Intel or AMD?

spakkker

The passmark figures assume all cores are working flat out. This is hardly ever the case as not all progs will make use of all cores.
Generally a pc uses one or two cores for non-intensive working , this is why the 6 core amd cpu's turn off half their cores unless needed and why newest intel cpu's turboboost a single core most.
A dual core cpu with fast cores can be quicker in general than a quad cpu with slower cores but a higher passmark rating.

free4440273

free4440273 wrote: »

Intel // better graphics upside too / by and large /

and really looking forward to these : / :cool:

http://www.techshout.com/hardware/2011/02/intel-ultrabook-concept-to-shake-up-the-portable-pc-market/

asbokid

esuhl wrote: »

It doesn't really matter who is "better" - just look at the prices and benchmarks and go for the one with the best performance per pound that exceeds the performance you require and is within budget...

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html

23n1th

gonzo127 wrote: »

intel at the moment because of the performance, although i have hopes for the new AMD chips i just cant see them being useful for my desires

I'm looking to build some small less power hungry quiet computers (when I finally move house!) a clients for a mythTV server for probably 3 TV's, so Fusion as it stands seems very good for my needs, certainly better than current Atoms. I wonder how intel will respond, since they are trying to take on arm as well.

gonzo127

23n1th wrote: »

I'm looking to build some small less power hungry quiet computers (when I finally move house!) a clients for a mythTV server for probably 3 TV's, so Fusion as it stands seems very good for my needs, certainly better than current Atoms. I wonder how intel will respond, since they are trying to take on arm as well.

well thats how i see the fusion chips, also a massive push for low cost consumer grade 'gaming' laptops.

as to intels response, well they are moving Atom onto smaller manufactoring processes 32-22-15nm over the next few years so we might see a good increase in performance out of them, especially if they start to work with nvidia and the tegra chipset

Wookey

I used to allways use AMD, for my new pc though i read a lot of reviews, benchmarks etc and decided on an Intel i7. I would recommend these to anyone, price difference wasn't huge (unless your a nutball wanting top of the range), is easily overclockable and i've been running multiple instances of games and recording ingame video with zero lag or loss of fps.

free4440273

^^i7 is indeed a nice processor :cool:

jaydeeuk1

I prefer AMD cpus in terms of value for money, the phenom x6 3.2 that was on Amazon for £96 inc vat was a steal, and can be paired with a cheap £50 motherboard.

However, in laptops I'd never use AMD again, they run way too hot, even the low power L310 chip.

dontplaywithme

If you love games, AMD is the right choice.