amd question...

[PZEROFGH]

both, my regular 478 can run anything i throw at it. and since most programs dont make use of the dual cores yet, a non dual core is still very efficient.

both your regular 478 and what else?

 

[Sprooty]

any P4 processor exept the celeron.

why do u need to know?

 

[PZEROFGH]

i just need you to clarify some stuff...thats all

 

[the deceived]

Wait just a minute.... Why are people saying that the X2's are more expensive than the Pentium D's??

I had a quick check on prices in the UK, and well if you want to be picky about the subject then yes, X2's are more expensive.

If you look at the bottom end of the line for both AMD and Intel, then the AMD 3800+ is around £225, and the Intel Pentium 4 830 is around £205. For the huge amount of extra performance from the X2, I'm sure people can stretch to that extra £20!!

Also, at the top end of the line, the AMD 4800+ is around £550, and the Intel Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 840 is around £630. So actually Intel are charging more for top end CPUs, and AMD are charging minimal amounts for their bottom end.

Here's where I got the prices from:

Intel - http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/Intel_Pentium_4_Dual_Core.html

AMD - http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/AMD_64_X2.html

So AMD have better performance, and charge SLIGHTLY more than Intel but yet out-do to the Intel in multi-tasking!!

Stop saying AMD are more expensive!!

EDIT: All prices exclude VAT by the way

 

[PZEROFGH]

An affordable price maybe.

Not everyone can afford one of those and if your looking at multi-tasking primarily, you would have to go with intel. Don't rule intel out just as yet.

 

[the deceived]

What was the point in quoting that again? The person who said that is saying that 'Yeah, if you want to do multi-tasking but you haven't got a big budget, go with Intel.'

They are suggesting that the X2's are still more expensive than the Intel D's. I basically proved them wrong with my last post!

 

[Sprooty]

What was the point in quoting that again? The person who said that is saying that 'Yeah, if you want to do multi-tasking but you haven't got a big budget, go with Intel.'

i meant Intels Single Core Processors, not its new Dual Cores.

If your budget isnt the biggest, a 3.0Ghz Intel P4 32bit will do fine but if you have the money an X2 will suit multi tasking needs better.

 

[PZEROFGH]

What was the point in quoting that again? The person who said that is saying that 'Yeah, if you want to do multi-tasking but you haven't got a big budget, go with Intel.'

They are suggesting that the X2's are still more expensive than the Intel D's. I basically proved them wrong with my last post!

thats why i was quoting that again, cause you were proving them wrong. so i just wanted to tell that guy

 

[the deceived]

Oh right I see, apologies to Sprooty and PZEROFGH. I thouht we were talking about the dual cores from AMD AND Intel, not just AMD vs. Intel's single cores.

Next time, I'll actually read more closely than spouting off