AMD vs Intel processors

[Jerry_111]

For the latest gaming, intel vs AMD -- which one has the best new processors?

 

[MRG]

Ooooo.. you are SO opening a can of worms with that question.

It's like asking if there is a god & if so, which religion is the true religion.

For the record, I have used & owned both over the years & prior to the Conroe, AMD crushed Intel with it's AthlonXP & FX line of processors. However, with the Conroe & newer line of technology, I feel that Intel now offers a better product & so thats why I based my system around a Conroe E6400 processor a little over a year ago.

That is just my own personal opinion.

-MRG

 

[Druckles]

INTEL SUCK, THEY R GAY LOL. AMD FTW.

/fanboyism

I believe Intel currently has the highest end processors, if you have cash to burn. AMD beat Intel on price, though.

 

[Pesmerga]

AMD currently is falling behind in CPU tech, last I heard. Intel is the way to go. For now.

 

[Druckles]

AMD are catching up. Intel are slowing down. Much like the graphics card race.

 

[Sanada]

There's nothing wrong with the current AMD CPUs available other than they aren't competitive with the Core2. Clock for clock the Phenom is pretty much evenually matched with the Core2 and can even surpass it when overclocked properly (so I've heard). They will be releasing a 45nm revision near the end of the year which should help make them more of an appealing choice. For gaming though you'll really want a fast dual core so you should get a Intel Core 2 Duo.

 

[AiM]

Last I checked, the e8400 and q6600 offered arguably the best cost / performance ratio. Both are Intel.

 

[DEATH eVADER]

Agreed, plus they don't have a tendency to overheat, unlike some other processors

 

[Asus]

Intel has the best performance right now...hands down.
Intel also has the best Performance per watt (electricity used from the wall).
In some cases you might find a deal or CPU model where AMD beats/matches Intel on performance per price in a specific application but by in large this still goes to Intel. And the AMD cpu will be using more power.

So...i'd recommend Intel. (My last 5 PCs have been AMD)
I would recommend Intel chipsets or AMD(ati) chipsets depending on which platform you are going for. Nvidia only if you plan to go SLI (made for either side).

One of the only solid reasons to go AMD atm is if you are building a Home Theater PC. Because their onboard graphics perform very well for that kind of thing (HD video, light gaming) vs Intel and Nvidia onboard graphics

 

[Blackthorn]

I have a Q6600, and despite some overheating issues (easily fixed with something better than a stock cooler) the performance is dazzling, for a reasonable price too. Unless I'm stress testing, it's never maxed out, even when running a ton of strenuous apps. The rumour mill currently has Intel as definite tech leaders right now.

 

[Sedako]

AMD are catching up. Intel are slowing down. Much like the graphics card race.

Nehalem.

 

[Asus]

Nehalem.

yep (preview)

 

[blahblahblah]

Nehalem.

AMD had its chances to beat Intel with Intel's initial P3 release and late series P4's, yet AMD never could put the smack down on Intel. I'm actually worried with the across the spectrum success of Core 2 Duo and soon to be success of Nehalem that AMD is going to be KO'ed. Perhaps the only saving grace for AMD is that Intel has a tendency to make new microprocessor parts very expensive upon initial release.

Looking at the glass half full, I guess AMD should be happy with its acquisition of ATI. Nvidia is wounded after its mobile and desktop fiasco's and Intel's larrabee is a joke.