AMD or Intel?

[Puddle Jumper]

But it is so much cheaper then them, it's not like you took a big loss at all, you still have a great CPU and alternative to the crappy q6600's out now.

If price is all that matters get a E8500 and TP45HP which would be faster and cheaper than the Phenom 9950 + the board Apok posted.

 

[Apokalipse]

If price is all that matters get a E8500 and TP45HP which would be faster and cheaper than the Phenom 9950 + the board Apok posted.

in what?
not multi-threaded programs.

*edit*
this board + 9950 is cheaper
Newegg.com - BIOSTAR TFORCE TA790GX A2+ AM2+/AM2 AMD 790GX HDMI ATX AMD Motherboard - AMD Motherboards


..just had a look at the combo deals:
Newegg.com - Computer Parts, PC Components, Laptop Computers, Digital Cameras and more!
you can get them both for $249

*edit*
and you can get 4GB RAM too:
Newegg.com - pqi TURBO 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory - Desktop Memory

for a total of $314.99, and you get all the components for a working system (with the 790GX onboard video), minus a PSU or monitor, while still paying less than a Q9550

 

[Puddle Jumper]

in what?
not multi-threaded programs.

The E8400 will beat the Q6600 in most game benchmarks and the 9950 is only slightly faster than it. Granted when more games are quad optimized that may change but it could be awhile before that happens. The tP45HP is one of the best p45's so you should compare it to one of the top 790GX's.

The whole dual vs quad debate aside there is no hiding the fact that there is no evidence that Deneb will be faster than Yorkfield, and even if it deneb happens to be faster getting a 9950 and upgrading to deneb later would be significantly more expensive than getting a Q9550 now.

 

[zmatt]

The e8500 is much faster than the 9950 in gaming. The benchmarks I posted clearly show that. Games just don't take advantage of 4 cores yet.

 

[Apokalipse]

Right now, we're about on the turning point of when games are being made for multi-cores.
And for games that don't, the systems we have now are so fast it doesn't even matter.

Considering that a 9950 and motherboard (with the worlds best onboard video card) and RAM is cheaper than a single Q9550, I'd go for the AMD system.

And when Deneb does come out, you could sell the 9950 and upgrade, thus recovering money in the process and making the upgrade cheap.

Besides, Phenom processors can handle simultaneous tasks and switching between stuff really well. their IMC will help them here more than cache can (which is much more useful focusing on a single program)

 

[zmatt]

Apok you would go for an AMD system because it has AMD written on it.


I remember this time last year when we were discussing the future AMD architecture. Perhaps you remember, but if you didn't I was on your side then. The numbers clearly showed that AMD was going to be on top again. It had HT, it had a higher IPC, it was true quad and it had the same reliable integrated memory controller. Unfortunately AMD didnt deliver. First the TLB errata, then the unstable OCing. The unbiased members of TF realized the mistake and went back to Intel. I think its safe to say the you are a fanboy and the only reason you support AMD is because it isn't Intel.

Once again nobody cares about IGPs, that is a moot point. This guy is buying a video card. In fact I would go so far as to say that people should avoid systems with IGPs. That's just one more cheap thing that can fail and ruin your day.

 

[Apokalipse]

Apok you would go for an AMD system because it has AMD written on it.

Actually, I would go with any system that doesn't have Intel written on it, as long as it does what I need. But that's besides the point.

I remember this time last year when we were discussing the future AMD architecture. Perhaps you remember, but if you didn't I was on your side then. The numbers clearly showed that AMD was going to be on top again. It had HT, it had a higher IPC, it was true quad and it had the same reliable integrated memory controller. Unfortunately AMD didnt deliver. First the TLB errata, then the unstable OCing. The unbiased members of tech forums realized the mistake and went back to Intel. I think its safe to say the you are a fanboy and the only reason you support AMD is because it isn't Intel.

It's not the only reason. Besides, a lot of the FUD surrounding the K10 before release wasn't nearly as credible as the information we have on Deneb (which is quite high), so I think I'm going to call this as a red herring

Once again nobody cares about IGPs

False, but we'll move on.

that is a moot point.

