Starting up the AMD Intel War... AGAIN!

01-22-05, 02:37 PM

Here are benchmarks of AMD's processors vs Intel's 3.4HT ghz. The reason I found this is because I was wondering what the Athlon 3700+ was equivilent to in Intel's proessor.

Have fun...
wmcjhi lol

-jcll2002

What are your oppinions on who is better? I also have another question... which is better an 3700+, or an Intel processor at 3.4 or 3.6? These bechmarks seemed to answer my questions though:approve:

01-22-05, 04:03 PM

I know this is highly oppinionated, but...
which do you think is better...

Comp #1
same specs but...
3.4 ghz p4 AMD
256MB ATI Radeon X600 Pro

Comp#2
same specs but...
Athlon 64 3700+
256MB NVIDIA GeForceFX 5700

Computer on the left (#1) is just $50 more. What do YOU think. BTW, I am already aware of the option of a DIY comp... I just want an opinion on these two computers.

Thanks

stevey500 · 01-22-05, 05:35 PM

I would say computer #1.. but thats only cause I trust both of the companies intel and ati very well.. I have GREAT luck with ATI video cards.. simply amazing cards.. so mod-able.. Intel has always worked great for me clear from using the Pentium 1.. I have never had one fry or go out on me for any reason. I have had 2 Nvidia cards die on me, and my friends Athlon.. its older.. fried on him. But I dont know.. its up to you

Cybigamerz · 01-22-05, 05:50 PM

I'd prefer the computer #2 because I found AMD Processers to be more reliable than Intel's processers.

Namuna · 01-22-05, 06:33 PM

I'm usually partial to AMD, but those benchmark results you posted was published by AMD...I'd think that would be a bit biased.

This might be a better reference:
http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/2004...charts-13.html

REarl22 · 01-22-05, 06:50 PM

I've built PC's over time with both types of CPU's. I've not had problems with either. My thought at the time I went with either one to start a PC build, was which setup would give the most "bang" for my buck at that time. So you really can't go wrong in choosing either one.

01-22-05, 06:50 PM

.
.
Reese and Eric....

Come out, come out, wherever you are!!!

I can't wait to see this get going.

01-22-05, 07:38 PM

I'm an intel lover. I've been one for so many years. It's hard to like AMDs which generally run too hot.

01-22-05, 07:43 PM

im a straight up pentium man myself. i think my dads old 286 might have been a AMD, but as far as win9x computers i have only had pentiums, my dad had a school computer that a cyrix chip and that was without a doubt the worst cpu ever made. its not that i dislike amd or anything, except the MO on amd is that they like to fry.

grapeape · 01-22-05, 08:57 PM

I was intel all the way until AMD's thunderbirds blew them away in price and performance. Since then ive gone mostly AMD on my main computer though my laptop is an Intel Centrino. Nothing really against Intel just price wise i can usually get more with AMD.

Graphics card wise...I assume both of these are PCX systems...that being the case Id avoid the geforce 5700 vs the Radeon x600 since the x600 is nearly twice as fast in benchmarks. Both are on the low end of the PCX cards..but the 5700 is the absolute bottom. The same applies if its the new x600 agp vs the 5700 agp though the difference isnt quite as great.

wmcjhi · 01-22-05, 10:00 PM

It isn't even a contest right now. The Athlon64s are cheaper, faster, and cooler than the p4 prescotts of equivalent rating.

PS
Tom's hardware is VERY intel biased, so I don't think that is a good liaison...maybe something like anandtech...

01-23-05, 01:34 AM

that video of CPUs cooking is stuck in my head

01-23-05, 01:50 AM

I have had the best luck with Intels...

AMDs have always had problems when i have them or a short life...i find in real world, intel is a faster processor (the only thing AMD is better for is Gaming, the intels start and run programs faster)

if amd really wanted a run for their money, look into the 3.6 HTs...they are expensive, but blazing fast :)

even though AMD is cheaper, Genuine intel is the way to go :)

NiwRoC · 01-23-05, 02:29 AM

Love the AMD for my home computer but Intel for the laptop...

Howard2k · 01-23-05, 09:02 AM

Originally Posted by ericcumbee

....had a school computer that a cyrix chip and that was without a doubt the worst cpu ever made....

Actually there are worse. I worked for a computer manufacturer in the early 90s and Texas Instruments actually released their own 486 chip called the 486DLC-40. The failure rate was astroomically high. There were a couple of bad batches where we'd even just look at the date stamp on the chip and RMA it. Not even bother testing.

Cyrix didn't have ANYTHING on TI :)