Intel vs Amd

[anywayIcan]

Bumped twice before I posted csn . . . lol . . . anyways . . nothing wrong with reviving the Good Old Days. . . .

My Machine specs btw:

This is my main work hack . .I have 4 other boxes, one dedi to MMD, another dedi to stuff we won't mention on MMD D) and two backups

The new Compaq Presario A900 series laptop puts power computing within your budget.It has 17.1-inch TFT display with BrightView technology and the latest Intel® Pentium® dual core processor.It’s more specs details are:

• Intel Pentium Dual-Core T2390 1.86Hz Processor
• Intel 945GM chipset motherboard
• 2GB memory
• 160GB Hard disk
• DVD writer
• Intel GMA X3100 Graphics card
• 17.1-inch Transflective TFT Wide Screen Display (1,440 x 900)
• Windows Vista Home Premium
• Weight 3 kg
• 10/100 LAN,Bluetooth
• 5-in-one card reader(SD, MMC, MS, MS Pro, xD )
• Webcam

Upgraded to Windows 7 ultimate because we all know Vista SUCKS

It is sufficient for daily use but lags a bit once more than 10 apps are run at once

 

[El_King_Jefe]

If we doing pics?

 

[henrique1966]

That will do anything a desktop will do! I would put more memory in it for things like photoshop/multimedia.

Once they started allowing you to actually have a graphics card that wasn't shared, laptops took a giant leap forward.

 

[anywayIcan]

Post deleted thanks . .sorry

 

[henrique1966]

I got it for 750$ at bestbuy, and then 24'' screen for 250$

I'm shocked! I seen the Asus emblem and I thought someone built it for you. I'm assuming the graphics card is shared if it came from best buys.

 

[henrique1966]

Awic,

Yeah, I was talking to you. For some reason MMD is acting strange at the moment. My connection timed out a couple of times before I could submit my post. When I tried to post again it brought up another thread.

 

[Panzer]

Intel is definitely better, at least I think so

 

[TRADEVA]

Ok, here is who is the best:

Whoever at the moment controls the market share and has the best manufacturing process for a smaller die size.

Ill elaborate, i wes a geek into getting the best computer shit for years, im over it now though as its wanky and a waste of money.

AMD (ati JV) basically owns the GPU martket, as they have the most technologcally advanced fabrication plants. im not sure at their current stage, but their GPU's were being manufactured on 40nm chips, where intel was around 55 or 60nm

Intel owns the CPU market, they are around 32nm processing, im not sure about amd but id say they are about 40nm or so.

So why does this matter? Well, the smaller the chip, the less hot it gets, the less power it uses, so clock for clock (ghz speed) and core for core (you know, dual core, quad core) the processor can operate faster, and be pushed further before it gets too hot.

So what is too hot?
Well in all reality heat isn't too big of an issues, 60c is fine for CPU's to operate safely, and some GPU's operate 85 - 100c standard.

But for the processor to run quicker it will need more voltage, which = more heat (where it comes from) and obviously more power.

Put too much voltage through a processor and it blows, this is true because people use LN2 (liquid nitrogen) to cool the processors, meaning a sub Celsius rating.

However, what ever bang for buck is really the best, and that doesn't always mean the smaller die size, for instance:

i could buy a $90 AMD Phenom 555, its a dual core 3.1ghz processor, but since i know what im doing and due to a technicality with that particular processor, i can unlock 2 extra cores making it quad core and then overclock it to 4.5ghz

So, how does a 4.5GHZ quad core for $90 sound to you?

Bang for buck is the best.

Of course, you may like a particular brand, but likely nvidia or intel, and thats likely because you have been suckered into their marketing methods. after all, they are the only 2 companies using heavy marketing in every computer and media product, aren't they, and its working.

I voted the blank spot.

 

[Nirmala]

I think intel is better.

 

[blackhatdavid]

This is the old Pepsi vs Coke discussion isn't it...or is it the Mac vs PC argument? The REAL question is "does it do what you need it to do?"

 

[silverdot]

I've been studying for my CompTIA A+ test (June 21st wish me luck) and I've learned that the main difference is the L3 cache on AMD processors is built onto the chip. Intel has the L3 cache built nearby but not on the die (CPU). Basically it takes longer to access the information stored there. When the CPU is looking for information this is the first place it goes to see if it's stored there, then the L2 cache, L1 cache, then RAM.

Now with the i3, i5, i7 processors Intel finally hopped on the boat and built the L3 cache on the processor but ALSO enabled hyper-threading like they did with the P4. On a single core is like having "2 lanes" on information. So let's say you got a i7 quad core. That's 4 cores, with hyper-threading, with the L3 cache on the die. 8 lanes of information with fast L3 cache.

I vote Intel all day. It's not pepsi and coke anymore. Intel has it by the balls right now, I can't wait to see what AMD comes up with.

 

[CashDin]

Intel. The Front Side Bus runs 4 times per cycle. AMD only runs 2. It's as simple as that. Faster data transfer. AWIC, what is this dedicated machine you have for running things that are not to be mentioned here? If you can't talk about it here, then it must REALLY be the fun stuff.

 

[Mr.Capitalism]

What, a tie?!? how can this have been a tie? I can't believe there's no overall bias here..
we all know who makes better cpu's.. Intel. speed, power efficiency, and leading technology. they just have to charge more for their products.. If only they were a little bit cheaper, it could compete for value conscious buyers. I hear the new(ish) P55 platform has some bottleneck with high bandwidth graphics cards, or multiple graphics cards.. but that doesn't matter to me, i'm not a gamer.

I really wish intel would go and make hyper-threading standard on all their i5 processors. i Hate how they disable it for the i5 750. that's BS. i'll be buying either a i7 860 or AMD 6 core. need to replace my old old computer, P4 3.2 ghz. It's soo slow, its painful using it. need to make some money soon then i can build computer.

AMD has AMAZING value though when it comes to many core and overclocking processors.. Phenoms, Black series, and they have a 6 core for <$300. I think intel's 6 core is $1000.. Only i think AMD is too underground, and is why their markeshare has never surpassed intel.

I think tho many consumers don't know enough technical stuff, about computers/processors to make wise value decision and chosse AMD more often.. Intel is also an entire generation (13nm) ahead of AMD at the moment. Idk, I always see salesmen trying to push Intel products over at my local electronics stores. (& Bestbuy). They've got good marketing, have to admit. they're the Coke. Everyone remembers the old short "Intel Inside" commercials.. , they still running those, aren't they.

I just checked, & AMD's market share, 19% in 2009-Q1 2010, was much lower than i expected, but improving.. but, alternatively, they do very good with ATI GPUs. I would definitely buy some stock in intel.

 

[amul21]

I am also using intel core 2 duo and i like it better than AMD....