[QUESTION] AMD your opinion - 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 12-29-2005, 01:01 AM   #11 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 76
Default

What kind of people would choose an Intel CPU Then ?
__________________

__________________
ASUS P4P800 SE
Pentium 4 Prescott 3.0 E (478 socket)
Radeon 7500 64mb (I know ... (^_^)
when i get around to it)
Samsung PC3200 512mb x 2 (DUAL SOCKET)
SEAGATE 300GB SATA
SEAGATE 120GB IDE
honsbeek is offline  
Old 12-29-2005, 01:04 AM   #12 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: asdf
Posts: 8,887
Default

People who encode videos/music, and are making movies and other things like that. Or your doing some heavy graphical work. But AMD Dual core should be at the same level.... Just my 2 cents..... I haven't been reading much lately....
__________________

c0rr0sive is offline  
Old 12-29-2005, 01:30 AM   #13 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 765
Default

Who chooses Intel? Mainly mobile users (Centrino, but Turion is still better), and ignorant customers (ie, people who buy from Dell).

AMD outsold Intel this year in processors in the OEM and retail market, so clearly, AMD is doing SOMETHING right. Don't forget, AMD has its memory controller on die, which means it doesn't have to move information 1-3 inches and back to be fully processed, just a few nanometers. Also, the memory controller for Intel depends on the motherboard's northbridge, so if you got a cheap motherboard, you got a cheap memory controller. Then you got crappy performance.

AMD is cheaper, faster, and overall better. To those who said media and graphical art users are those who use pentiums, you're dead wrong. Many of those people in those fields either use Mac's or processors which belong to the Athlon 64 FX line of processors.

Trust me, I've been using Intel up to a few months ago, and when I made the switch, I've never been happier. I'm running an Athlon 64 3000+ Venice core. It's "clock speed" is 1.8ghz however it is equivalent to a 3.0GHz Pentium, and truth is, it runs faster then any pentium on most of the games I play, did I mention I haven't overclocked it yet?


I could go on, but main selling points are it runs cooler, 64 and 32 bit, cheaper, faster, and a better overclocker.
septoid2 is offline  
Old 12-29-2005, 04:11 AM   #14 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 76
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by septoid2
Who chooses Intel? Mainly mobile users (Centrino, but Turion is still better), and ignorant customers (ie, people who buy from Dell).

AMD outsold Intel this year in processors in the OEM and retail market, so clearly, AMD is doing SOMETHING right. Don't forget, AMD has its memory controller on die, which means it doesn't have to move information 1-3 inches and back to be fully processed, just a few nanometers. Also, the memory controller for Intel depends on the motherboard's northbridge, so if you got a cheap motherboard, you got a cheap memory controller. Then you got crappy performance.

AMD is cheaper, faster, and overall better. To those who said media and graphical art users are those who use pentiums, you're dead wrong. Many of those people in those fields either use Mac's or processors which belong to the Athlon 64 FX line of processors.

Trust me, I've been using Intel up to a few months ago, and when I made the switch, I've never been happier. I'm running an Athlon 64 3000+ Venice core. It's "clock speed" is 1.8ghz however it is equivalent to a 3.0GHz Pentium, and truth is, it runs faster then any pentium on most of the games I play, did I mention I haven't overclocked it yet?


I could go on, but main selling points are it runs cooler, 64 and 32 bit, cheaper, faster, and a better overclocker.
Septoid !!! I'm facinated by what your said,
"AMD has its memory controller on die" What do you mean by this , please tell me more about amd and intel's diffences. Please tell me why amd doesn't run with Intel Northbridge and if you don't mind , explain to me how , amd 1.8 is equivalent to 3.0 pentium ???

I heard someone mention that amd cpu do more in one cicle , so the structure of amd cpu's must differ from intels???

Please indulge me , if you don't mind

Ralph
__________________
ASUS P4P800 SE
Pentium 4 Prescott 3.0 E (478 socket)
Radeon 7500 64mb (I know ... (^_^)
when i get around to it)
Samsung PC3200 512mb x 2 (DUAL SOCKET)
SEAGATE 300GB SATA
SEAGATE 120GB IDE
honsbeek is offline  
Old 12-29-2005, 04:29 AM   #15 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 30
Default

Ya amd's do more work in less time then intel thats why a amd 3000+ is 1.8 and a intel is 3.0. I believe thats why amd uses the 3000+ etc.
funami is offline  
Old 12-29-2005, 05:14 AM   #16 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 240
Default

Yes, I'm not well versed in the super technical details, but AMD processors have the memory controller on the die, as in inside of the processor. Intel boards have it on the mother board as a physical chip. AMDs also have lower clock frequencys (Mhz) but they do more in a single cycle than an intel does.

So a Sempron 3000 runs at 1.8Ghz, but a pentium4 3Ghz is running at 3ghz. The AMD processor, while running slower, performs at the same level as the 3Ghz intel, in some cases it'll probably be better. (I know, a sempron might not be the best thing to compare w/ but I'm to lazy to look up a normal athalon and I have a semp 3000 running right now.)

