i need help deciding! - Page 2 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 03-25-2006, 07:38 PM   #11 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 640
Default

Ok, difference between Intel and AMD;

Basically, AMD Athlon 64s are for gaming, AMD Athlon 64 X2s are for everything else, and Intel Pentium 4s are for video/audio encoding.

Intel has the Pentium 4s which have really high clockspeeds. Compared to Intel, AMD has really low clockspeeds. But AMD does more with what speed they have than Intel. A 1.0GHz Pentium 4 is like a .63GHz Athlon 64. That means that a 2.0GHz AMD Athlon 64 will perform the same as a 3.2GHz Intel Pentium 4. Thats basically what most people don't know about AMD.

Processors have pipelines. Those pipelines have stages. An instruction, sent through that pipeline, has to go through each stage before it's complete. The more the stages, the worse. But you can't have too few stages either. Now, an Intel Pentium 4 (based on the Netburst architecture) has 34 stages in it's pipeline. Thats horrible. Comparitively, a Athlon 64 has 12 stages in it's pipeline. That doesn't mean that the Athlon 64 is 3x faster than the Pentium 4, but it IS faster. Because the pipeline is so long in a Pentium 4, they need to make their processors really fast to get anything done. Thats where the 3.8GHz clockspeeds come in.

AMD isn't some third-party, underground kind of company. Its a perfectly legitimate company. Think Ferrari and Porsche, ATi and Nvidia, Michael Jackson and Unknown Envy. Same basic principle. Except, Intel is a lot bigger than AMD. AMD only has like 17% of the market. But you know what the funny thing is? AMD has stronger, and better, processors than Intel.

But that was all the boring stuff. AMD is definately better at gaming. A Athlon 64 3200+ (2.0GHz) may be the same as a Pentium 4 3.2GHz, but thats only in normal tasks. In games, AMD is far and away, the best. An Athlon 64 3200+ (2.0GHz) will probably beat a 3.6GHz Pentium 4 in most games. In Battlefield 2, a Athlon 64 3200+ beats a 3.8GHz Pentium 4.

Intel is often more expensive than AMD. Pentium 4s also run REALLY hot compared to Athlon 64s. And Athlon 64s overclock farther, generally, as far as home overclocking goes.

Intel is putting out the Conroe, and Conroe has a 14-stage pipeline so if you learned anything from this post, you'll know that it'll be good. Thing is that Conroe's 4-issue Core makes it perform much better than the Athlon 64. So a 2.0GHz Conroe = 2.4Ghz Athlon 64 (atleast thats what Intel claims, and a recent benchmark at IDF more than proved that).

If building a PC anytime before Q4 of this year, go with AMD.
__________________

Green Radience is offline  
Old 03-25-2006, 11:21 PM   #12 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 686
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by GageMW
AMD is just a different brand of processor, it still runs on the same principles, if you plan on building or upgrading soon just tell us your budget and we can tell you what to get, i would really reccomend getting a solely pci-e motherboard however, as no reliable manufacturers have come out with a good agp&pci-e board
I know that ECS has a board out that supports AGP and PCIe. I know ECS isnt the best, but it is pretty reliable. At least both of my ECS mobos are.
__________________

__________________
slick_tech15 is offline  
Old 03-26-2006, 12:49 AM   #13 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
aliasaid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,400
Default

Quote:
Intel is putting out the Conroe, and Conroe has a 14-stage pipeline so if you learned anything from this post, you'll know that it'll be good. Thing is that Conroe's 4-issue Core makes it perform much better than the Athlon 64. So a 2.0GHz Conroe = 2.4Ghz Athlon 64 (atleast thats what Intel claims, and a recent benchmark at IDF more than proved that).

what do you mean by "4-issue"? since amd has 12 and conroe has 14 stages why is conroe still faster. i never knew the DEEP reason why amd was always better...
__________________
"Is virtue a thing remote? I wish to be virtuous, and lo! Virtue is at hand." -Confucius
aliasaid is offline  
Old 03-26-2006, 08:29 PM   #14 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 640
Default

Its basically the steps a processor takes to put a instruction through a stage. Steps and Stages are different. The Conroe takes 4 steps to put the instruction through 1 stage. I'm not sure about how this goes on with A64s, I just know that the 4-issue core improves Conroe performance.

And its not really a DEEP reason, its the only reason. Any other explanation would be incorrect.
Green Radience is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 12:45 AM   #15 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 211
Default

so if you had to buy one would you pick the conroe or amd?
Keadonen is offline  
Old 03-27-2006, 12:17 PM   #16 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 640
Default

Conroe, hands down. Its better in both price and performance. But it isn't out for a while now and I wouldn't wait that long for it. At this moment, Athlon 64s.
__________________

Green Radience is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.