade when you could just spend a few hundred?


You are over exaggerating. It does not take thousands of dollars to upgrade to Intel's latest generation of CPUs from an older one.

For example, my current system is based on the Q9450. If I wanted to upgrade to a i5 2500k then my cost would be as follows:

1. i5 2500k............................................................... around $224
2. Decent upper mainstream motherboard...................... around $200
3. 8GB of DDR3 RAM.................................................. around $125

Total cost is less than $600.

Toss in another $30 - $60 for a heatsink for overclocking.
Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
a c 119 À AMD
May 30, 2011 2:34:45 PM

Actually, I would probably get the i7 2600k since I do encode video. Hyper Threading helps improve that performance. But it does nothing for games.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 30, 2011 3:44:55 PM

jaguarskx said:
Actually, I would probably get the i7 2600k since I do encode video. Hyper Threading helps improve that performance. But it does nothing for games.


I thought so too, but after doing some research and benchmarks, I found I was wrong. At least part of the time. I'm going to run some other benchmarks to find out if it only helps in the limited situations I saw/tested or if it's more wide spread.

Resident Evil 5 showed about a 10% boost with hyperthreading:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSfduuG0tIA

I have a dual 6950 setup (unlocked) with an i7 @ 4.0. With hyperthreading, at max settings (minus physX and normal AAA), I tested 3 times in a row with and without hyperthreading. I gained 3 FPS with hyperthreading, which is also about a 10% boost. (from 38's to 41's).

Edit: I had no difference with Crysis benchmark. I wonder how many games might see a difference, and under what conditions (if I have vent and gamepad software going at the same time).
Score
0
May 31, 2011 3:01:55 AM

It does cost atleast 1k for an upgrade... sata drives CPu RAM GPU Heatsinks SSD .. complete upgrade from say a 775 slot.. basicaly just reuse old case..
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 31, 2011 8:54:25 AM

YOu can reuse SATA drives....

You don't need an SSD, especially for gaming on a budget, as they do NOTHING for framerates...

YOu don't need aftermarket heatsinks....(unless you get an X4 with the intent to OC it to 4 GHz so it then matches the performance of older i5/i7 rigs running at 3 Ghz...(not an exaggeration, either)

Of course if you build an entirely new rig, it will likely push $1000...
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 31, 2011 9:00:33 AM

saying that Intel 'needs triple channel RAM' pretty much implies you have not done much reading the past two years or so...

Is AMD a great value solely when compared to i7-980X with X58 mb based systems? Certainly...

Compared to any i5 based rig, and especially to i5-2400/2500k? Not so much.

Compared to i3/2100? Nope.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 31, 2011 9:06:51 AM

xx_pemdas_xx said:

Is intel to far behind the technoligy curve?


LOL!

Yes, but somehow they their 'inferior' i7 based rigs still outperform X4/X6 rigs even if at an 800-900 MHz clock deficit. Clock for clock, there is simply no contest.

You need to do some reading/research, IMO....

Recommend reading up on socket 1156 and 1155 based rigs; the former have been out quite a while.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
May 31, 2011 9:21:12 AM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
Do you have any benchmarks between the phenom II x6 and the i7 2600k ? how much of a difference does the price difference bring. for the price of the i7 2600k can't i go out and buy dual opterons?


What sort of dual socket Opterons and MB are you contemplating buying that will compete with the $189 2500k? (THe only Dual socket Opterons that are in the $250 price range are 2.4 Ghz, which means they perform about like a Sandybridge underlocked to 1.6 GHz...) Or did you mean this one http://www.pricewatch.com/gallery/cpu/opteron_2439_se , at $899 each, which will still be manhandled at games by the 2500k?

Recommend you read THG's cpu guides pretty carefully....and soon.
Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
a c 119 À AMD
May 31, 2011 2:27:04 PM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
It does cost atleast 1k for an upgrade... sata drives CPu RAM GPU Heatsinks SSD .. complete upgrade from say a 775 slot.. basicaly just reuse old case..


You are assuming everything need to be upgraded.

-I already have 5 SATA hard drives connected to my socket 775 motherboard. If you have done any research or have any knowledge of Intel based motherboard you should know that those motherboards do accept SATA drives. I suspect most people have SATA hard drives as well unless they have a particularly old computer that only supports IDE drives. Generally for most people with a modern PC, this is not an issue. This is a non issue and has no merit in the total cost of an upgrade if you are specifically comparing AMD to Intel.

-SSD is nice, but not a necessary upgrade for most people. If you wanna spend money on a SSD drive, then that's your business. This is a non issue and has no merit in the total cost of an upgrade if you are specifically comparing AMD to Intel.

