AMD Processor vs Intel Processor

[Catbert]

Not sure how old this thread is but I thought I`d slap in my two cents.

Read a few posts about the amount of RAM on Snake-Eyes system.

Currently, anything over 1Gb actualy slows the processing speed of 64bit CPUs.

As a few people have stated, he would be better getting 2x 512Mb and using the Dual Channel.

 

[waynejkruse10]

and more cost effective

 

[caseyc]

the 2.6 GHZ FX55 beats the 3.46GHZ P4 EE

It also beats the 3.73GHZ P4 670 chip.

Answer: AMD.

 

[Snake-Eyes]

Find another graph, Tom's Hardware Guide isn't always the most reliable source, so i'm told.

 

[4W4K3]

yah i would say that graph is probably bogus. being an AMD fan NO ONE will believe this but the AMD FX-55 is definetly beaten in some tests, and in some tests its not. Intel can beat it...just that graph itself looks pretty unrealiable. I would say it would take more than a 3.7Ghz EE to beat an FX-55. I can find you a graph that says the FX-55 is #1, and you can find one that says its #8....its realy pointless to compare.

And yes i also distrust Tom's Hardware, not because of that single graph that was posted (as many of you probably assume) but because out of ALL his reviews and guides...you will notice a pattern (which i wont get into). he seems to ALWAYS give out good reviews to certain companies/products, and gives mediocre reviews to other hardware that is #1 in my book and seems to be across the overclocking nation. its very sketchy frm what i see...but some of it is credible...some.

 

[VIII]

And yes i also distrust Tom's Hardware,

because AMD got pwned

 

[4W4K3]

because AMD got pwned

exactly...this is what i meant when i said "being an AMD fan no one will believe this..."

I state one thing and everyone looks at my sig to see whether or not i am saying this truthfully or...(oh god hes got an AMD!) HE MUST BE BIASED! lol. i am doomed by m hadware.

I stated the AMD FX-55 can be beaten by Intel in some categories...i'll say that all day long. but of course no one focuses on that...they only want to make it sound like i'm biased and my info is not credible.

(Not mad or anything VIII, this just seems to be the perfect examlple of what i am trying to express. I own an AMD and support it...so naturally no one is going to see my point when i diss a non-AMD supportive chart.)

 

[ReverseFluxx]

Just look at Tom's Hardware. It's very reliable. The AMD's own the Intel's in gaming, the Intel's own AMD's in applications.

 

[waynejkruse10]

In a mag i bought recently it tested the FX 55, 3.46ghz P4, 3.40ghz P4, here is the results.

NOTE: FX 55 - $1059 USD
P4 3.46ghz EE LGA 775- $1065 USD
P4 3.40ghz EE LGA 775- $989 USD

(according to Newegg)

Benchmark 1 - Multimedia Content Creation 2004
FX 55 - 39.2
3.46ghz - 33.6
3.40 - 33.5

Benchmark 2 - Business Winstone 2004
FX 55 - 29.5
3.46ghz - 25.4
3.40ghz - 24.9

Benchmark 3 - Memory Bandwidth
FX 55 - 5522MB/S
3.46ghz - 4692MB/S
3.40ghz - 4526MB/S

Benchmark 4 - Pifast (10 Million Places)
FX 55 - 49.22 sec
3.46ghz - 56.47 sec
3.40ghz - 63.12 sec

Benchmark 5 - 3DMARK 01 SE
FX 55 - 24002
3.46ghz - 22170
3.40ghz - 21122

Benchmark 6 - Doom 3
FX 55 - 92 fps
3.46ghz - 89.2 fps
3.40ghz - 86.6 fps

All systems used same components except Mobo and CPU. The AMD won 6/6 test.

And you wonder why Intel has 85% of the CPU market.

Wayne

 

[ReverseFluxx]

But that test didn't include the 3.76ghz.