I don't know too much about intel procs, I think Intel's marketing of chips is far worse than AMDs, AMD you know what you're getting, intel it's like a game and you hope you buy the right one because there's 10 different types of P4 3ghz procs(not talking about socket)

It's cheaper and better to go w/ AMD.
__________________
In The Mail!!!!- Athlon 64 3500 @Stock/Abit K9N SLi sAM2/2GB G.Skill DDR2 800 @Stock /XFX G7900GT XXX 520/1500Mhz/74GB Raptor w/ 16mbcache/300GB 16mbcache SATA HD/NEC DVD-RAM Burner/OCZ ModStream 520watt psu/ThermalTake Armor Jr./Logitech EX110 mouse/keyboard
Mk97 is offline  
Old 12-29-2005, 01:23 PM   #17 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,790
Default

You guys can't just simply say AMD is better because it is without knowing what you're talking about ...kudos to you dudes who actually try and explain what you mean

Biggest difference between Intel and AMD are the clock frequencies...as already pointed out AMD cores are clocked significantly slower than Intel cores yet compete competetively with them. This is because a clock cycle is simply the time it takes the processor to complete one operation, however the number of instructions per operation is not set therefore one operation will not neccesarily be equal to another operation

To put into perspective

P4 3GHz = 3000000000 operations per second
Athlon 3000+ = 1800000000 operations per second

Let's say the P4 does 10 instructions per cycle, but the 3000+ does 17 per cycle (this aren't real numbers, I'm just making a point)...that would work out to:

P4 = 3000000000 * 10 = 30000000000 instructions per cycle
Athlon = 1800000000 * 17 = 30600000000 instructions per cycle

The IPC rate is what determines the performance of a processor, not the clock frequency...therefore, as we can see above, despite the AMD being clocked much lower, it performs more per operation and is roughly the same speed as the faster clocked Intel

Quote:
AMD has built the memory controller directly into the core rather than previous architecture that constructed it within the northbridge...this means that there is no longer a low frequency bus needed to connect the processor to the memory controller as they are intertwined and the FSB is effectively the speed of the core itself

This leads to direct access to the memory, known as Hypertransport or previously Lightning Data transfer...a high speed low latency bus that is capable of delivering up to 22GB/sec bandwidth...in the case of DDR400 memory the memory bandwidth is roughly 6.4GB/sec rather than the "standard" 3.2GB/sec that DDR400 would normally deliver if the memory controller was situated on the northbridge

Intel architecture still uses the traditional northbridge and FSB concept therefore the memory is still limited based on the communication required between numerous points...therefore AMD is able to utilize slower operating, cheaper memory modules to provide the same bandwidth as faster, more expensive modules that Intel uses
I've already written enough crap about this topic if you are to search I believe you'll find more than enough information...the memory controller architecture and implication is still a bit foggy to me so I can't explain it particularily well, but I'll summarize the above

AMD FSB = Effective core speed
Intel FSB = Effective memory speed
AMD Memory Bus = 2GHz (1GHz * 2) = Memory Controller (CPU) <-HTT-> RAM
Intel Memory Bus = 1066MHz (266.5MHz * 4) = CPU <-FSB-> Northbridge <-Memory Bus-> RAM
__________________
Intel C2D E6320 / AMD Athlon X2 3800+
Gigabyte 965P DS3 / DFI nF4 Ultra-D
2GB OCZ Gold PC2-6400 / 2GB OCZ Gold PC4000
eVGA 8800GTS 320MB / eVGA 6800GS 256MB
150GB Raptor / 74GB Raptor
2x500GB / 320GB
OCZ GameXStreme 850w / OCZ StealthXStream 600w
gaara is offline  
Old 12-29-2005, 07:18 PM   #18 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
mike4realz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 404
Default

uhhh yah i guess the above post means that AMD is just better

so go wid AMD
__________________

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 2.83Ghz || 4GB OCZ 1066 DDR2 RAM || GIGABYTE GA-EP45-UD3P Motherboard ||
PNY XLR8 GTX 470 || Raptor 300GB 10,000 RPM HDD RAID0 || Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
mike4realz is offline  
Old 12-29-2005, 08:50 PM   #19 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
plumber4578's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hanover, PA
Posts: 391
Send a message via AIM to plumber4578 Send a message via MSN to plumber4578
Default

I built my first computer and I went with AMD. I talked to many people that built computers and had nothing good to say about intel. Especially gaming. Intell is good for word processing. I think that's about all the can do faster than AMD. AMD can take a lot more heat than and Intel too. It always confused me too with the rated speeds. That's a sales gimmick! I have a XP3000 Barton core with 400FSB unclocked and love it. I wont upgrade to a 64 system for awhile.
__________________
My puter:
MOBO - ASUS P5W DH DELUXE
CPU - INTEL Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz
VIDEO - EVGA 8800 GTX
MEM - 4 GB (1BGX4) G.SKILL PC2 6400
PSU - CORSAIR 620WATT
HD - 2 SAMSUNG 500GB 7200 RPM
OS - Windows Vista 64Bit
plumber4578 is offline  
Old 12-29-2005, 09:20 PM   #20 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

as of yet, AMD systems don't have to have DDR2 to get high memory bandwith. this is because of the onboard memory controller.

once AMD gets DDR2 support, it will have a lot more memory bandwith than Intel CPU's
AMD will get DDR2 once socket M2 comes out, which should be somewhat early 2006

now, AMD also spent more time on their dual core CPU's than Intel did. both cores can communicate better with each other and the system than the Intel dual cores can.
__________________

__________________
Apokalipse 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 07:29 AM.


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