-As for a video card... You can generally upgrade the video card at anytime. You do not need to wait to upgrade the CPU and motherboard to upgrade to a new video card unless the following two applies. Also, I would assume that most people would use the same video card in either an AMD or Intel based PC unless you specifically want to use CrossFire or SLI. Therefore, the cost of the video card is meaningless for most people when comparing an AMD or Intel build.

1. You have an old computer with no PCI-e ports; meaning AGP, or PCI.
2. You have a mobo that only has a PCI-e 1.x port which is basically incompatible with PCI-e 2.1 cards.

-Heatsinks... Well regardless if you are buying AMD or Intel, if you are overclocking then you need to buy a heatsink. Since many heatsinks are compatible with both AMD and Intel CPUs there is really no argument here because the price will be the same.


Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
a c 119 À AMD
May 31, 2011 2:31:35 PM

xX_PEMDAS_Xx,

At the very least you sound confused.

In any case, as I stated before no one here in this forum is going to care which brand you end up going with.

However, if you are deliberately trying to confuse people, then that's a different issue...
Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
a c 119 À AMD
May 31, 2011 2:36:06 PM

bystander said:
I thought so too, but after doing some research and benchmarks, I found I was wrong. At least part of the time. I'm going to run some other benchmarks to find out if it only helps in the limited situations I saw/tested or if it's more wide spread.



Yeah, I based my statement on Hyper Threading providing no discernible gaming improvement based on a review that Anandtech did either last year or later 2009. Resident Evil was not part of their review though and of course trying to benchmark all the popular games in their review would have been time consuming to say the very least.
Score
0
May 31, 2011 3:25:22 PM

mdd1963 said:
YOu can reuse SATA drives....

You don't need an SSD, especially for gaming on a budget, as they do NOTHING for framerates...

YOu don't need aftermarket heatsinks....(unless you get an X4 with the intent to OC it to 4 GHz so it then matches the performance of older i5/i7 rigs running at 3 Ghz...(not an exaggeration, either)

Of course if you build an entirely new rig, it will likely push $1000...



we are talking IDE drives to sata as because a new motherbaord does not support lagacy devices like that so.. 1k for a intel "upgrade" And if your going for new things you have to get and SSD because it is new, it can use 6gbs otherwise sata 6 is not worth it and neather would USB 3 worth it if you HDD can't keep up with your flash device?? AMD allows smaller more economical upgrades. New CPU -> new mobo RAM -> new GPU not all at once, because they are more interchangeable.
Score
0
May 31, 2011 3:34:31 PM

jaguarskx said:
You are assuming everything need to be upgraded.

-I already have 5 SATA hard drives connected to my socket 775 motherboard. If you have done any research or have any knowledge of Intel based motherboard you should know that those motherboards do accept SATA drives. I suspect most people have SATA hard drives as well unless they have a particularly old computer that only supports IDE drives. Generally for most people with a modern PC, this is not an issue. This is a non issue and has no merit in the total cost of an upgrade if you are specifically comparing AMD to Intel.

-SSD is nice, but not a necessary upgrade for most people. If you wanna spend money on a SSD drive, then that's your business. This is a non issue and has no merit in the total cost of an upgrade if you are specifically comparing AMD to Intel.

-As for a video card... You can generally upgrade the video card at anytime. You do not need to wait to upgrade the CPU and motherboard to upgrade to a new video card unless the following two applies. Also, I would assume that most people would use the same video card in either an AMD or Intel based PC unless you specifically want to use CrossFire or SLI. Therefore, the cost of the video card is meaningless for most people when comparing an AMD or Intel build.

1. You have an old computer with no PCI-e ports; meaning AGP, or PCI.
2. You have a mobo that only has a PCI-e 1.x port which is basically incompatible with PCI-e 2.1 cards.

-Heatsinks... Well regardless if you are buying AMD or Intel, if you are overclocking then you need to buy a heatsink. Since many heatsinks are compatible with both AMD and Intel CPUs there is really no argument here because the price will be the same.


You seem to no nothing about me, As a very informed enthusioust i have been using sata since it came out (sata I) which is whats on a 775 slot MOBO it is the same speed as IDE (150mbs) SATA I is compatible with II but at reduced speeds.... so a new SATA drive would be needed to be compatable with the new SATA... which seems to be the point of a new mobo with ddr3. you seem to know nothing about older tech.

SSD is a necessary and worth while upgrade, It gives you the full performance of your sata 6gbs and USB 3.0 without it you only can transfer at the speeds of sata 3gbs and USB 2.0..

A new video card will be bottlenecked by and old CPU and MOBO, even if it fits and works, (example: i have a x1650 pro with a AMD 3k it is bottle necked by its CPU) ALSO I HAVE A CROSSFIRE MOBO< faster then SLI> only AMD.

**1. You have an old computer with no PCI-e ports; meaning AGP, or PCI.**

I have dual PCI-e 2.1 x16 slots on my mobo.... check my specs..

