Niode wrote:Besides, AMDs chips are expensive and not very fast, plus their energy efficiency isn't the best. So they are no good for mobile platforms.
AMD's are generally cheaper and tend to run faster than Intels.
Erm... that statement was true 5 years ago.
Please do your research before sounding stupid.
A Core 2 Quad (intel, btw) Q6600 g0 slackr edition is £130 Retail (IE with heatsink) performs exactly the same as the AMD X4 9850 and that CPU costs £170-180 retail.
Also if you want to do it, the Q6600 will overclock much further and run cooler and stabler than the 9850. We're talking 30-40% overclock compared to around 10-15% overclock on the 9850.
Care to pull any more unfounded and completely bollocks statements out of your ass?
So you've compared 2 chips, in other cases, it's the opposite.
An AMD Athlon X2 6400+ costs $150 whereas an Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 costs about $270. There a plenty of examples going both ways, but I've found that for the most part, AMD is cheaper and faster.
Plus your whole overclocking argument, that can vary from chip to chip to chip. I don't ever take others overclocking experiences into account when buying chips because it can vary significantly.
HoboJoe wrote:So you've compared 2 chips, in other cases, it's the opposite.
An AMD Athlon X2 6400+ costs $150 whereas an Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 costs about $270. There a plenty of examples going both ways, but I've found that for the most part, AMD is cheaper and faster.
Plus your whole overclocking argument, that can vary from chip to chip to chip. I don't ever take others overclocking experiences into account when buying chips because it can vary significantly.
Hang on? You're comparing chips from last generation, when there are faster chips available cheaper right now?
riight... ok. then...
Oh and as for your AMD argument. Please show me some benchmarks of current AMD chips out performing Intel chips at the same price point. At stock and the same efficiency.
Over here the q6600 goes for about 250-300 bucks normal price. England sells stuff at weird prices....a new chip shouldn't be cheaper then an older chip.
The performance value on the Q6600 is unbeatable right now. It makes zero sense to buy a dual core chip when you can get a £125 quad core retail with a heatsink. You can get one without a heatsink for £30 less. I'd rather get the OEM version and slap a water-cooler on it for £160 in total. That will let that chip overclock like crazy.
It's like the socket A Athlon XPs from 7 years ago all over again. Or the AMD Opterons from a couple of years ago.
I'd really like to see AMD come out on top again. I've always used their chips in my systems but it just makes no sense to use them these days. Intel are pushing out faster chips that are cheaper and more efficient than AMDs offering. They can't keep up right now. With rumours that they are going to be dropping the ATi brand and the closure of their handheld division. Things aren't looking great for AMD. It will be a great shame if AMD have to bow out. The consumer will get shafted and we might be looking at going back to the days of the Pentium processor where Intel can pretty much charge whatever they want.
Well I'll use AMD's still the day I die. I've never been a fan of intel. And if my couple of purchases every 10 years or so can help them stay alive...so be it. Monopolies suck.
HoboJoe wrote:Well I'll use AMD's still the day I die. I've never been a fan of intel. And if my couple of purchases every 10 years or so can help them stay alive...so be it. Monopolies suck.
