AMD vs INTEL!

[shane86]

This polls for all my fellow geeks out there. Do you prefer Amd or Intel cpus? Or don't care? Why? Personally I prefer Amd cpus because of their flexability overclocking and they tend to be cheaper. I can overclock my Phenom II 1090T six core to 3.6ghz which is higher than the Intel Core i7 980X. Sure the core i7 980x can go over 4 ghz but... its got a 1k+ price tag. I only paid 299.99 for my phenom II 1090T. Eat my shit Intel.

 

[zorgonatis]

I prefer Intel processors, although I have been a customer of both companies in the past.

My current quadcore (q9400) is clocked at 3.9Ghz and smashes the shit out of even more expensive AMD processors.

"Eat my shit AMD."

 

[shane86]

lol "eat my shit amd"

*edit* yeah wired its all personal preference. I was just curious who liked what. The only thing I disliked about amd was that it took them a while to support ddr2 and ddr3 ram. Now when the intel 12 cores come out in 2012 they'll probably make ddr4 ram for it and amd will be stuck with oldschool ddr3.

 

[wired420]

Intel = Less Power Usage
AMD = Over Clocking...

Plain and simple.

 

[Owneth]

Intel = Less Power Usage
AMD = Over Clocking...

Plain and simple.

Intel Core I920 @ 4.3GHZ ... Default clock is 2.67ghz.

Intel OC's just fine.

I'd reconsider. And that's on AIR. 63C on full load.

 

[zorgonatis]

Aye, I'm also of the opinion that it's hard to beat Intel clocks. I'd only really consider AMD for budget builds, and even then you're sacrificing performance. Lets face it, most people don't overclock at all.

Don't get me wrong, if I wanted more than 4 cores I'd be going AMD, but even 4core i7's match the performance of the AMD 6core processors in most multithreaded environments.

 

[wired420]

Lol I saw a video of a AMD 1090T six core clocked at 6.94 nitrogen cooled. I just ordered two of them this morning. They'll be here by 10am.

 

[Possien]

i start fires with my amd

 

[Owneth]

Lol I saw a video of a AMD 1090T six core clocked at 6.94 nitrogen cooled. I just ordered two of them this morning. They'll be here by 10am.

Enjoy your RMA's.

 

[silentscope1]

AMDs are best bang for buck at the moment, the performance difference doesn't quite justify the price difference for a i7 980x over a 1090T

 

[Apoc]

Intel FTW.

I've overclocked Q6600s to 3.9-4.1ghz on air alone. Good luck getting AMDs even remotely close to that on just air. (The i7s easily hit 4.2ghz on air. I've only gone as far as 4.6ghz on air before it got a little too hot for my tastes)

I've never been a fan of AMD. Mostly because their hardware tends to burn out twice as fast (hence why it's cheaper), and the over clocking on AMDs pretty much peaks at 3.9ghz, which is absolute crap compared to Intel CPUs.

Intel is coming out with a 6core CPU that will absolutely destroy anything AMD is producing. The reason Intel is 'late to the party'? They do shit right. They don't get it out first, just to be first. They get it out when it's ready to be out to the public.

The only thing AMD has on Intel at the moment, is likely to be notebook manufacturing deals. And that's pretty much it. (If you own a desktop, with an AMD CPU in it, you're missing out.)

 

[Dameize]

Id have to go AMD even though im currently using an intel cpu. Why? because AMD CPUs are cheaper and can be overclocked much better. Yes the Intel 6core high end cpu smashes the shit out of the AMD cpu but at the end of the day I know that I iwll save money and its not a realistic noticable differance.

 

[zorgonatis]

Id have to go AMD even though im currently using an intel cpu. Why? because AMD CPUs are cheaper and can be overclocked much better. Yes the Intel 6core high end cpu smashes the shit out of the AMD cpu but at the end of the day I know that I iwll save money and its not a realistic noticable differance.

You could, yknow, get a cheaper Intel CPU

 

[zomgmage]

Intel's also hit that high with extreme cooling.

Clock for clock... Intel > AMD.

My Xeon W3520 (i7 920) runs @ 4.4 on air, stock clocks are 2.67 I think.

Also, from personal exp... Intel seems 100% more stable. All AMD CPU's I've owned ended up either burning out or just being so unstable at stock clocks they where not worth use. The last AMD I had was a Opteron 165, It was a decent chip but had nothing on intel

 

[botouser]

i use HP z800 Workstation Intel Xeon X5680

 

[kj598]

Intel is the best! Haha, I always used Intel CPU.

 

[rooster71]

ATM im into Intel - got i7 2.6 occed to 4ghz.

Job done imop atm.

 

[imahippy]

"i start fires with my amd"

lol, yea i had a lappy with a crappy old amd in it, and it nearly burnt my ballsack several times..but yea they still reliable and cheap..just good for cooking eggs and such

 

[lynar]

Intel! My i5 750 is at 3,8ghz (around that), stock 2,66. No external cooling

Couple of years ago i had a AMD 64bit 3000(?).. stock was 1,86ghz, and i was on 2,7ghz
And this was like.. 4-5 years ago (when i had the X800XT grrrrraphic card ^^)

 

[butane]

Intel = quality, a bit more expensive

AMD = crap, a little cheaper

I have had far more luck OC'ing intel cpus on air alone. AMD seems to always be a step behind Intel.
I would use an amd cpu if someone asked me to build them the cheapest computer possible, and even then I would probably use a Pentium E5200 lol.

But in all reality it depends on who the computer is for, and what they will be doing with it. AMD is good to have around if not just to keep Intel honest and to hit a staggered price point.