AMD or Intel

[Teny]

i like both.
they each have their advantages.
Im thinking of rebuilding my AMD, but not as good as my sig, but more of one where i would have as a daily use instead of using my laptop all the time.

 

[oriion]

I've only used Intel with pre-assembled comps. When I build my own rig, I use AMD, mostly because they seem to be cheaper. I've never run into any problems with either. The only time I've ever had a semblance of a problem was when my AMD Athlon 64 overheated one day, but it was a very very hot day and it was long overdue for thermal paste reapplication.

So yeah. I don't really have a preference, but I'll stick with AMD because it's been good to me.

 

[glaedr223]

so im confused,

which is better for gaming, video editing etc.???
no opinions just facts please.

 

[freestyler105]

so im confused,

which is better for gaming, video editing etc.???
no opinions just facts please.

Neither...processor speed isn't going to be "faster" at a specific task, it's just going to be faster in general.
Example:
An Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 is faster than an AMD Athlon X2 6000+. Overall it's just faster, so it's going to be better for ALL tasks. There are exceptions, but in general this is true.

But right now, Intel's fastest processors are faster than AMD's fastest.

 

[rpal1211]

so im confused,

which is better for gaming, video editing etc.???
no opinions just facts please.

Intel is superior in all the recent benchmarks (even with the new Phenom II out)

For gaming a dual-core is ideal since most games are not multi-threaded, but a quad running at 3.5Ghz will have the same performance as a dual-core at 3.5Ghz. I say a dual-core is ideal because they can overclock sufficiently better than a quad, therefore yielding greater performance. However, you would see the best performance in video editing if you purchased a quad core, but a dual-core at high frequencies and plenty of cache will get the job done.

I don't recommend AMD, I've had issues with the RAM frequencies when overclocking the 5400+. If I were you, I'd stick to the E7/8xxx series, get a good heatsink, and overclock it to 3.5-4.0Ghz. The performance outdoes the price in a large margin, in my opinion.

 

[synviaweb.com]

I thing the computer's with base AMD the best !!!

 

[tom-knox]

WTF? ^

@OP, The new phenom line are a great addition to computing and the Phenom x4 is the best value line of Quads available

 

[esa193]

For gaming a dual-core is ideal since most games are not multi-threaded, but a quad running at 3.5Ghz will have the same performance as a dual-core at 3.5Ghz. I say a dual-core is ideal because they can overclock sufficiently better than a quad, therefore yielding greater performance. However, you would see the best performance in video editing if you purchased a quad core, but a dual-core at high frequencies and plenty of cache will get the job done.

if you buying for gaming being that most new games and games coming out this year mostly support 4 cores a quad would be the way to go
and who said you cant overclock as far on a quad
my Q6600 will go as far as an e6600

 

[Snoop65]

When I had my Q6600 I overclocked it over 3ghz on air. It's a old chip now but still a great bargin.

 

[jarlmaster47]

I rock a P4 at 2.4 ghz!