As some of you might know from previous posts I’m planning on buying a computer and I saw that the AMD processor is much cheaper than the Intel processor and I wonder if there is any bigger difference between these two computers:
AMD:
Cooler Master Centurion 5 Miditower Black/Silver without PSU
Chieftec CFT-500A-12S 500W ATX/DualX EPS-12V 120mm Fan 20/24-pin (AMD&P4 OK)
Gigabyte GA-MA790FX-DS5 AMD790FX 4DDR2-DIMM 2PCI 5PCIe SATA Raid Audio GB-LAN Firewire Socket AM2+ ATX
Samsung SH-S203D/BEBN DVD±RW Dual-Layer 20X BLACK Bulk SATA
Processor:
AMD Phenom 9850 BLACK EDITION Quad-Core 2.5GHz 4x1MB (L2+L3) 125W Boxed (with cpu-cooler!) Socket AM2+
RAM:
A-DATA 2048MB DDR2 PC2-6400 800MHz
HDD:
Samsung HD501LJ 500GB 7200rpm 16MB SATA2
Graphics:
BFG GeForce 9800GX2 1024MB DDR3 TV-out HDTV DUAL DVI RETAIL PCI Express
OS:
Windows Vista Home Premium 32-bit DVD Svensk OEM
INTEL:
Cooler Master Elite 332 Miditower without PSU
Chieftec CFT-500A-12S 500W ATX/DualX EPS-12V 120mm Fan 20/24-pin (AMD&P4 OK)
Gigabyte GA-EP35-DS3 iP35 4DDR2-DIMM 3PCI 4PCIe SATA Raid Audio GB-LAN Socket775 ATX
Samsung SH-S203D/BEBN DVD±RW Dual-Layer 20X BLACK Bulk SATA
Processor:
Intel Core 2 QUAD Q9450 2.66GHz 12MB FSB1333 Boxed (with cpu-cooler!) Socket 775
(The other components are all the same as on the AMD computer)
Now, the price of the AMD processor ($ 296) is lower than the Intel processor ($ 440) but what are the other differences between these processors? I’ve heard that AMD processors are better for gaming (which I will use it for) is it therefore better to buy the AMD processor?
Any other tips/recommendations on the computer as a whole are appreciated.
intel's core2duo/quads are faster than amd x2/phenoms in practically every gaming benchmark. the phenom 9850 is only competitive with the q6600. the q9300 is faster than both and the q9450 even faster.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3272&p=12
For gaming, you could consider an Intel dual core from the Core 2 line.
The E8400 would outperform the Phenom in most games and save some money (from your post I assumed the lower $$ for AMD was the motivator), and I see it around $200ish. There's others to choose from too, of course.
I'm afraid right now AMD just hasn't kept up with Intel for CPUs for gamers (I still really like the Phenoms for general office use). I know I'm not alone in hoping they catch up. But for now I really think Intel is the better way to go. As linked above, the data are pretty clear when you put em to the test.
dawn_swe
Something to think about.
World's Fastest Supercomputers Employ AMD Opteron(TM) Processors to Reach Unprecedented Performance
3 of the Top 5 Systems and 7 of the Top 20 Systems Depend on AMD Innovation Top 20 Showing for AMD Opteron Processors Outpaces any other x86 Processor Architecture by Almost 2:1
DRESDEN, Germany, Jun 18, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- At the International Supercomputing Conference, AMD (AMD) today announced that its AMD Opteron(TM) processors have helped deliver many of the top performing supercomputers in the world. For the first time ever, AMD technology plays a role in the number one supercomputer in the world and this same processor technology that helps drive the number one supercomputer is also readily available for business and personal computing
My prediction? Someday, AMD will leave INTEL in the micro dust. This doesn't help you much with buying your computer today, but it's still something to think about. Good luck, Greybear70
To some extent that's like saying a Chevy won the Daytona 500, so their cars must be the best mileage. Supercomputers != consumer computers.
I think it'd be great if AMD would catch up and pass, as we all benefit from the results of competition.
But for now doing main HQ in Dresden's euros vs Intel's devalued US$ and the sizable lead Intel has, I think it'll be after we get a new CPU slot (so new mobo) before a person would feel like they'd get categorically better performance from AMD than they can from Intel.
I agree the Intel would be much faster at playing games and I also fully agree that you should try and save some money and get a fast dual core rather then a quad core as there are not a whole lot of programs that can take advantage of 4 cores at the moment, or even in the foreseeable future, and not a single game is on the list, although a lot of posters claim that Crysis uses all four (NOT). But if it is just between those no two, go for the Intel. While AMD's beat out Intel's, that only applies to certain ranges of CPUs, and not higher mid-range to high end cpu's.
Thermaltake Tsumani
QX6850
Gigabyte X38 Based MB
Coolit Thermoelectric Chilled Water Cooling
Asus Radeon HD 3870 X2 1gb
4gb HyperX Overclocked Ram
16,820 to 17,000+ 3dMark06
AMD has always performed more executions per clock cycles than Intel and as others have stated I too wish AMD would get their stuff together, but currently Intel is kicking AMD’s butt in most categories.
Look at this comparison chart first http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php before making your decision. I would also recommend dropping your budget in the video card cpu area and get a much better power supply, a bad power supply when it craps out will take out the other peripherals.
I'll take you another direction as well, why not buy a premade quad core and add your own power supply and video card? Here's a pretty cheap option http://configure.us.dell.com/dellstore/config.aspx?c=us&cs=19&l=en&oc=DDDADG4&s=dhs&dgc=CJ&cid=24471&lid=730577
Athlon X2 is easy to overclock. Just unlock the multiplier. I think black edition AMDs are already unlocked, I can't afford to buy one to test out my theory though.
Whoops. i was thinking about athlon xp, a long time ago. remember the pencil unlocking trick. unlocking an X2 is much harder. BEs do come unlocked, googled it.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |