Intel the clear winner

Recursion · 12-29-04, 02:50 PM

In a recent review of the past 10 years of processors as seen here http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/2004...charts-13.html

There were 30 benchmarks done and

Intel: 20

AMD: 10
-----
30

It shows that Amd is better for gaming, but the all around use and value of the chip is in Intels hands

So intel>AMD

Sentential · 12-29-04, 02:54 PM

errrr ok...

and the point is? Are you trying to flame bait?

AZNCOOLED · 12-29-04, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sentential

errrr ok...

and the point is? Are you trying to flame bait?

Its true intel is a better overall processor

Gautam · 12-29-04, 03:25 PM

Well, all it proves is that Tom's gets plenty of their do-re-mi from a certain someone, if you catch my drift.

Graphicism · 12-29-04, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZNCOOLED

Its true intel is a better overall processor

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.

Steven4563 · 12-29-04, 03:27 PM

and how u work out intel's overall better it really depends on what YOU/ME like doing on our PC's

Gautam · 12-29-04, 03:29 PM

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.

To each their own, but there isn't, and never will be, a "clear winner."

obsolete · 12-29-04, 03:29 PM

And I'm still going to buy AMD.

I.M.O.G. · 12-29-04, 03:36 PM

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.

Graphicism · 12-29-04, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gautam

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.

larva · 12-29-04, 03:43 PM

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.

larva · 12-29-04, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism

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.

Avro · 12-29-04, 03:47 PM

those blue intel guys scare me.

Recursion · 12-29-04, 03:49 PM

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

warlock110 · 12-29-04, 03:53 PM

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.

Graphicism · 12-29-04, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scotch

I think toms hardware is a very reputable site and I trust the bench marks

You know what 'think' did don't ya?

obsolete · 12-29-04, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by warlock110

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.

Graphicism · 12-29-04, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larva

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.

Gautam · 12-29-04, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by larva

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.

Someone Stupid · 12-29-04, 03:57 PM

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.

12-29-04, 02:50 PM	Thread Starter #1
Recursion Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Bronx, NY	Intel the clear winner In a recent review of the past 10 years of processors as seen here http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/2004...charts-13.html There were 30 benchmarks done and Intel: 20 AMD: 10 ----- 30 It shows that Amd is better for gaming, but the all around use and value of the chip is in Intels hands So intel>AMD

12-29-04, 02:54 PM	#2
Sentential Contributing Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Jacksonville, FL	errrr ok... and the point is? Are you trying to flame bait? __________________ Coolermaster 690II Advanced \| Corsair 1000W Creative X-FI Titanium Fatal1ty Pro Intel i5 2500K (4.5ghz @ 1.33v)Corsair H100 PNY GTX 470 SLI SLi Asus P8Z68-V Pro Intel 320 SSD SATAII 2 X 120GB Raid 0 Kingston HyperX (4x4096MB)(8-8-9-28 @ 1600mhz @ 1.5v) Heatware: 13-0-0

12-29-04, 03:25 PM	#4
Gautam Senior Benchmark Addict Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Hillsboro, OR	Well, all it proves is that Tom's gets plenty of their do-re-mi from a certain someone, if you catch my drift. __________________ El<(')>Maxi: I still have your board...and I'm afraid I lost your address so I can't send it back...and my pm box is broken...and I can't remember where the PO is anyway

12-29-04, 03:27 PM	#6
Steven4563 Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Northants England	and how u work out intel's overall better it really depends on what YOU/ME like doing on our PC's __________________ AMD Athlon 64 3200+ Winchester @ 250x10 = 2.5ghz 1.55V Cooled By XP-120 & YS-TECH FD1238 Fan MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum Edition Corsair XMS TwinX 1Gig 2x512Meg PC4400 Ram @ 416Mhz 2,2,2,6 1T Hercules 3D Prophet 9700NP 128Meg ( Bios Flashed To 9700Pro With VGA Sliencer ) 480Gig Hard Drive Space MSI 16x DVD Drive Artec 52x CD-RW Drive Creative SoundBlaster Audigy 2 ZS Antec PlusView 1000AMG Metallic Gray Case Antec TruePower 550watt PSU ( New Version ) Windows XP Pro SP1 3DMark2001SE: 23014 4.9GHZ Of AMD Power For Overclockers.com Boinc Seti Team.

