• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Intel the clear winner

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, all it proves is that Tom's gets plenty of their do-re-mi from a certain someone, if you catch my drift.
 
AZNCOOLED said:
Its true intel is a better overall processor :burn:

For frying vegetables and such yes, but overall day-to-day performance is the Athlon 64, this was proven on a test either at anandtech or gamepc, I forget where.
 
Nah, come on guys, no need to take the bait. Intels are great for day-to-day usage, and there's no doubt that they've got an edge in multitasking. Some people like it practical and clean. I tend to prefer raw speed at any cost. :D To each their own, but there isn't, and never will be, a "clear winner."
 
If you just want to say intel is the winner, you might as well highlight their revenues - relatively, the benchmark results are equal compared to teh difference in reveneus.

I think its very American and natural though to want a single clear winner... Unfortunately, it all depends on what you are looking at.

Like I've been looking at dual layer burners lately, and the nec3500 is basically the best drive all around, so I could consider it the winner. However, there are drives that are better than it at certain tasks, so if those were the only tasks I performed, then the other drives would be better.

It's all perspective.
 
Gautam said:
Intels are great for day-to-day usage, and there's no doubt that they've got an edge in multitasking.

To be honest I went Athlon 64 for multi-tasking and graphic design/video editing performance.
 
This is not surprising, and has nothing to do with any supposed bias. 10 years ago all AMD could do was mint a carbon copy of an Intel processor. It was not until the failure of the K5 some years later that AMD tried to market an original design, and not until the advent of the K6 that they had any chance of winning any kind of performance comparison.
 
Graphicism said:
To be honest I went Athlon 64 for multi-tasking ...

You will likely be dissapointed then. A64s have a host of advantages, multitasking is not one of them.
 
I just wanted to point this out, yes AMD is great for games, but for the all around user it is the opposite.

I think toms hardware is a very reputable site and I trust the bench marks
 
how does the A64 compares to P4 in video encoding? i think the P4 would be faster with it's raw clock speed, but i can be wrong.
 
warlock110 said:
how does the A64 compares to P4 in video encoding? i think the P4 would be faster with it's raw clock speed, but i can be wrong.

P4>A64. P4's have "two" CPU's & video encoders can utilize that.
 
larva said:
You will likely be dissapointed then. A64s have a host of advantages, multitasking is not one of them.

Not at all, intel only advertises multi-tasking because it's the only thing it has going for it. I find myself being able to render in adobe premier whilst working in another program only a slight speed hit. On an intel the render would be slow, and working in another program would be smooth, yet also at about 50% of the CPU or whatever is left from the render.
 
larva said:
This is not surprising, and has nothing to do with any supposed bias. 10 years ago all AMD could do was mint a carbon copy of an Intel processor. It was not until the failure of the K5 some years later that AMD tried to market an original design, and not until the advent of the K6 that they had any chance of winning any kind of performance comparison.
Well, I agree with everything you said, except that it's definitely secret that THG is *cozy* to say the least with Intel... Not where you want to go for unbiased info. But then again, just about reviewer out there is the b---ch of one manufacturer or another.
 
You don't point to relatively ancient history to say which company is better for what, or better overall currently. Are you really going to tell someone who wants to do anything nowadays to get an Intel Coppermine core CPU or will you tell them to get a much faster Northwood? If you said Northwood (or even Prescott), you just blew your arguement for this post out of the water. Intel makes some great processors as does AMD. Anyone who stays to one side without opening their eyes is ignorant, even if their choosen side is better - even a blind man can sometimes make it across a busy street.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back