English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

8 answers

c AMD by far is a faster processor just keep in mind you may want to install a after market heat-sink fan like a golden orb cause they tend to run hot

2006-07-20 09:55:02 · answer #1 · answered by SeaSea 3 · 2 1

Conroe is the best processor in the world. Don't listen to the Intel-haters, just read the reviews:

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.

2006-07-20 17:36:26 · answer #2 · answered by Kafir 4 · 0 0

While Core2 IS better than anything AMD has to offer at the moment, AMD is likely to rebound with something eventually. Both Intel and AMD are great companies. If you are going to get a totally new computer, I'd try and at least get something beyond a Pentium 4/Celeron or the Sempron line, especially for gaming. Advancements in dual core technology by both AMD and Intel have made processors much faster in the last year and few months.

In general Core2 >Athlon 64 FX > Athlon64 X2 > Athlon 64 >= Pentium D900s > Pentium D 800 > Pentium 4 > Sempron = Celeron > Pentium 3

If you want specific benchmarks for comparing two processors then read up at http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html or http://www.anandtech.com/cpu .

There are many other decent review websites as well. It all really comes down to which two processors you are comparing. In general for gaming AMD is usually better and Intel is better for multimedia, but Intel Core2 is better at both if you can afford/locate it.

2006-07-20 17:55:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I am an AMD man but I have to admit that intel is coming out with some real good stuff lately that is actually cheaper than AMD. Come on AMD get with it and lower your prices too.
I still have to say that overall AMD is a little bit better.

2006-07-20 16:56:31 · answer #4 · answered by IngeborgDot 2 · 0 0

AMD in general but these days you need to look at getting this for your gaming system:

Processor with 2 cores and good amount of L2 cache (1MB is good)
minimum of 1GB, but 2GB is ideal
200-250GB 7200-10K drives SATA 300
minimum of 1 256MB video card with no shared system memory AT ALL with 256-bit memory bus. 2 in SLI mode is much much better.
An Awesome looking case with quiet but great cooling.
DVD+-RW drive
19"+ CRT/LCD of your choice (some gamers still go with CRTs because of the refresh rates)


In the end the processor type doesn't seem to make a huge difference but I've noticed the better performing gaming systems have AMD processors in them.

For me it's AMD - Desktop, Intel - Laptop.

Note, in my system I run the stock AMD fan and I never get above 34 deg C. This is in a Thermaltake case.. AWESOME CASES!

2006-07-20 16:49:36 · answer #5 · answered by Alyssa 5 · 0 0

Still AMD.

2006-07-20 17:09:56 · answer #6 · answered by DazedAndConfused 3 · 0 0

amd is better for overclocking and gaming. intel for multimedia

2006-07-20 16:45:20 · answer #7 · answered by NAQ 5 · 0 0

DEF AMD ITS BETTER AND FASTER AND USES LESS ENERGY

2006-07-20 16:42:45 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers