Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers

LPF Donation via Stripe | LPF Donation - Other Methods

Links below open in new window

ArcticMyst Security by Avery

AMD and Intel

What make of processor is currently in your MAIN rig?

  • I have an AMD processor

    Votes: 22 32.4%

  • I have an Intel processor

    Votes: 45 66.2%

  • Whats a processor?

    Votes: 1 1.5%
  • Total voters
    68
Tech_Junkie

Tech_Junkie

0
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
11,800
Points
0
What I've always loved about AMD, besides price, is that for the most part they run very cool. Even stepping them up they run cooler than most comparable Intel chips. Most of the PC's I've built with AMD chips ran just as fast as Intel chips almost double the power with just some OS tweaking. Like Wayne said, the Intels work better with video, an audio processing, but if you dont use your PC for those, than I cant see justifying the the extra cost.
 





iskor12

iskor12

0
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
2,113
Points
0
I run Intel processors. If you would have asked about 5 years ago, I would have said AMD. Intel, in just about every way, has surpased AMD in speed and effeciency in the past couple of years.

Still...AMD makes a good chip, but it just isn't up to my NFS standards.

To be honest though....the processor that I use the most is an ARM processor, which can be found in your average smart phone or I-pod.
 
Last edited:
E

ElektroFreak

0
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,725
Points
0
pullbangdead said:
I'm dubious of AMD's future now that they've gone fabless. I suppose they know what they're doing, and it certainly cuts costs, but in an industry so obsessed with performance, I find it hard to believe the AMD will be able to keep up with Intel in the technology department when so much of their technology will no longer be in-house.

I'm sure their designs will still be fine, but there's so much technology that goes into these chips, that is now going to be outsourced with much less control of their own production lines. I know most of the Si industry is fabless, but most of the industry isn't trying to keep up with Intel and their in-house technology.

Calculated risk, I guess.

Oh, and my laptop has an Intel chip.
Click to expand...

As I previously stated, I think both companies have their place. I also admire underdogs..

AMD has a long standing relationship with TSMC, the world's leading fabricator.. allowing them to handle fab is ideal for a company like AMD. Also, AMDs basic core design hasn't changed significantly since the original Athlon, instead it's just been scaled smaller and smaller while other additions like on-die memory controllers and larger caches have taken up the rest of the available silicon real-estate. AMD can't keep up with Intel in a top-end chip to chip speed comparison, that has been obvious for some time, but that's only part of the equation that makes a good chip. Value is extremely important to the majority of computer consumers (especially makers of supercomputers), and AMD has that market firmly in hand.
 
pullbangdead

pullbangdead

0
Joined
Aug 25, 2007
Messages
2,007
Points
63
ElektroFreak said:
As I previously stated, I think both companies have their place. I also admire underdogs..

AMD has a long standing relationship with TSMC, the world's leading fabricator.. allowing them to handle fab is ideal for a company like AMD. Also, AMDs basic core design hasn't changed significantly since the original Athlon, instead it's just been scaled smaller and smaller while other additions like on-die memory controllers and larger caches have taken up the rest of the available silicon real-estate. AMD can't keep up with Intel in a top-end chip to chip speed comparison, that has been obvious for some time, but that's only part of the equation that makes a good chip. Value is extremely important to the majority of computer consumers (especially makers of supercomputers), and AMD has that market firmly in hand.
Click to expand...

All true, good points. It is amazing nowadays how much of the die is taken up with cache, and how important that hsa become.

And I also am completely aware that I'm biased. My experience is mostly based on working in chip fabs, so of course I think having control over your own fab is very important. I think it's pretty universal that people feel that the things they work on are the most important parts to success, and the same is true for me.

And, I selfishly want fabs to stay in-country for my own job opportunities. Of course GlobalFoundries is building a big, new fab in New York right now, so it's not all bad for US careers opportunities in AMD's new arrangement, if one doesn't mind living in upstate New York.
 
pseudolobster

pseudolobster

0
Joined
Jan 20, 2008
Messages
1,724
Points
0
AMD in my home desktop and fileserver. Intel in my laptop and my work PC.

I'm really happy with my home PC, the processor is a Phenom II 955 Black Edition, and it overclocks easily to 3.6ghz... It cost me $160 for the CPU, which is a 3.2ghz quad core. If I went with intel, I'd be paying $250 for a q8200, which is only 2.3ghz. You really can't beat AMD on performance per dollar. Sure, intel's i7 9xx lineup is loads faster, but it's also at least quadruple the price.
 
MarioMaster

MarioMaster

0
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Messages
3,642
Points
63
I've been with AMD for a while now, mainly because at the time their processors offered the best performance for the price. I had an Athlon64 3800+ but upgraded to what I'm currently running - an X2 6000+ Windsor core which was as high of a speed bin as there was when they were released.
 
Benm

Benm

0
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Messages
7,896
Points
113
I used to be all-AMD, back to the 486 series, but those machines were all desktops. Since i switched to laptops as primary machines to work on, i've gone intel.

With fast laptops performance/power is often an important factor, whereas in desktop systems power consumption doesnt matter at all i used to go for performance/price as well.
 
f22warzone

f22warzone

0
Joined
Sep 8, 2007
Messages
759
Points
0
I have to admit that amd has the price to performance down and plus they don’t emit that much heat
AIT graphics blows everything away they have it all from price to performance to pure performance (I’m running 2x 5970 :p though the drivers are lacking)
Intel has the brute force for those that don’t really care about cost as theirs not much to compare to an i7 oc to 4.0 GHz with HT and yet still runs somewhat cool with steeping

But the future will be cpu/gpu hybrids like what are all ready in development as the cypress gpu processors have 24x the processing power of an i7 when trying to hack and decrypt a password.
 
potatorage

potatorage

0
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
1,341
Points
0
I prefer intel due to the lower power consumption/performance, but I do like the price point of the amd processors.
 
mikeeey

mikeeey

0
Joined
Jun 7, 2007
Messages
1,771
Points
0
I just built my new gaming computer using an AMD Phenom II 965 X4 3.4GHZ. The processor only cost me about $160, and let me tell you it's the fastest thing I've ever seen. Not a single thing has slown it down, it's amazing! The only Intel I've ever owned was my previous computer, which was a Pentium 4 3.0ghz (just a single core processor).

I really can't compare the two, as I've never owned or played with an i7, but I'm still going to recommend the high end phenom II to anyone. Intel is just wayy too over expensive.


Now here's another question... ATI or Nvidia?
http://laserpointerforums.com/f58/ati-vs-nvidia-49714.html
 
Last edited:
KiLLrB

KiLLrB

0
Joined
Jan 27, 2010
Messages
1,072
Points
48
mikeeey said:
I just built my new gaming computer using an AMD Phenom II 965 X4 3.4GHZ. The processor only cost me about $160, and let me tell you it's the fastest thing I've ever seen. Not a single thing has slown it down, it's amazing! The only Intel I've ever owned was my previous computer, which was a Pentium 4 3.0ghz (just a single core processor).

I really can't compare the two, as I've never owned or played with an i7, but I'm still going to recommend the high end phenom II to anyone. Intel is just wayy too over expensive.


Now here's another question... ATI or Nvidia?
http://laserpointerforums.com/f58/ati-vs-nvidia-49714.html
Click to expand...


You thread jacker!!! lol j/k ATI all the way baby!
 
Hiemal

Hiemal

0
Joined
Dec 27, 2011
Messages
1,443
Points
63
pseudolobster said:
AMD in my home desktop and fileserver. Intel in my laptop and my work PC.

I'm really happy with my home PC, the processor is a Phenom II 955 Black Edition, and it overclocks easily to 3.6ghz... It cost me $160 for the CPU, which is a 3.2ghz quad core. If I went with intel, I'd be paying $250 for a q8200, which is only 2.3ghz. You really can't beat AMD on performance per dollar. Sure, intel's i7 9xx lineup is loads faster, but it's also at least quadruple the price.
Click to expand...

You're using the same exact processor as me! I paid around what you got it for too.

I love AMD. Intel is great for mobile processors, AMD is great for Desktops.
 
Lotus_Darkrose

Lotus_Darkrose

0
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
1,807
Points
48
Le Quack said:
You're using the same exact processor as me! I paid around what you got it for too.

I love AMD. Intel is great for mobile processors, AMD is great for Desktops.
Click to expand...

Pretty old thread, lol.

You say Intel is for mobile and AMD is for desktops...I show you this:

AMD FX-8150 8-Core CPU Review: Bulldozer Is Here - HotHardware

8 cores from AMD can't even touch Intel's 6 core i7-970. And keep in mind Intel now has the 980 and 990, along with the Sandy Bridge cpus, which all beat the AMD FX-8150 8-Core.
 
Lotus_Darkrose

Lotus_Darkrose

0
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
1,807
Points
48
Also, I wasn't bashing AMD, just pointing out the flaw in the "Intel is for laptops, AMD is for desktops" mindset that was expressed :)

My desktop has an i5-760, and my cheap laptop has a dual core AMD (can't remember what one).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.




Top