12-29-04, 03:29 PM	#7
Gautam Senior Benchmark Addict Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Hillsboro, OR	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. To each their own, but there isn't, and never will be, a "clear winner." __________________ El<(')>Maxi: I still have your board...and I'm afraid I lost your address so I can't send it back...and my pm box is broken...and I can't remember where the PO is anyway

Intel the clear winner

Internet Services

Website Development

Tech Hardware

12-29-04, 03:29 PM	#8
obsolete Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: MN	And I'm still going to buy AMD. __________________ ][H][ ]-[Abit NF7-S V2]-[1800 Tbred]-[2x256 Corsair XMS]-[TI4800 SE]-[Audigy 2 ZS/w S HD 280 Pro]-[WD-R SATA]-[Sony CRX300E/B2 BLK]-[Antec TC 550W]-[Custom WC]-[Viewsonic P95f+B 19" & Viewsonic P70f 17"]-[ -ºb§ºlëtë

12-29-04, 03:36 PM	#9
I.M.O.G. Glorious Leader Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Rootstown, OH	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. __________________ The OC Forums Way We are a team. We are a community. We are a fellowship made strong by mutual respect and shared dedication to the task of enriching all who come here. The OC Forums Thank You Thread Put your computer to work for our OC Forum Teams! Try out our POST TEMPLATES, they save you time answering common questions! I spend half my money on CPUs, GPUs, and Liquid Nitrogen. The other half I waste.

12-29-04, 03:43 PM	#11
larva Inactive Moderator Join Date: Jul 2002	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. __________________ Home Rig - cod2 tool--------------------------------------------------------------------------------School Rig - work tool CPU P4 561 @ 220fsb/4GHz------------------------------------------------------------------------CPU P4 506 @ 200fsb/4GHz MB Abit AG8-V Video EVGA 7800GT-----------------------------------------------------------------MB Abit AS8-V Video EVGA GF 6200 Memory 4x512MB BH5 - DDR440-2,2,2,5------------------------------------------------------Memory 2x512MB Corsair VS400-2.5,3,3,8 Cooling Scythe Ninja w/103cfm 120x38mm Sanyo-------------------------------------------Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer 4 w/Intel 92mm fan Sound SoundBastid Live Case AMS gTower PS TPII-480----------------------------------Sound Integrated audio Case Antec SLK1650 PS SP2-350 Storage 74GB Raptor - 2x200GB Samsung - LG4167b DVD-RW------------------------Storage 2x160GB Hitachi SATA - LG4163b DVD-RW - 250MB Zip Display Dell 2005FPW 20" widescreen LCD Printer - Canon i9900---------------Display Viewsonic VX2025 20" widescreen LCD Printer - Canon i860

12-29-04, 03:47 PM	#13
Avro Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Richmond Hill, Ontario	those blue intel guys scare me. __________________ Main: AMD FX-8120, Corsair Vengeance DDR3, Sabertooth 990FX, Nvidia 8800GTS 640mb, Soundblaster X-FI Platinum, OCZ modstream 600w, Apogee GT, tline, BIX2, eheim 1250 HTPC: Athlon 64 X2 5000+ BE , Asus M2A-VM, 2gb Crucial Ballistix, HD2600 Pro, 2 X 160GB IDE, ULTRA-120, HVR-1600 + HVR-1250, Sony STR-DE425 Receiver, Precision Acoustic centre and rears, Optimus Pro LX-7 fronts Laptop: XPS M1530, C2D T5550 1.83Gghz, 3gb ram, 120gb 7200rpm, 8600M GT 256mb, 9 Cell Storage Server: Athlon64 3000+, Asus, 1gb ram, X600, 1.25tb 160GB PS3 <<< HEAT >>>

12-29-04, 03:49 PM	Thread Starter #14
Recursion Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Bronx, NY	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

12-29-04, 03:53 PM	#15
warlock110 Member Join Date: Jul 2003	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. __________________ GA-S3 + E6600 @ 360 X 9 1.4V 2 X 1GB G.Skill PC6400 @ 360 4-4-4-12 2 X 320GB Seagate 2 X 250GB Maxtor 1 X 160GB Seagate 1 X Samsung 18X DVDRW w/Lightscribe Creative Audigy 4 Pro 7600GS @ 550/420 TT Big Typhoon

12-29-04, 03:57 PM	#20
Someone Stupid Registered Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: New Orleans, LA	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.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search