AMD or Intel? Your thoughts?

[bigmike82]

"Ok, to be totally honest with you guys. The REAL reason I'm upgrading is because of starcraft II. "

If that's why...

Intel Core Duo. 6 GB Ram. Nvidia 250 gts.

You don't need anything more. Spend the rest on a gun.

[odysseus]

Intel is the lead in most cases right now, due to ability and power management. Really though, most PC users really won't know the difference with somewhat comparable offerings.

[den888]

I have had both AMD and Intel in the past, but my current PC's all run Intel processors. Frankly, I cannot tell the difference between them !

[AJAX22]

Amd is wayyyyy behind intel...

Once intel revised it's pricing system to make it's new product available without a new adopter premium they pretty much took over the market.

[kapache]

INTEL NUFF SAID. Intel is 100% ahead of AMD, back in the late 90s AMD had the upper hand with their over clocking capabilities, but nowadays Intel has way more to offer than AMD overclocking feature.

[StephenhDMRS]

Intel especially in that case. Intel uses less power than AMD. And also... Just because it's higher clocked doesn't mean it works faster/better than a lower clocked Intel. I've read enough processor reviews and the numbers to see that intel always beats amd comparably and even a 2.6ghz intel processor will beat a 3.1 amd processor

I play starcraft 2 and I can say with mainly all games, it comes down to your video card. If your going to sacrifice on money savings, do it with the CPU. The GPU can make it for A LOT.

[beaster]

My wife used to work for AMD, and they're always a step behind Intel. Not sure how Intel does it, but I know AMD has offshored and outsourced most of their operations out of California to Asia and Canada and centralized manufacturing in Texas. OK, so I'm biased, but AMD products will never enter my house again.

[choprzrul]

I am confused. No one seems to compare a $100 AMD processor to a $100 Intel processor. I would be interested to see benchmark results when the $$ spent are equal rather than claimed GHz or whatever. I am thinking that it would make more sense to compare this way as most people have a budget they allow themselves on a build.

Now, how does the Intel/AMD comparison work when you add the Intel-based MB chipset and graphics card? Obviously, it makes sense to stay vendor specific throughout the build. Just my $.02

[Brianguy]

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/

[Paragun]

I think you guys are missing the bigger picture here. It's no longer the CPU that makes a good or great computer, it is important, but not the only thing to consider. Just take a look at your windows task manager, performance tab. When do you ever hit 100% CPU usage?
I have the AMD Phenom II X4 965 3.40Ghz and I have never seen it go above 34% on any core.
You should also consider your motherboards chipset, the speed of your memory, and the graphics card. For games I would place more consideration on the graphics card as it will do most of the rendering.

[choprzrul]

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/

Nice link. Looks like the AMD Phenom rules the Benchmark/$$ chart. Better known as 'bang for the buck'???

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_alltime.html

.

[Paragun]

Nice link. Looks like the AMD Phenom rules the Benchmark/$$ chart. Better known as 'bang for the buck'???

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_alltime.html

.

ROTFL...it figures, mine is at the bottom of that list. However, I never had a problem running anything.

[bombadillo]

Mine is one of the better values. Its close to a year old now and have happily been running an AMD Athlon Phenom II X4 945 successfully with no issues or slowing of any kind. Great bang for the buck.

[Ruiner]

Depends on what the PC is primarily for. I build my PCs to get maximum peformance for gaming, so I use Intel CPUs as they are far faster, but more expensive. For general use PCs or for people on a budget, I'll use AMD as its a lot cheaper.

[gabe123]

HK or GLOCK? They both get the job done. But I prefer HK, or Intel for that matter.