Intel or AMD

Any off topic discussions should go in this forum. Post count is not increased by posting here.
FTP Access status is required to post in this forum. Find out how to get it
Forum rules
Any off topic discussions should go in this forum. Post count is not increased by posting here.
FTP Access status is required to post in this forum. Find out how to get it
Locked

Close Intel or AMD

Intel
28
60%
AMD
19
40%
 
Total votes: 47

Chicago
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 606
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 2:47 am
Location: $HOME

Intel or AMD

Post by Chicago »

I just want to make a little poll.
I don't want to start a fight, so please, relaxed guys.
If one company would have to dissapear which would you choose?
(Me, AMD (to get shut))

Andy
User avatar
Administrator
Posts: 12622
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 11:47 am
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Post by Andy »

At the moment I'd choose AMD because Intel are way ahead in terms of performance from their chips. I used to be an AMD guy but then I moved to Intels because of their better performance and cooler running chips.

ddew
Donator
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:09 am
Location: Sweden

Post by ddew »

For me it's Intel all the way. AMD was superior back in the netburst days but now that Intel has caught up tech-wise it's no contest.

Edit: Of course I mean that Intel should stay, in case it wasn't obvious.
Last edited by ddew on Wed Jul 23, 2008 2:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

nullbytes
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 7:06 am
Location: USA

Post by nullbytes »

AMD. I like the performance of Intel over AMD.

QuiescentWonder
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 2365
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 10:22 am

Post by QuiescentWonder »

Oops, I meant to vote for AMD but I misunderstood the poll.

win98
Donator
Posts: 936
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 5:45 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by win98 »

AMD they are behind in the current market and smaller.

___
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 1915
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:19 am
Location: New Zealand

Post by ___ »

rather have them both cause then there would be no competition, which would result in higher priced cpus

XDude
Donator
Posts: 1518
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:40 am

Post by XDude »

___ wrote:rather have them both cause then there would be no competition, which would result in higher priced cpus
and worst, slower introduction to newer technology
like we will not have intel 64 without amd64

logicaL
FTP Access
Posts: 303
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 9:30 pm

Post by logicaL »

I have to agree and say that both should stay. AMD may be a bit behind with their CPU's, but their aggressive pricing forces Intel's prices down.

Also it would be a double whammy if AMD were to go, you have monopoly's in two markets, since they now own ATi. And ATi is doing well, especially if the 4870 X2 is as good as speculated.

mdogg
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 954
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 9:39 am
Location: My house

Post by mdogg »

I'd say Intel chips just for the familiarity of it. The PC I'm on now is running an Intel Pentium Dual Core @ 2.00GHz (look, it works for me so don't give me that "CORE 2 DUO IS BETTAR THAN THAT JUNK!!!")
Image

Popbob
FTP Access
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 1:35 pm

Post by Popbob »

I voted AMD.... But then I realized ATI was going down with AMD. So, I'd rather Intel right now.
mdogg wrote:I'd say Intel chips just for the familiarity of it. The PC I'm on now is running an Intel Pentium Dual Core @ 2.00GHz (look, it works for me so don't give me that "CORE 2 DUO IS BETTAR THAN THAT JUNK!!!")
CORE 2 DUO IS BETTAR THAN THAT JUNK!

baso
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 2:51 pm
Location: Czech, Moravia

Post by baso »

AMD for desktops, Intel for notebooks. I like AMD for lower prices ...so a voted for AMD.
Image

moonlit
User avatar
FTP Access
Posts: 514
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:02 pm

Post by moonlit »

mdogg wrote:I'd say Intel chips just for the familiarity of it. The PC I'm on now is running an Intel Pentium Dual Core @ 2.00GHz (look, it works for me so don't give me that "CORE 2 DUO IS BETTAR THAN THAT JUNK!!!")
I suspect you have the same chip as I do, the E2180? If so, that's the same as a Core2Duo E4400 with half the cache disabled and it's a very capable chip (and good for overclocking too, I've got a 50% overclock out of it without even trying, it's awesome for what, £40/$80 or thereabouts?).


Edit: Oh yeah, I went for Intel. I was an AMD guy from the K6-2 through my aging AthlonXP but when it came to build a new machine Intel appealed more to me and I really don't regret my choice. I got a cool running and cheap yet very powerful chip out of the deal and I'm very happy with my decision. That said, AMD are looking like the tenacious underdog again and with any luck they'll bounce right back up there with Intel again soon enough.

XX55XX
FTP Access
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:13 am

Post by XX55XX »

I chose Intel.

I've used a Pentium II, a Pentium 4, and now I use a Core 2 Duo.

The only day that I will go with AMD is when it comes out with a processor that is far more superior than what Intel has to offer for the moment, in terms of raw performance.

