BF2S Forums AMD vs. INTEL Poll/Topic

joker3327 wrote:

Ok I clicked  AMD......reason .....it just seems to P*ss all over intel for gaming......which is what most of us use or PCs for!!


Lets see what Core Duo / Conroe comes up with

the same reason for me 2 and all of us here

AMD will pwnze j00

jaymz9350 wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

joker3327 wrote:

Ok I clicked  AMD......reason .....it just seems to P*ss all over intel for gaming......which is what most of us use or PCs for!!


Lets see what Core Duo / Conroe comes up with

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware … 83765.html

collection of conroe data.

super PI 1M in under 10 seconds! now thats amazing

not to say benchies aren't good ways to see performance but when i see some that say my system should play bf2 at about 140 fps (forget where it was someone here posted the link) and i really only get 85-90 it's hard for me to trust these. and also i'm in no way saying conroe isn't great just i don't think everyone in the world needs one.  if no one buy's an amd proc, then they go under and intel becomes the microsoft of cpu's, no matter what kind of crap they make you have little choice but to buy it.

Quite agree....forget benchmarks..a damn good fragfest shows the difference better for me

AMD. My first, and last, 'love' for a processor producer.

iv always had AMD, never had a problem with them, currently run a dual core 4800 which iv had since last year.   
also, intel adverts reeally annoy me, it seems like dell and pcworld must work for them or something, cuz thats the only thing they ever advertise..the only AMD ad iv ever seen is on the Ferrari F1 team.
so i dont really hate intel becasue of them, mainly because dell and pc world piss me off..

semerkhet83 wrote:

iv always had AMD, never had a problem with them, currently run a dual core 4800 which iv had since last year.   
also, intel adverts reeally annoy me, it seems like dell and pcworld must work for them or something, cuz thats the only thing they ever advertise..the only AMD ad iv ever seen is on the Ferrari F1 team.
so i dont really hate intel becasue of them, mainly because dell and pc world piss me off..

reason amd doesnt advertise a lot is that its simply they dont have the money too while intel is a larger company.

The problem with your poll is that it reflects the past, not the future.  Of course AMD will win the poll....but they just lost the current battle.

AMD has ruled the roost for several years and to be honest, I've loved every freakin minute of it.  I am genuinely happy to see the underdog on top.  The downside of this is how badly the AMD prices were getting.  No longer was AMD the uber affordable chips it once was.  Now however, the ball is in the back into the Intel court.  The fact that Intel is about to soundly kick AMD's ass is good for everyone.  The new Intel prices are relatively low, and AMD is frantically slashing prices, as that is all they have to bring to the table at this point.  In the end, we all win regardless of which brand we prefer.

This new round of competition is very good for the gamer.  I'm still very happy with my AMD chip for the moment but I can guarantee in 6 months I'll be gaming with Intel and hoping the next round goes back to AMD.

BigmacK192 wrote:

Dual-Core Pentium 4's with HT technology FTW.

thats extreme edition... they handle multithreaded apps uber fast

dankassasin42o wrote:

From a computer Techs point of view.


  AMD FTW!!!!!!



Intel aint shit.

If intel is so shit then why did they release a new cpu that outperforms amd top cpu for 1/3 of the price?

The#1Spot wrote:

The reason i chose amd is cause the L1 cache is at least 2.5times more than intel which is what is important in a processor, run cooler, use less voltage to run, overclockable, dont get fps spikes, has cheaper ram, and it less confusing of which one is upgradable ex pent d pent m wtf how can you tell amd uses #s which is a lot easier.

the new conroe will have around the same amount of L1 cache w/ amd's current cpu, and the conroe has 8times more L2 cache than production line AMD cpu's (excluding FX series)

gburndred wrote:

Conroe overclocked from 3ghz to 5ghz on air cooled and the temp is 75F. All benchmarks say that the conroe out preformed the amd chip. I think all the people that see the benchmarks for conroe are in denial. They don't want to believe that its true. Computer places have pushed amd products for so long, and now they are most likely going to start pushing the new conroe, its cheaper and more faser.

