Which computer base unit should i get, AMD or Intel?

davester

There was a point when AMD was the better processor a long time ago, At the moment they are pretty much the same so really its a case of get the best processor you can afford. If I am not mistaken AMD and Intel use different type of tests for processor speed.

Lil306

davester wrote: »

There was a point when AMD was the better processor a long time ago, At the moment they are pretty much the same so really its a case of get the best processor you can afford. If I am not mistaken AMD and Intel use different type of tests for processor speed.

Ofcourse they do, their tests are done so their processor has the advantage and looks better

esuhl

davester wrote: »

There was a point when AMD was the better processor a long time ago...

That's like saying BMWs are better than Mercedes. It really depends on the models in question, not the brand logos. A £200k Merc will probably be "better" than a £40k BMW, while a £200k BMW will probably be "better" than a £40k Merc.

You might find a BMW and a Merc that both cost £100k, but which one is better then? The BMW with a larger engine, 4 wheel drive and traction control, or the Merc with better safety features, more comfortable seats and a larger boot? It depends entirely on what you intend to use the vehicle for. The same applies to CPUs. You can't say that AMD are better than Intel (or vice versa) without a lot of qualification as to what you mean by "better".

davester wrote: »

At the moment they are pretty much the same so really its a case of get the best processor you can afford. If I am not mistaken AMD and Intel use different type of tests for processor speed.

Both Intel and AMD use different chip architectures on different models, and no AMD architecture is directly comparable to an Intel one.

The only practical way to compare chips is to find a benchmarking test that represents the kind of things that you will use the PC for, and look at the benchmarks for the various chips.

davester

But at the time I was talking about AMD was the cheaper and faster by its benchmarks equilent to pentium 4 yesss that long ago. so it would be more the 40k BMW is better than the 200k Merc

I am talking pre multiple core I think celerons was Intels latest chips and Athlon was the lastest from AMD and before AMD went and fiddled with their numbering. My AMD 700Mhz processor was actually rated higher than the Intel 700MHz. And soooo much cheaper than the Intel.

esuhl

davester wrote: »

But at the time I was talking about AMD was the cheaper and faster by its benchmarks equilent to pentium 4 yesss that long ago. so it would be more the 40k BMW is better than the 200k Merc

I am talking pre multiple core I think celerons was Intels latest chips and Athlon was the lastest from AMD and before AMD went and fiddled with their numbering. My AMD 700Mhz processor was actually rated higher than the Intel 700MHz. And soooo much cheaper than the Intel.

But again, you can't say that "AMD was the cheaper and faster..." because it's not universally true. It depends on the specific chips that you're talking about *AND* what it is that you're measuring.

A 600MHz CPU is slower than a 700MHz CPU in terms of clock cycles. But if the 600MHz chip has a more efficient instruction set that allows it to complete a particular task with half the number of instructions than the 700MHz chip, the 600MHz will complete the task a lot quicker. So which chip is "the fastest"?

Saying that "AMD was cheaper and faster by its benchmarks equivalent to Pentium 4" does not make sense. It's like saying that Strauss was better than Einstein - meaningless without a lot of qualification.

CHR15

See what you have started mr_vampy ??

Snooze

esuhl wrote: »

That's like saying BMWs are better than Mercedes. It really depends on the models in question, not the brand logos. A £200k Merc will probably be "better" than a £40k BMW, while a £200k BMW will probably be "better" than a £40k Merc.

You might find a BMW and a Merc that both cost £100k, but which one is better then? The BMW with a larger engine, 4 wheel drive and traction control, or the Merc with better safety features, more comfortable seats and a larger boot? It depends entirely on what you intend to use the vehicle for. The same applies to CPUs. You can't say that AMD are better than Intel (or vice versa) without a lot of qualification as to what you mean by "better".



Both Intel and AMD use different chip architectures on different models, and no AMD architecture is directly comparable to an Intel one.

The only practical way to compare chips is to find a benchmarking test that represents the kind of things that you will use the PC for, and look at the benchmarks for the various chips.

davester wrote: »

But at the time I was talking about AMD was the cheaper and faster by its benchmarks equilent to pentium 4 yesss that long ago. so it would be more the 40k BMW is better than the 200k Merc

I am talking pre multiple core I think celerons was Intels latest chips and Athlon was the lastest from AMD and before AMD went and fiddled with their numbering. My AMD 700Mhz processor was actually rated higher than the Intel 700MHz. And soooo much cheaper than the Intel.

esuhl wrote: »

But again, you can't say that "AMD was the cheaper and faster..." because it's not universally true. It depends on the specific chips that you're talking about *AND* what it is that you're measuring.

A 600MHz CPU is slower than a 700MHz CPU in terms of clock cycles. But if the 600MHz chip has a more efficient instruction set that allows it to complete a particular task with half the number of instructions than the 700MHz chip, the 600MHz will complete the task a lot quicker. So which chip is "the fastest"?

Saying that "AMD was cheaper and faster by its benchmarks equivalent to Pentium 4" does not make sense. It's like saying that Strauss was better than Einstein - meaningless without a lot of qualification.

mr_vampy

Thank you all for your replies. I just wanted to know how the 2 differnent processors compare, what I didn't realise was that my post would re-ignite the AMD vs Intel argument. lol. The computer is just for general use. I'm not a gamer so won't need any extreme processing power, memory or graphics card etc.
I think I will most likely go for the AMD machine even though it's slightly pricier.
Thank again.

CHR15

It could have been worse. You could have asked what was best, a PC or a Mac

Snooze

CHR15 wrote: »

It could have been worse. You could have asked what was best, a PC or a Mac

:rotfl:

Haha! Yeah, that's another good one.