AMD or INTEL??????????????

[joey_rjm5]

I am wondering if I should go with an AMD system or an Intel system. OI am wanting to get a geforce 2 and I want to onerclock and be able to overclock as much as possible. What works best, easiest and with the least amount of problems.

 

[Exiler]

well here we go again. A question like that will generate a lot of posts.

Your gonna have the Intel fans and AMD fans. Stability, Cost...blah blah blah...

Well I will leave this post now and let the battle begin.

 

[joey_rjm5]

i know

 

[jeff_harrison_344]

Okay Okay I guess Il have to start it off

AMD

 

[Ottoman]

My AMD 650 smokes my bro's
PIII 800...

I've had it over a year, cost me less, have a faster bus...
so what if my room heats up a little more
more cash to spend on peripherals...

 

[joey_rjm5]

Right now I think I am leaning towards a Duron to get used to how AMD works. Then going for something in the mid ghz range. They're so darn cheap I love it. Can Durons use pc2100???

 

[airflow]

Celeron vs Duron, I would say, on average,
Celeron is about 10% more overclockable,
Duron is about 10% faster with same clock speed.
Duron produces 10% more heat.

I feel Celeron is more reliable, and easier to overclock with a softmenu, rather than trying to change multiplier on a Duron.

I have a Celeron 600 @ 900mhz, soon to be 1008mhz, with higher voltage + better cooling.

many people get Celerons over 1ghz.

 

[joey_rjm5]

Now I am thinking I will just go ahead and get a 1.2 ghz athlon witrh the 266 memory

 

[WillysNut]

Comming from an original Intel fan...I guess a real middle of the road answer would be...Both! I think for now (For_Now)..AMD has the lead on performance per unit of currency and raw performance. Even though AMD mobo's are a little more money. Right now you can buy a nice Duron for $30-40us, and a mobo for it that will allow you to upgrade to a 1.33 Athlon down at a pretty affordable cost.

Based on the latest tests of the "unnamed" PIII which is either a Tualatin or a newer Coppermine, the new Intel Chips are gonna ROCK! Tom's Harware had a 1.13 chip up to 1419...1.4Gig....167FSB...The chip was multipler unlocked but they OC'ed via FSB only. That looks pretty darn close to what we're seeing from AMD.

I'm gonna try out an AMD system for a while, next to my trusty Intel boxes and sit back and wait for the new round of Intel's to hit the pavement. Good luck on your final decision

 

[sfa ok]

WillysNut (Jun 12, 2001 06:09 p.m.):
Comming from an original Intel fan...I guess a real middle of the road answer would be...Both! I think for now (For_Now)..AMD has the lead on performance per unit of currency and raw performance. Even though AMD mobo's are a little more money. Right now you can buy a nice Duron for $30-40us, and a mobo for it that will allow you to upgrade to a 1.33 Athlon down at a pretty affordable cost.

Based on the latest tests of the "unnamed" PIII which is either a Tualatin or a newer Coppermine, the new Intel Chips are gonna ROCK! Tom's Harware had a 1.13 chip up to 1419...1.4Gig....167FSB...The chip was multipler unlocked but they OC'ed via FSB only. That looks pretty darn close to what we're seeing from AMD.

I'm gonna try out an AMD system for a while, next to my trusty Intel boxes and sit back and wait for the new round of Intel's to hit the pavement. Good luck on your final decision

But we'll have to see what it does per mhz, now won't we? ;D

 

[joey_rjm5]

Right now I'm leaning a little towards the AMD side, but it looks like I won't have the money for about a month so I guess alot could happen by then. Maybe intel will have something. Thanks for the help with my decision.

 

[Phil]

AMD are always the best for price/peformance and currently have the best performing chip out as well though this could change with the northwood, but they will still be cheaper for the same performance. You have to ignore the mhz side of things now a days as it it isn't a good comparrisson. For example if you look at the recent tualatin/coppermine-t review on toms hardware they benchmarked the new p3 oc'd to 1.5ghz a 1.3ghz tbird and a 1.7ghz p4, in quake 3 the tbird was faster than the p3 by about 0.5% but considering the p3 was clocked 200mhz faster this is quite good, where as the p4 is usually faster than a tbird in quake 3 due to the memory bandwidth requirements, it will loose this without rdram (i.e. any of the sdram motherboards for it).
in general though you will get more performance for your money buying amd.

 

[joey_rjm5]

Thanks for the help. I do want bang for the buck and AMD has alot of that so I guess my question is answered. Just one more thing though. I have heard some stuff about AMD not being as reliable and compatible as intel is this true or is it not a big deal?