AMD Processor vs Intel Processor - Page 72 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-11-2005, 01:31 AM   #711 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 51
Send a message via AIM to Mionics
Default

bro as far as im concerned PENTIUMS loose their performance but there is no good answer for your question. Either way man a computer most likely wont last you long especially since you said you're new to this. So if you wanna go with a 64-bit. youre making the right choice but dont go above the 3500+ cause then they get too expensive and it wont do you any good to have a 3700+ when you wont even know the difference in most cases.
__________________

Mionics is offline  
Old 07-11-2005, 03:16 AM   #712 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

well, I think you are right also. AMD focus on doing more per clock cycle, and Intel like to just boost clock speeds
the Pentium 3's were more efficient than Pentium 4's. a 1.4 P3 will outperform a 1.4 and even 1.6 P4.

Intel's CPU's has been getting less efficient, and at the same time AMD's have been getting more efficient
__________________

__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Old 07-11-2005, 06:56 AM   #713 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,147
Default

Having not been online in quite a while, it's surprising to see this thread has gotten so big! Thanks to all of you who contributed! I really learned a lot (and am still learning)!
__________________
Snake-Eyes is offline  
Old 07-11-2005, 07:19 AM   #714 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,782
Default

it was intels deal with rambus that created the p4 which put the end to efficient intel cpu's
__________________
Core 2 Duo E6400, DFI Infinity 975X/G, 2x 512mb DDR2 667mhz, Albatron 7900gt, WD 200gb SATA, Samsung DVD-RW, Silverstone ST-50EF 500w PSU.
waynejkruse10 is offline  
Old 07-11-2005, 08:19 AM   #715 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

yup, that's why they have a x4 FSB
__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Old 07-11-2005, 02:10 PM   #716 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 496
Default

Heyyo,

Hmm, it's a sad thing when "partnerships" are supposed to make things better, but in computers, sometimes it means the reverse. Nvidia buying out 3dfx (oh c'mon, our vidcards would be soo much better if 3DFX was still in the game. They made incredible vidcards, they were the top until they got bought out), sapphire going with that cheap ram company... the only time it seems to be good is when they're inventing something completely new. Sony, and IBM, and I can't remember the 3rd company, them and those cell cpu's will totally overthrow the current cpus. They run onna completely different achitexture due to them being like, 1/4th the size of our current x86 cpus. I mean, they plan their default speed on release to be 4GHz. At E3, in the PS3 they had 4 of them running at only 3.7GHz, so that's 1.2GHz they weren't even using, and the UT2k7 ingame cinematics looked incredibly smooth. Same goes for that other game.. I forget the name now..

I think they said they can do up to 10 processes per cycle, x86 cpus can only do 2. So 10x4 is 40 processes per cycle, you could like, freakin' mutli-os-multi-task that setup. I'd cream my pants if my computer were that stong, lol. I dunno folks, they say the PS3 will ship with linux onnit.. if so.. and you can plug your keyboard n' mouse into it.. that's like, a super computer at a new low price. Just get that cedega, and there ya go, play games with rediculous graphics settings and have no framerate loss, literally.

I dunno, cedega might not work with the version of linux they're gonna use on the PS3, but I hope they make a compatible version, if so, the prospect of having a super computer would be all the more intruging no?

Btw, they do plan to bring cell processors to us PC users... but to get a standard out n' so, we can be looking at a cell processor in our comps in maybe 2007.. if we're lucky, most likely in 2008. By then, who knows wth amd and intel might have accomplished. Cause it's obvious, x86 architecture is old, an upgrade is needed.. But the wait... oh boy.
__________________
Later-A-Much, and LONG LIVE THE D!
æ ThE_MarÐ
ThE_MarD is offline  
Old 07-12-2005, 01:40 AM   #717 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

a lot of companies promise they'll have technology sooo much better, but the problem is, often they do not deliver. I'm njot saying they shouldn't try, and I don't doubt that cell processing can be really good, but I would wait and see for myself before I jump to conclusions about anything.

and, if they do make the cell processors, I'm sure they can develop a Linux compatible with it. Linux is open source, so literally anyone is allowed to develop one for it. although it sort of depends on Sony to decide if they want it on their PS3's
__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Old 07-12-2005, 02:28 AM   #718 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,782
Default

Computers can be sooooo much better, but companies have to go with technology what is a good mix of Cost of Production and Performance.
__________________
Core 2 Duo E6400, DFI Infinity 975X/G, 2x 512mb DDR2 667mhz, Albatron 7900gt, WD 200gb SATA, Samsung DVD-RW, Silverstone ST-50EF 500w PSU.
waynejkruse10 is offline  
Old 07-12-2005, 03:09 PM   #719 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 496
Default

Heyyo,

The main prob I have with intel ain't their preformance, but their dirty antics:

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,121796,00.asp

Yet again, they're investigating Intel, this time in europe, with agressive force. Sure, there's plenty of companies that do this, but c'mon, Intel is the "supposed" leader of cpu's.. why would they need dirty business antics then eh? I think they know they slipped behind AMD in price/preformance quite badly, and I guess this is how they wanna keep the big bucks.
__________________
Later-A-Much, and LONG LIVE THE D!
æ ThE_MarÐ
ThE_MarD is offline  
Old 07-12-2005, 06:19 PM   #720 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,782
Default

There was sumthin on slashdot about some compilers run AMD code slower than Intel code on purpose.
__________________

__________________
Core 2 Duo E6400, DFI Infinity 975X/G, 2x 512mb DDR2 667mhz, Albatron 7900gt, WD 200gb SATA, Samsung DVD-RW, Silverstone ST-50EF 500w PSU.
waynejkruse10 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 08:47 PM.


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