Intel Prescott

[entity512]

Those intel extremes sure look sexy...

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

Lol; they certainly do!

 

[Cartman00]

what most people dont know about 64-bit processors is that programs that were not designed for 64-bit i.e games, video applications, etc. will have to work twice as hard as a 32-bit like intels. although programs do seem to be becoming 64 as well as 32 compatible...
But for now Intel>AMD

EDIT: Sorry for off-topic btw Prescotts although they may have 1mb L2 Cache, dunno what your looking at for prescott's, they do tend to run hotter than a lot of other processors. If your looking to overclock and dont want to buy upgraded heatsinks/fans go with the C

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

I think most of us do realise that; or at least they should.

Also, Intel has always and will always be greater than AMD anyway.

 

[Barrett]

I beg to differ. Not to be argumenative, but how can you guys say the Intel P4 3.4 is better at gaming than the AMD 64 3400+. The benchmarks don't lie my friends!

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

You give us the Benchmarks where the AMD64 Athlon 3400+ (note; we're not saying the FX-53) is better overall than the Intel P4 3.4Ghz HT EE?

As far as I know, its damn close with the FX-53 too. Don't know who is better overall, but I know its close.

 

[gibant1]

Both processors are More than fast enough to handle all games. Your graphic card is more important.

I put my 6800 in my brothers 2Ghz XP and it runs farycry silky smooth with everything turned on.

If you multi-task, Intel all day long, if you dont, both are good.

Former 3Ghz Amd64 owner.

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

Got a good point; most is down to what you like personally. Just like nVidia and ATi and Mac and Microsoft.