For people that will buy dedicated video cards.

This guy is buying a video card. In fact I would go so far as to say that people should avoid systems with IGPs.

Actually, I would just generally speaking avoid using IGP's in favor of more powerful dedicated cards, unless the IGP more suits the purpose of the user and/or the user simply cannot afford a descent dedicated card and the IGP, like in this case, is actually pretty good, but don't simply avoid a motherboard for the sole reason that it has an IGP.
In fact, 790GX boards are basically high-end boards (with "only" two PCI-E 16X slots compared to 3 or 4 used on 790FX boards)

That's just one more cheap thing that can fail and ruin your day.

Every component you add technically has a nonzero probability of failing, so I don't think you have much of a point here.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

In my opinion this whole discussion comes down to the fact that if things were reversed and Intel was making phenom and AMD was making Core 2 no one would be defending Phenom. That says that people are going with Phenom because of the name on the chip (or the name that isn't on it) not how it performs.

I agree with zmatt about the IGP. When I am buying a motherboard features I will never use aren't a selling point. It's just one more thing that could go wrong.

 

[Apokalipse]

I don't think it is. In my opinion this whole discussion comes down to the fact that if things were reversed and Intel was making phenom and AMD was making Core 2 no one would be defending Phenom.

I think there would be. It just wouldn't be me. And see below.

That says that people are going with Phenom because of the name on the chip (or the name that isn't on it) not how it performs.

Actually, for me it's both. But not only that, it's cheap.
But I haven't been arguing that he should go with Phenom's because of the company. I've been recommending he should go with components based on performance and price and upgradability aspects. And because the topic specifically has the title "AMD vs Intel"

I try not to debate the topic unless it's specifically brought up. And in this case, it was.
So yes, I'm still going to call it a red herring.

I agree with zmatt about the IGP. When I am buying a motherboard features I will never use aren't a selling point. It's just one more thing that could go wrong.

With what probability of going wrong?
I mean, technically a dedicated card can go wrong aswell. Then what?
I mean, if you have a board with an IGP, you could fall back on it until you get another one.

 

[zmatt]

Well speaking from experience. I have spent the past 4 years doing volunteer tech support at my old high school. IGPs are one of the most common things that fail. Aside from software issues (windows will crash its not a question of if but when) and old hard drives, (the school district has a bad habit of pressing 10 year old drives into service). Lets face it, IGPs are the cheapest thing there on the board, they don't get as stringent a QC check as other components. **** even their existence was an after thought. Intel gave their IGPs 3d capability to nibble at the low end of the graphics spectrum. Nvidia and ATI followed suit because there is money to be made in a market where OEMs cut as many corners as they can.

False, but we'll move on.

Perhpas you didn't notice, but this is the "Building, Buying, or Upgrading High Performance PC Systems" section. IGPs are not, never have been and most likely never will be high end. There is no place for IGPs on this board. Nor do they belong on the OC board. If you are recommending IGPs then keep it to the "Building, Buying, or Upgrading General PC Systems" section.

Actually, I would go with any system that doesn't have Intel written on it

So what you are saying is, you wouldn't endorse, recommend or buy Intel even if every other chip makers chips were having 80% fail rates and were half the performance and double the price of Intel chips?

I mean, technically a dedicated card can go wrong as well. Then what?

Video cards have much higher standards then an Intel 945, or an ATI xpress200m and you know that. Except for the occasional goofup *cough* nvidia 7900gt *cough* video cards are very well built. The gpus can handle temps much higher than a cpu and still perform like a champ. Back to my tech support days, IGPs would fail fairly often, but the only time we had issues with video cards was when either the motherboard itself was failing or if they had been tampered with. I have seen pcs smoke because kids shoved paper into the psu. Ive seen floppy drives fail because they are full of pencil shavings. And I saw where one kid tried to rip a video card out the back of the pc using the vga cable as a rope. Needless to say the motherboard was ruined.