What Is The Different Between AMD with Intel?

[Aramis]

ok the AMD & Intel question is complicated, it has gotten wayyyyyyyyyy more complicated recently, but if you ask anywhere else ok maybe even here your going to get a lot of fanboydom


I used Both chips, infact there is not many chips i have not used so i will give some history, and then a modern comparason

AMD chips prior to the socket 754, and socket A it "Athalon, duron, Athalon64, Sempron, Athalon64 x2, and Optertron"

where not worth the money except for those doing basic work, and basic games. and where radically cheaper than intel

so in truth at that time while those chips where cheaper they did the job for those who where never going to make the maximum use of the cpu

AMD Athalon, was prob best described the first attempt to get a cheap gaming cpu, and it was, comparable to intel, the Duron was also very effective for a vareity of uses, and was extremly overclockable and cheap

but these cpu's had a limited half life. that usually ended in the 5 year mark depending on use and maintance.

So far every duron computer i have built sold, and replaced died between the 3 to 5 year mark,

the Athalon models however "still have models running" however i decommisioned them

now the cpus on the socket754 range, where highly reliable, but there half life was the same as the previous range, the upgraded socket range 939

which was also when the first dual core athalons became available have had a considerable longer half life

as in currently all 939 gaming and work machines i sold, are still 100% working
if anything the only problem that has come up has been caused by XP SP3 end

the am2 am2+ ranges are compatable to the 939 range but I have neither sold anywhere as many as the 939 range prob due to the fact the only thing the 939 range has needed has been a vista upgrade for some, and graphics card for other

the intel cpu ranges

i am skipping the pre 166mmx range as it is overly complicated

the intel cpu's

Intel 1 mmx 166 mmx to 222mmx
Intel pentium 2

where extremly solid perfomers, i had limited experience with the server equivalents so i wont talk about those of this era

these cpu's where supperior to amd, but the computers cost more

the intel pentium 3 was a extremly good processor thou there was controversy of a certain inbuilt feature of it "you can look it up yourself if you really want to, just think 1984"

between the pentium 2 and pentium 3 the celeron cpus where introduced
these where highly unreliable cpus

despite being the budget range to combat AMD's growing popularity, they only fooled those who did not understand that while amd had budget cpu's there budget cpus could play games well

while the intel budget cpus "Celerons" could not in most cases, as i recall the only game i got to work for a early celeron was "Deus Ex" and "Hitman" and bother suffered lag, and occasional graphical error

they where initially designed for budget work computers, but even for Word and excel documents it was a Horrific Ordeal

Dell sold a particular model, that will earn them a special place in hell
the GX110 " http://www.pcarenahungary.com/pricelist/oriaskep/dell_optiplex_gx110-298.jpg"

This model was mass produced for companys, under false impressions that these where as reliable as "intel pentium 3" in fact i recall a certain internet company went BUST when they replaced all there computers with this model assuming it would be better than what they had

while later celerons are far better, i remain defient never to sell a customer a Intel budger CPU

the intel Pentium 4 is another flawed CPU released, there is numeous revisions
12 aprox, each revision either adding a new socket type, architecture alteration, and enhanced 64bit support

the first Pentium 4, was more reliable than some of the later models, but still prone to overheating, too SD RAM, the last revisions, where dualcore and took ddr2

the last line of Pentium 4s where quite reliable but not cost justifiable compared to the amd Alternative

"the pentium d was based on the pentium 4 and more fault tollerante"

another problem is people peddling Pentium 4 brand on so many of intel lines it can be very misleading especially, since they all use the same socket

considering the cost diffrence from a dual core Pentium d and a dual core Celeron

the Pentium D is a better choice, and is a great option

the pentium D, rates Slightly lower than the AMD X2 option "mid high end amd alternative" and is awesome for work computers

the Intel Dual core "no point buying a solo core" rates much higher than the pentium d, but if your only doing work there is no justification for the cost for most of the cpus especially the quad cores unless your work requires it

another thing to keep in perspective is AMD archtecture has not advanced much over the past few years

and the next generation of intel cpu's will be compatible with the current socket set

currently as you can see from what i have said, while there has been a great diffrence in the past, currently the only diffrence between the cpu's

is what you require it for, and how much you can afford

you can get a gaming cpu for £50 with a AMD, but the equivlanet in intel is £150

the best brand Lines are as follows comparing bangs per buck for an average user are, i have skipped a few model lines you can still get some places and i have skipped the Intel Core i7 as they just got released

