Mr. Switch
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 1,841
I kind of wish that i had gone the Intel route when I made my system. I do alot of multitasking and a P4 with HT would make my multitasking a bunch easier.
Why is Intel so popular
- Thread starter harley3344
- Start date
- Status
PP Mguire
Build Guru
- Messages
- 32,591
- Location
- Fort Worth, Texas
Just upgrade to a dual core and your Intel wants will fly out of the window.
Thing is, the AMD doesn't really have any weaknesses, while the weakness of the P4 is that its bad at gaming.
Sure, the P4 is better at encoding, but have you ever noticed by how much? Not much, though its there, I'll give em that. But the AMDs aren't bad at encoding either.
Sure, the P4 is better at encoding, but have you ever noticed by how much? Not much, though its there, I'll give em that. But the AMDs aren't bad at encoding either.
PP Mguire
Build Guru
- Messages
- 32,591
- Location
- Fort Worth, Texas
Now w/ X2s there is no difference. So your better choice now is AMD. The time for saying AMD for gaming and INtel for apps. is gone and now its AMD for everything.
I read somewhere recently that Dell is considering going with AMD cpus in the future. I wish I had a link.
I too was a naive pc enthusiast until I started looking to build a pc recently. I was ready to buy a 3.2 or 3.4 ghz Intel for my build because they were obviously "faster" than a 2.2 or 2.4 ghz AMD. I finally researched it enough to come to my senses and go with an AMD (4000+).
That said, Intels take alot of abuse from gamers, and I don't think they are that far behind performancewise in games.
I too was a naive pc enthusiast until I started looking to build a pc recently. I was ready to buy a 3.2 or 3.4 ghz Intel for my build because they were obviously "faster" than a 2.2 or 2.4 ghz AMD. I finally researched it enough to come to my senses and go with an AMD (4000+).
That said, Intels take alot of abuse from gamers, and I don't think they are that far behind performancewise in games.
PP Mguire
Build Guru
- Messages
- 32,591
- Location
- Fort Worth, Texas
Until AMD ships the AM2.
003 said:
Are you referring to the 65-nm P4s, or the PentiumM-based Conroe?
If you're talking about the 65-nm P4s, then no, the performance will stay the same. They will still be Netburst, and they will still run 3.2-2.6Ghz.
If you're refrering to the Conroe (and Merom and Woodcrest) then you MAY be right, but we don't have practically any info on the performance of those cores (and it doesn't look as if they'll beat AMD, judging from the rumors). But then again, anything can happen, and I'll be happy for Intel if they take back the crown.
P.P. Mguire said:
Same thing here. If its the 65-nm P4s that he's talking about, then there will be nothing to beat, AMD will still be on top.
But if he's talking about the Conroe (and assuming that Conroe will beat the current Athlon 64 X2s) then no, AM2 will do nothing to help AMD overtake Conroe. You should know by now that the difference between Socket 939 and AM2 is practically nothing.
Note: The Merom (Mobile) and Conroe (Desktop) are going to be Dual-Core processors. The Woodcrest (Server) will be a Quad-Core processor. Intel has no plans for making any more Single-Core processors, after these 65-nm Pentium 4s live out their life.
- Status