**2. You have a mobo that only has a PCI-e 1.x port which is basically incompatible with PCI-e 2.1 cards.**
I have TWO 2.1 PCI-e x16 lane slots... check my specs before you tell me what i have...
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 31, 2011 3:39:53 PM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
we are talking IDE drives to sata as because a new motherbaord does not support lagacy devices like that so.. 1k for a intel "upgrade" And if your going for new things you have to get and SSD because it is new, it can use 6gbs otherwise sata 6 is not worth it and neather would USB 3 worth it if you HDD can't keep up with your flash device?? AMD allows smaller more economical upgrades. New CPU -> new mobo RAM -> new GPU not all at once, because they are more interchangeable.


I have a GA-X58-UD3R, it is a x58 board as you can guess by it's name. Oddly enough, it does have IDE support, but keep in mind, IDE is very old technology still. It still has SATA 6/s, USB 3.0, and 4 PCIe x16/x8 slots.

You seem to assume a lot.

Note: Most SSD's on their own cannot saturate Sata 2 on their own. Most require a RAID 0 setup to be able to. I haven't seen many benchmarks on the most recent SSD's, so things may be changing, but it would not be a drastic difference.
Score
0
May 31, 2011 3:42:49 PM

Quote:
seriously, you should go research, most people today still dont buy SSDs, i like the concept of hybrid SSDs, (saw an article a while back), but the point is you need to realise that although AMD provide low cost processors, its not because its they are better, they are cheaper because of they are lower in performance terms compared to Intel.

although i like AMD, i dont understand you idea of AMD being more 'interchangeable' unless your talking about socket AM2+, then your point makes no sense. Intel can also be changed newcpu-->new mobo--->new GPU as you said, if you look at Intel's old socket, socket 775, you can see that that it could be upgraded from a pentium all the way up to a core 2 extreme. USB 3.0 is still NOWHERE NEAR the speed of a sata drive. look it up your self:

http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/hard-drive-speeds.jpg

PLEASE could you go and do some research, and dont open pointless threads, if you dont even plan on upgrading.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus

You just proved my point thanks.. just because SATA II can go 3gbs does not mean the device can do 3gbs, USB 2.0 can do 150mbs but iv never seen a flash drive that fast. USb 3.0 can do 5gbs and sata III can do 6gbs but unless you get a SSD your not going to come near 5gbs and then there is no point of USB 3.0.. it looks like 5gbs from USB 3.0 is pretty close to 6gbs from a sata drive??
Score
0
May 31, 2011 3:46:23 PM

bystander said:
I have a GA-X58-UD3R, it is a x58 board as you can guess by it's name. Oddly enough, it does have IDE support, but keep in mind, IDE is very old technology still. It still has SATA 6/s, USB 3.0, and 4 PCIe x16/x8 slots.

You seem to assume a lot.

Note: Most SSD's on their own cannot saturate Sata 2 on their own. Most require a RAID 0 setup to be able to. I haven't seen many benchmarks on the most recent SSD's, so things may be changing, but it would not be a drastic difference.



Why get sata III if we can't even use sata II fully yet, thanks for posting this. So it COST MORE to be able to even use the sata 6gbs speed?

Also how much more did you pay for lagacy support (an extra lagacy chip on the motherboard) the x58 chipset can't do IDE by itself there is an extra chip on your motherboard controlling the IDE devices and then sending it to your south bridge.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 31, 2011 3:48:32 PM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
Why get sata III if we can't even use sata II fully yet, thanks for posting this. So it cost to be able to even use the sata 6gbs speed?

Also how much more did you pay for lagacy support (an extra lagacy chip on the motherboard) the x58 chipset can't do IDE by itself there is an extra chip on your motherboard controlling the IDE devices and then sending it to your south bridge.


Manufacturers do crazy things. They add support to their motherboards when they think people might like to have that feature.

I didn't pay anything extra, directly.
Score
0
a c 473 à CPUs
a c 115 å Intel
a c 119 À AMD
May 31, 2011 3:49:00 PM

xx_pemdas_xx said:
Y... check my specs before you tell me what i have...


My comments were not directly at whatever system you currently have.


My comments were about people in general who want to upgrade their current system. You will note that I have repeat stated "most people" in my post. You really need to pay attention to the context of what you are reading.


I'm pretty sure most people would disagree about SSD being a necessary upgrade for them. For you, that's a different matter, if you think it is necessary then go for it.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
May 31, 2011 3:49:15 PM

Oh yeah, what is this point that we are proving to you?
Score
0
May 31, 2011 3:49:38 PM

bystander said:
Manufacturers do crazy things. They add support to their motherboards when they think people might like to have that feature.

I didn't pay anything extra, directly.



I payed extra for two serial and PS/2 and IDE on my motherboard. and its 2 years old.
Score
0
!