is AMD that bad?

Question

I know that Core 2 Duo wipes the floor with the AMD x2 line, but i really want to know - will the AMD athlon x2 4600 be really that bad of a choice - i know its powerful enough to run Battlefield 2 maxxed while doing the Prime 95 torture testing and doing a Norton system scan, but the reviews and the bashings are really getting to my head - plus AMDs architecture is actually better with the onboard RAM controller.
I just wanna know will an x2 4600 be able to play the latest DX10 games with a good GPU and 2GB ram.
Cause ive always liked AMD, Intel is a big headache in the motherboard section and i have a great AM2 motherboard in mind.

Thanx alot

Answer 1

AMD is just fine. Sure Intel's got better CPUs...but the price's bite you for it. I mean...do you really need all that gamin...and if so...AMD will still be just fine.

Answer 2

My own experience tells me AMD CPU's historically were always faster than Intel ones when compared side-by-side on processors of the same speed, the AMD usually is faster.

I had AMD processors for long time, now in this time of my computing life I have a Gateway computer with a Pentium D 820 2.8 Ghz that's dual-core and I am very pleased with it. Running benchmarks it show that this processor is way faster on every aspect compared to a Pentium 4 of the same speed.

Both Intel and AMD processors (well we have not much of a choice) are good, some have more cache, some have faster bus speeds but an AMD X2 4600 sounds more than reasonable to run if not all, most of your games, even your Battefield 2.

Battlefield 2 runs fine on my Pentium D 2.8 Ghz dual-core with 1 GB of DDR2 RAM Dual Channel and an NVIDIA Geforce 7600 GT PCI Express video card.

For your gaming, worry more about how much RAM you have, and what kind of video card you have, rather than CPU speed, because mostly any modern computer CPU these days will run that Battefield 2 anyway.

Have a nice day.

Answer 3

The people talking about AMD giving you more performance per dollar need to research better. The 4600+ is $200, while the Core 2 Duo E6300 is $180, and the Core 2 Duo is faster, so which gives you more for your money. That said, if you are dead set on AMD, that processor is very good, and you will have no problems playing new games. Plus AMD will have their new ones out this summer, and you can always upgrade to one of them if you want more performance.

Answer 4

AMD makes some very good processors, you get more performance per dollar than you do with Intel.

As far as Intel wiping the floor with AMD, this goes back and forth. AMD has blown Intel away in several past benchmark test. The competitive atmosphere these 2 companies create only works to the benefit of the consumer. Buying an Intel processor now just because it outperforms the most current AMD processor is a big mistake, because the next AMD release will outperform the current Intel processor, and vice versa. It is a cycle that will never end.

If you are only interested in buying a particular brand of hardware because it outperforms its competition, you will never buy hardware. Your hardware is outdated before it ever makes it to the store. You only need to be concerned with how long it will take for software to catch up to your hardware.

Answer 5

this is the amd processor I have in my new rig. and after a month of having it. never seen any problems on it.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103759



you will see more gammers uses AMD processors over intel. like said money to preformance wise AMD is the way to go. most peopel bash amd because they are right up there with intel and was the first to release the dual core processor. dont worry about buying the amd processor and BF 2142 runs like a bat out of hell on my system. cant wait to see how it takes on the resource hog of a program called BF2 lol.

Answer 6

For the latest performance info go to Tom's Hardware.com

Answer 7

I have always been happy with AMD..

Answer 8

no but i just dony like amd