its not that theyre in denial, they are just fanboyz who cant see the light

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

The#1Spot wrote:

The reason i chose amd is cause the L1 cache is at least 2.5times more than intel which is what is important in a processor, run cooler, use less voltage to run, overclockable, dont get fps spikes, has cheaper ram, and it less confusing of which one is upgradable ex pent d pent m wtf how can you tell amd uses #s which is a lot easier.

the new conroe will have around the same amount of L1 cache w/ amd's current cpu, and the conroe has 8times more L2 cache than production line AMD cpu's (excluding FX series)

wtf did you get 8times more l2 cache than amd the max right now on amd is 2mb and dells best is 4mb whch will make it 2 times more. BTW L2 cache is secondary memory so its not near as important and dell relies on L2 a lot so thats why it has more the most expensive intel processor on the market which ususally is the fastest has $1018 on newegg has 56kbL1 cache cause it relies on the 4mb L2 and amd has had 256kb since the x2 was out and the cost around $300 which only relies on 512kbx512kb which makes it way more efficient. Also if Itel conroe has the same amout of L1 cache how come they never post it like the other processors they sell hmmm i make my point here.

Last edited by The#1Spot (2006-07-19 21:32:37)

Final Words

Intel's Core 2 Extreme X6800 didn't lose a single benchmark in our comparison; not a single one. In many cases, the $183 Core 2 Duo E6300 actually outperformed Intel's previous champ: the Pentium Extreme Edition 965. In one day, Intel has made its entire Pentium D lineup of processors obsolete. Intel's Core 2 processors offer the sort of next-generation micro-architecture performance leap that we honestly haven't seen from Intel since the introduction of the P6.

Compared to AMD's Athlon 64 X2 the situation gets a lot more competitive, but AMD still doesn't stand a chance. The Core 2 Extreme X6800, Core 2 Duo E6700 and E6600 were pretty consistently in the top 3 or 4 spots in each benchmark, with the E6600 offering better performance than AMD's FX-62 flagship in the vast majority of benchmarks. Another way of looking at it is that Intel's Core 2 Duo E6600 is effectively a $316 FX-62, which doesn't sound bad at all.

Enthusuasts have not seen overclocking like this since Socket 478 days, and in fact Core 2 may be even better.  The 2.4GHz E6600, which outperformed the FX-62 in most benchmarks at stock speed costs $316, and overclocked to 4Ghz with excellent air cooling.  With that kind of performance, value, and overclocking the E6600 will likely become the preferred chip for serious overclockers - particularly those that are looking for champagne performance on a smaller budget.

Testing Conroe with eight motherboards and thirteen different 2GB memory kits taught us quite a lot about using Conroe as the center of a new system. The Core 2 Duo CPU is fast, cool, and generally easy to work with in every motherboard with every memory we tested. Most of our Reference systems have been based on AMD/AM2 for the last couple of years. To be honest, going back to some of those same systems after our Conroe testing, the differences are more obvious and painful than you might think. Conroe is clearly the faster platform - and not by small, barely measurable differences.

For christs sake people, dont take my word for it, dont take the above words for it.  Go out and read for yourselves.  This is just not debatable.  Intel has swept the field.  You can argue the point all you want, but tha fact remains......Intel has just rendered all of their previous processors obsolete, and nearly decimated AMD's offering as well.  The only thing one can say for AMD at this point is that at least the new intel platform didnt slaughter THEM as bad as it slaughtered it's OWN previous offerings.

Intel owns bragging rights now.  Get used to it, now or later, AMD has nothing to bring to the table other than price cuts before late 2007/2008.

I don't like this any more than you all, as I've been running AMD since 1995 but I'm also not an idiot.  I know a good thing when I see it.

Last edited by ShotYourSix (2006-07-19 21:44:35)