AMD Phenom Triple Core
AMD Athlon 64 Dual Core
AMD Phenom Quad Core
Intel Pentium D Dual-Core
Intel Core2 Quad
Intel Core2 Duo
Intel Xeon
Intel Celeron

[link8r]

AMD's used to have more 64-bit chips before Intel - but you do need a 64-bit OS to take advantage of this, like Windows 64-bit versions etc.

I find my AMD laptop is very fast, much faster than the intel version but that was a while ago.

Much of a muchness I'd say, are they still a lot cheaper?

[speedo1234]

INTEL processors: Intel was the first major brand for desktop CPUs, they survived a lot of competitors. The CPUs they manufacture are always a bit more expensive than AMDs. Because of their market shares, Intel was able to force some "gadgets" onto the market. Until 2002, all CPUs were classified by the speed (for example 2GHz - so 2000MHz). Intel lost some influence on the desktops CPU market because of AMDs techniques - they used not only pure speed but a more specific command kernel. By that the CPUs (i.E. AMD Athlon XP) were slower, but provided the same results as a faster Intel CPU (remember? AMD at 1.666GHz was the same as a INTEL on 1,8GHz). Intel provides most of the "normal" server CPUs today. Private users often choose AMDs for their machines to save costs. Intel supports the classification by the pure speed of a CPU no more. The introduced new numbers for the CPUs which represent the speed, the advanced features, the cache etc. for a certain CPU (and the best for them: you cannot compare them to AMD any longer as easily as it was before ...)

AMD: AMD concentrated on the PC and consumer market and cut the costs for their CPUs in order to be more competitive. Nowadays the AMD CPUs are hotter than Intel CPUs, therefore you will need a better cooling and your system will be a bit louder. AMD provides a dual core CPU for PCs longer than Intel and I guess they have more experience with these features.

[3ncryptabl3_lick]

I think we can leave the Wiki.answers out speedo. This isn't you 'sharing your experiences' nore is it 'your opinion'. Do refrain from copy and pasting content from one place to here just to raise your count.

[007c]

It's funny i read here that amds ran cooler? I bought amds two times and they were hot as hell. I switched back to a dual core pentium and the heat is back to normal. None were overclocked.

[Aramis]

Originally Posted by 007c

It's funny i read here that amds ran cooler? I bought amds two times and they were hot as hell. I switched back to a dual core pentium and the heat is back to normal. None were overclocked.

that would be true in your case

the earlier pentium 4's where far hotter than amd, but this changed later on, just prior to there first dual core pentiums

as for amds running hot, well i could never tell, i always considered all cpus to run hot, its when they run so hot the pc turns itself off, is when i get concerned as thats exactly what some of the earlier pentium 4's did

fortunitly for intel the company that signed an exclusivity contract with them "DELL"

was what managed to stop the company from suddenly going bankrupt, and because dell was restricted to Intel CPU's they designed a better cooling and ventialtion sytem in there computers which can still be seen today

why in most cases i would not recommend dell, there is instances like myself have bought a dell, simply because it had such a coolent system which allowed it to be dang close to silent, but i only buy refurbished dells at one fifth the going price

however i still avoid all intel cpu's prior to Pentium D

[sequincer]

The difference is,Intel is is 10 times bigger than AMD.
but i still prefer AMD

[TinaCool]

Intel has better performance, better battery life, is more smooth to work with...

AMD is not much diff though... they both are ok

But better to buy Intel..