Should I buy this?

[john3]

oh come one, do you actually think AMD is gonna go out without a fight just because intel is supposedly to rock them with a conroe. AMD has got something up their sleeve i just know it. They arents gonna lose their main source of customers.........gamers. if intel has them beat on that, intel has them beat altogether. Cause most of AMDs consumers are gamers that want to build a high end system and know that AMD rocks it.

 

[GrimReaper23]

oh come one, do you actually think AMD is gonna go out without a fight just because intel is supposedly to rock them with a conroe. AMD has got something up their sleeve i just know it. They arents gonna lose their main source of customers.........gamers. if intel has them beat on that, intel has them beat altogether. Cause most of AMDs consumers are gamers that want to build a high end system and know that AMD rocks it.

That is the truth

 

[john3]

lol i just saw some benchmarks comapring the 2.66GHz Conroe to an OC'd FX-60 at 2.8GHz and Conroe won on average by 20%. this is just be but im sure the FX-60 Can be increased higher than just 200MHz, come on. What kind of a comparison is that. they increase AMD by 200 MHz and the Conroe by 500MHz, and they still have the nerve to compare the two. The Conroe was OC'd more than 2 times than the amount that the FX-60 was OC'd and it still only won by 20%. I highly doubt that Intel is going to last long with that piece of s***

 

[objecterror]

I really hate how all this technology is growing so rapidly, i just got into my own rig and your telling me theres more coming out? i hate to sound so newbish but i saw some San Diego cores via newegg that haven't even been touched. who do they figure will be buying this? and if so, in what?

maybe iam just missing the point, but, even if the clock speeds are diff, what about all the other things that make AMD's so much better, i just love to compare pentiuems FSB and L1 cache to other people. it just rubs the truth in there face.

 

[orangefiery]

i saw that report too

 

[Brtnboarder495]

first off, so you get a good idea.

AMD PWNS EVERYTHING THAT MAKES INTEL REMOTELY A GOOD CPU. AMD IS THE BEST CPU FOR ANYTHING YOU WILL BE USING YOUR COMPUTER FOR. now the dual cores can be used for anythying: multi tasking w/e they kick Intels fat rich *** lazy behind.

are you buying this already made? or are you putting it together?

I'm pretty sure it's not possible that you could of sounded any stupider.

Moving along ... here is a less biased and more accurate description of where Intel and AMD exceed:

Single Core Multitasking: Intel
Dual Core Multitasking: AMD
Single Core Encoding/Multimedia: Intel
Dual Core Encoding/Multimedia: AMD
Single Core Gaming: AMD
Dual Core Gaming: AMD
Single Core Mobility: Intel
Dual Core Mobility: Intel

So to sum all that up, if your looking into desktops, AMD typically beats Intel in single core and dual core situations, except the encoding of files and if you'll be doing mostly media work with music or photos and the like. For mobility, laptops and notebooks, Intel pretty much owns AMD everywhere with performance and battery life.