Need A Detailed Explanation :)

Status
Not open for further replies.

chrisgill369

In Runtime
Messages
435
What i want to know is what makes AMD processors better than Intel Pentium's at gaming but not at other things like video encoding ?

What makes Intel Celerons so crap ? lol

I just cant see what makes one processor better than another, and how some are better at some things as apposed to others :confused:
 
Ok celerons are crap because they have a low l2 cache, only 128k, when p4's have 512kb-1mb and some even have l3 cache with 2mb. The bigger the cache the better the performance.
Also I can't answer your AMD vs Intel question because I generally think Intel is the best and it can't be beat. You'll need a more opinion balanced person to answer that.
 
hmm.. well celeron's are crap b/c of the L2 cache figure. Essentially, this is a type of memory that can be accessed much faster by the cpu than the traditional ram. If the mostly "common" data is stored in L2 cache, the CPU will get its data faster - and thus will perform better overall.

I don't know the technical specifications of Intel vs AMD sufficiently to comment on that question - yet :).

But, one thing to keep in mind is, when designers design the microprocessors/microcontrollers, sometimes they have a particular goal in mind. Sort of optimize the architecture/instruction set for certain applications. If the application is gaming, then well, AMD is probably the way to go. For other applications, perhaps maybe Intel is somewhat better because of the design. Too many variables and I don't know enough of the 2 specifications to comment. Planning on reading up on this stuff soon. Keep in mind that most high end workstations in companies use Intel.

Intel also seems to be more stable with respect to temperature. If you have a good motherboard, maybe this is not an issue - b/c they can monitor the temperature. But, lets say you have a crappy MB, and your cpu fan suddenly stops working. Intel CPU won't fry. The AMD "used" to fry. I don't know what will happen now.
 
well at least i know why my Intel Celeron sucks now :p

my computer takes a fair few minutes to load everything up, then when i double click Firefox icon its another 1 or 2 minutes on top of that before it loads up!! Is this because im on a Celeron or something else ?

My Intel Pentium 4 computer boots up so much quicker and it has more programs in the startup lol
 
hmmm.. couldn't say man. But I highly doubt it! :). 1 or 2 minutes is huge.. My PIII that I am using right now loads Firefox in 1 second. And I don't think it has that much L2 cache.. I can't remember the figure. It's been a while since I looked at my PIII specs.. lol..

L2 cache is good if your program has a lot of reusable code/data I think. If there are a lot of loops (executing the same code) or raw data that gets used over and over again, keeping them close to the CPU is wise. Thus, the improvements you see in a non-celeron. But, if NEW instruction/data is executed/needed by the cpu continuously, I don't really see why the celeron would be a huge problem. I mean, regardless of how much L2 cache you have, you'll have to get the NEW data from the ram.

In anycase, I don't think "starting up" firefox would benefit from L2 cache that much.
 
the answer over why amds are better at gaming is quite complex and i dont understand it myself. Its to do with the data pathway. on a amd its much much shorter than intels this means it doesnt have to send infomation though faster to get just as much done. Ive only heard that intels are better at video editting because of the higher fsb but i dont understand how this helps. hope this helps as its as far as i know
 
amd has i think uh small pipelines that are short and intel has large pipelines that are long
 
Also I can't answer your AMD vs Intel question because I generally think Intel is the best and it can't be beat.
That's just a biased and untrue answer.

Intels can easily be beat
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom