amd vs. Intel

[Jaymz9350]

How many Intel chips have you seen overclocked to 6.0GHz and be stable? Just asking...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEP_s4nAZEs

First of all the 6 ghz wasn't stable, just a cpu-z screen. and that has nothing to do with how yours "blows away" your buddies I7. are you running at 6.0 on LN2? not saying the PII's aren't great and can't overclock (they can, at least on LN2 oc higher than i7's) but that has nothing to do with a normal home application even overclocked.

I'm no intel fanboy, my current pc is my first intel in about 10 years, I have just yet to see any proof the PII's blow away I7 except on max overclock with extream cooling.

And actually the record cpu-z screen for the PII is actually just shy of 6.7ghz about 1 ghz above the I7 record.

Look back at the p4 and a64 days though, while you could clock a p4 to 8 ghz +- (cpu-z world records 4 of the top 5 are p4 based chips over 8ghz and the 5th is just shy) the a64 had trouble much past 3 i believe, but in real world use the a64 smoked the p4.

 

[Syko]

AMD all the way.. bought a AMD CPU for 80 bucks for the equal power in Intel was almost 200 bucks

 

[Jaymz9350]

AMD all the way.. bought a AMD CPU for 80 bucks for the equal power in Intel was almost 200 bucks

Just curious what 2 processors are you talking about?

 

[mjonesjr]

The price difference between the AMD Phenom II x4 and the Intel i7 is about $200. I have the AMD Phenom II x4 Black Edition and it smokes my buddies i7 with the same setup as me and his is over clocked to meet what MHz mine is stock.

 

[TheTopher]

Could you possibly post some benchmarks and actual model numbers/system configurations to back that up?



Simply stating that an AMD system was less expensive and faster than an overclocked Intel counterpart is more like hearsay than actual data...much like an Apple commercial.

 

[DetUnd]

I prefer AMD because of they own ATI. They are very efficient to run my 2 x 1G video cards. AMD also has fantastic Linux support.

 

[Jaymz9350]

I prefer AMD because of they own ATI. They are very efficient to run my 2 x 1G video cards. AMD also has fantastic Linux support.

Actually AMD (or ATI I should say) has pathetic Linux support compared to Nvidia.

 

[TheTopher]

Actually AMD (or ATI I should say) has pathetic Linux support compared to Nvidia.

+1

nVidia has made linux specific drivers for its products as far back as I can remember. I believe ATi only recently started doing that.

 

[Jaymz9350]

+1

nVidia has made linux specific drivers for its products as far back as I can remember. I believe ATi only recently started doing that.

Now they also only support the HD2000 series and up in there drivers which means some newer distros (like when i tried Ubuntu 9.04) on anything older you get no ATI driver.

 

[mrcarcrazy]

I've heard both are better... I'm under the belief that they're pretty much equal but I'm gonna go intel cuz it's in my mac

+1 to this. Mac FTW

 

[mjonesjr]

+1 to this. Mac FTW

This isn't a Mac vs. PC thread. Mac's use Intel processors now.

 

[DetUnd]

Amd releases monthly updates for kde4

 

[Jaymz9350]

Amd releases monthly updates for kde4

Are you talking about GPU drivers? If so just releasing drivers doesn't mean anything. Releasing quality drivers that properly function and perform well has not been AMD/ATI's strong point for Linux. I know most people who run Linux exclusively tend to stay away from AMD/ATI.