This is very tricky because AMD has mastered being able to make their processors faster at lower clock speeds. There speeds are still measured in the ghz but the numbers are not as high as Intel's. This is do to the way the processor die is manufactured and front side buses size etc. However, from what I understand Intel has the edge right now but that processor will cost your shirt off your back. A new monkey wrench in this problem is the new dual core processors from both AMD and Intel. A dual core processor rated at 2.3 ghz will out perform a 3 ghz single core processor in multi tasking every time. If you are new to this and you are making your computer for the first time then all I can say is go to all the tech sites out there and read their reviews and you will find your answer.
2007-01-01 17:01:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by Shellback 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
AMD processor is extra inexpensive than Intel processor and Intel are fans, extreme overall performance, multi tasking. AMD concentrates on the laptop and customer marketplace and minimize the expenses for their CPUs fee with a view to be extra aggressive. generally AMD use socket A (462 pins) and Intel use socket 478(478 pins). Now Intel processors have the biggest L3 cache at 2mb on an identical time as the biggest for AMD is 1mb.
2016-11-25 21:47:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
They both use Ghz, as well as their own performance rating.
example: AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is 2.4 Ghz
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 is 2.4 Ghz
While the Ghz measurement or performance rating might help you compare it with other processors of the same line, it's a terrible way of comparing processors of different companies or even different lines since they are COMPLETELY different. Instead, the only way to compare real-world performance of two CPUs is to compare benchmarks, reviews, and performance charts.
Here's a great place to get started:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html
Never make CPU decisions based on Ghz or video card decisions based on the amount of memory. A little research goes a long way when comparing performance.
2007-01-01 17:15:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jamal D 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
generally AMD processors have a XXXX+ number associated with them. for example i own a Athlon 3400+ meaning that it is equivalent to a Intel 3.4 ghz machine even though it only runs at a clock speed of 2.4 ghz. just check the rating on the processor box.
2007-01-01 17:29:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by Drew B 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
AMD Processors are also in GHZ...GHZ is clock speed, not a brand thing.
AMD's brands are AMD Athlon 3800+ (2.4 Single Core processor) for example.
Intel's are Intel Core Duo T2700 (2.33GHZ Dual Core processor)
You have to look it all up though, generally, AMD has certain patterns, but they vary between cores and brands (Turion, Athlon, etc.)...
2007-01-01 16:50:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by Chris_Knows 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
AMD numbers (like XP-3200) are the equivalent of Intels GHz. In this case it would be like a 3.2GHz Intel, but only run at about 2GHz.
2007-01-01 16:49:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html?modelx=33&model1=430&model2=464&chart=181
Use that website to compare the performance of different processors under real world applications.
2007-01-01 16:48:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by Snerler 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
amd also uses ghz im not sure wat your talking about but iver researched heavily. the fact is AMD clocks out almost a full ghz slower than an intel. but you can higher a tweaker to overlcock it to almost 3 ghz more! (only for amd) and the multitasking makes up for the low clockspeed.
2007-01-01 16:48:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
goto intel.com then to amd.com and read up on both websites each site give a comparison of the cpu's
2007-01-01 16:49:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by Carling 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
what does this have to do with monitors
2007-01-01 16:48:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