I need processor help! <3 - 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 12-03-2005, 09:51 PM   #1 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 19
Default I need processor help! <3

Alright, it's time to buy a new computer. I'm not savvy, so I searched up whether AMD is better than Intel, and site matched up a pentium 4 640(3.2 ghz) with a AMD Athlon 64 3500+, and the AMD pulled ahead with a higher average FPS.

So I go to Ibuypower.com, and I click on a generic Gamer PC and I'm looking at processors.. and I notice that they have dual core processors out: [939-pin] AMD® Athlon-64 X2 4800+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology. I googled this, and it said that the two processors have 2.2 ghz and 2.4 ghz. Does that mean that together, they produce 4.6 ghz?

Also, is AMD truly better than Intel? I thought that the 3500+ and such was 3.5 ghz, but I learned that was not the case. xD.

So does the dual core processors stack their processor speed(because if not, 2.4ghz for an AMD athlon 4800 is disappointing!)? Should I look into a dual core processor, or stay with just a regular one? And also, what AMD processor would run games like CS:Source and WoW godlike?
__________________

WolvenASE is offline  
Old 12-03-2005, 10:04 PM   #2 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,446
Send a message via AIM to Alex81388
Default

The 2.2ghz and 2.4ghz are two completely seperate chips...each with two cores. The site you looked at just sucked at explaining things.

Each of the AMD X2 Processors have two cores inside, so really you can imagine two processors in one, but its not quite THAT great.

Everyone here will say that for about everything but video encoding and related applications, the AMD chip is stronger. Especially for gaming. Hands down AMD kicks *** in gaming. The 3500+ is there to say that comparibly to Intel, it is like a 3.5ghz chip. But its way to complex to look @ it like that.

You can still get away with single core VERY easily, and if I were you, I would just pick up a chip like the AMD 64 3500+ personally. It will handle any of the games you throw at it, right now games really only look towards the video cards (which kind of sucks), but put your money towards your video card as opposed to your CPU.
__________________

__________________
Sig removed due to foul language. Please read the rules regarding the allowable content of sigs before reposting your COMPLIANT sig.
~Trotter
4/21/06
Alex81388 is offline  
Old 12-03-2005, 10:05 PM   #3 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,339
Default Re: I need processor help! <3

Quote:
Originally posted by WolvenASE
Alright, it's time to buy a new computer. I'm not savvy, so I searched up whether AMD is better than Intel, and site matched up a pentium 4 640(3.2 ghz) with a AMD Athlon 64 3500+, and the AMD pulled ahead with a higher average FPS.

So I go to Ibuypower.com, and I click on a generic Gamer PC and I'm looking at processors.. and I notice that they have dual core processors out: [939-pin] AMD® Athlon-64 X2 4800+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology. I googled this, and it said that the two processors have 2.2 ghz and 2.4 ghz. Does that mean that together, they produce 4.6 ghz?

Also, is AMD truly better than Intel? I thought that the 3500+ and such was 3.5 ghz, but I learned that was not the case. xD.

So does the dual core processors stack their processor speed(because if not, 2.4ghz for an AMD athlon 4800 is disappointing!)? Should I look into a dual core processor, or stay with just a regular one? And also, what AMD processor would run games like CS:Source and WoW godlike?
No it it does not equal 4.6 it equals 2.6 for one and 2.4 for the other.

You cannot directly compair AMD and Intel with Ghz becuase they run on different instruction sets so AMD will do more with a lower Ghz. AMD is trully better than intel and are the current kings of both 64 bit and duel core processors currently.

also do not use the site you were try newegg.com it's much better.
__________________
<form action=\"http://www.srsyo.org/tfsearch.php\" method=\"get\">
<input type=\"text\" name=\"search\"> <input type=\"submit\" name=\"submit\" value=\"Search TF before you post!\"></form>
Vista Discussion | 64 Bit Discussion |Microsoft Homepage | Yo Linux | Paul Thurrott | Fire Fox | Thunder Bird | Image Shack | Photo Bucket | Put File | Anti-Spyware | MS Anti-Spyware | Trillian | Anti-Virus | On Line Virus Scan
Tyler1989 is offline  
Old 12-03-2005, 10:12 PM   #4 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 19
Default