MacLover
FTP Access
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:53 pm

Post by MacLover »

AMD all the way!

I used to be an Intel guy, but I use AMD now for two reasons:
1. I never liked Intel's mainboards.
2. They cost less and give more!

XX55XX
FTP Access
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:13 am

Post by XX55XX »

MacLover wrote:AMD all the way!

I used to be an Intel guy, but I use AMD now for two reasons:
1. I never liked Intel's mainboards.
2. They cost less and give more!
Seems ironic that that is coming from a person who declares himself to be a "MacLover". Macs only use PowerPC/Intel chips for the most part.

mdogg
User avatar
Donator
Posts: 954
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 9:39 am
Location: My house

Post by mdogg »

XX55XX wrote:
MacLover wrote:AMD all the way!

I used to be an Intel guy, but I use AMD now for two reasons:
1. I never liked Intel's mainboards.
2. They cost less and give more!
Seems ironic that that is coming from a person who declares himself to be a "MacLover". Macs only use PowerPC/Intel chips for the most part.
OSx86 has been known to be cracked on to the AMD CPUs.
Image

stitch
Permanently Banned
Posts: 463
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 3:09 am

Post by stitch »

and OSx86 sucks dongs too...

As for me, Ultimately I prefer the POWER family of processors, but then were talking major cash. On the x86 side of the story, I prefer Intel. However, I've been known to buy what I need, and what works for what I'm going to do, so I don't rule out AMD and I do own AMD boxen.

My laptop is a CoreDuo 1.6ghz and my server is a Dual Opteron 242 1.6ghz. I've never compared any speeds and don't really care, but the server has 4GB of ram and my laptop only has 1.

Luthian
FTP Access
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2008 4:32 am

Post by Luthian »

I honestly don't know, I know Intel has some nice hardware out, but then again, I absolutely love my new AMD "Puma" based HP tx2500z tablet.

olileauk
User avatar
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 6:38 pm
Location: The UK

Post by olileauk »

Intel here. they're still pretty much dominating the market i'm looking at when i buy a new processor, so AMD don't get a look in.

MacLover
FTP Access
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 10:53 pm

Post by MacLover »

XX55XX wrote:
MacLover wrote:AMD all the way!

I used to be an Intel guy, but I use AMD now for two reasons:
1. I never liked Intel's mainboards.
2. They cost less and give more!
Seems ironic that that is coming from a person who declares himself to be a "MacLover". Macs only use PowerPC/Intel chips for the most part.
I mainly use PowerPC-based Macs (almost all of my Mac apps are for Mac OS Classic.)

By the way, when it comes to CPUs and their newest chipsets, Intel isn't the worst but there is a lot of room for improvement.

XX55XX
FTP Access
Posts: 229
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 12:13 am

Post by XX55XX »

There is always room for improvement. While I do agree that AMD has better chipsets (IGP is something that AMD is clearly superior when compared to Intel) and cheaper processors - you can't deny the raw performance and immense overclocking potential that Intel brings to the table with their processors - namely the Core 2 Duo. And all of this - at a higher watt/performance ratio.

Not that I am dismissing AMD in anyway - after all, their Athlon 64's were the performance king for quite a time before the arrival of the almighty Core 2 Duo.

AMD could use a lot of improvement themselves, especially when it comes to their "Phenom" line of processors.

ppc_digger
Donator
Posts: 590
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2006 1:25 am
Location: Israel

Post by ppc_digger »

How about both (at least, in the CPU business)? The x86 architecture is far outdated. Every other major architecture runs circles around Intel and AMD's offerings, taking far less power. A single UltraSPARC T2 can outperform 4 quad-code Xeons, and draw 3 times less electricity.

ZSS9393
FTP Access
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:04 pm
Location: In front of a Thinkpad
Contact:

Post by ZSS9393 »

I'm an AMD fan. I'm not fair weather. AMD is going slower now, but they'll catch up. It's like being a Ford fan.. Honda and Toyota may be dominating the market share, but Ford's been around longer, and have survived worse.

AMD may be slower than Intel now, but they were slower during the K6 days, yet they still survived. And they always shall.

But neither company should fall. Without AMD, intel would still have crapburst. Just as without Intel, AMD would have K6 crap right now. Heck, they wouldn't have anything, 'cause wittout the Intel 486 AMD wouldn't have a486 chip.

Besides, without Intel there'd be no processor, without the 4004.

And mustn't forget their most "controversial" chip, the "uber 1337" 8008.

Lol.

-Zach
http://ubuntu.com
^Ubuntu 8. New installer. Why the heck didn't they do this years ago?

shinn

Post by shinn »

I would chose Intel over AMD due to the fact that most gamers chose Intel.

Not to Mention, AMD gets really hot during operation.

If you really need a cheap PC, stick with AMD, if not, go Intel!

Locked