Okay. Someone also told me that 3500 was the equivalent to 2.2 ghz, but it can easily stand toe to toe with an intel 3.8 ghz. Considering if the above statement is true, would that mean that if a game would have the minimum reqs of say.. 2.0 ghz, that it would put alot more strain on the AMD rather than the Intel because it has 3.8 ghz? If what I said wasn't true, please correct me. Thanks for all of your help, I appreciate it!
WolvenASE is offline  
Old 12-03-2005, 10:20 PM   #5 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,339
Default

You seem to be a gamer if this is so do not even look at an Intel Processor.

No intel has a complex instruction set and cannot do as much per Mhz or Ghz.

AMD has an more simple instruction set and can do more with less Mhz or Ghz.

Both Intell fall under the category of complex not simple but AMD is simpler than intels set. This is based off what I was told by my instruction several years ago so please fill in the gaps.
__________________
<form action=\"http://www.srsyo.org/tfsearch.php\" method=\"get\">
<input type=\"text\" name=\"search\"> <input type=\"submit\" name=\"submit\" value=\"Search TF before you post!\"></form>
Vista Discussion | 64 Bit Discussion |Microsoft Homepage | Yo Linux | Paul Thurrott | Fire Fox | Thunder Bird | Image Shack | Photo Bucket | Put File | Anti-Spyware | MS Anti-Spyware | Trillian | Anti-Virus | On Line Virus Scan
Tyler1989 is offline  
Old 12-03-2005, 10:29 PM   #6 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,446
Send a message via AIM to Alex81388
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by WolvenASE
Okay. Someone also told me that 3500 was the equivalent to 2.2 ghz, but it can easily stand toe to toe with an intel 3.8 ghz.
That statement kind of contradicts itself...


An AMD 3500+ which I believe does 2.2ghz, will handle a game with a spec of 3.0ghz easily... if you must look at it like that.
__________________
Sig removed due to foul language. Please read the rules regarding the allowable content of sigs before reposting your COMPLIANT sig.
~Trotter
4/21/06
Alex81388 is offline  
Old 12-03-2005, 10:32 PM   #7 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 19
Default

Yeah, this is going to be a Gaming PC.

Anyways, so I get that AMD can do more with the ghz it's alotted, thanks.

But does that mean that if I bought a game that's minimum processor speed was 2.2 ghz, and I had an AMD that ran at 2.2 ghz, would it run without a problem where as an Intel processor would?

Also, is there anyway I can find out what certain AMD builds' (like the 3500+) equivalency is to processor speed(2.2 ghz, 2.8 ghz, etc.) And if you could reccomend me an AMD processor(dual core or not, doesn't matter) that you think is -really- good, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!
WolvenASE is offline  
Old 12-06-2005, 01:14 AM   #8 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,446
Send a message via AIM to Alex81388
Default

Yes, that is what we are saying. An Athlon at 2.2 is way better than an intel at 2.2
__________________
Sig removed due to foul language. Please read the rules regarding the allowable content of sigs before reposting your COMPLIANT sig.
~Trotter
4/21/06
Alex81388 is offline  
Old 12-06-2005, 02:46 AM   #9 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 68
Send a message via AIM to CrimsonGX
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by WolvenASE
would that mean that if a game would have the minimum reqs of say.. 2.0 ghz, that it would put alot more strain on the AMD rather than the Intel because it has 3.8 ghz? If what I said wasn't true, please correct me. Thanks for all of your help, I appreciate it!
No, because all/most games minumum requirements are based off Intel's Ghz, for AMD they usually say 'or equivalent'

So if the game required, say, 2.2 Ghz Intel, you'd need an AMD proccessor with a P-rating of about 2200(and the AMD would probably run it slightly better than the intel), such as the 2200+ Sempron, which runs at 1.5 Ghz.
__________________

CrimsonGX 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 02:34 PM.


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