I'm use to having intel computers but amd is not much of a difference. I've checked on internet sites on comparisons of the two and its really no difference. the top tier of intel and amd are practically the same. I'm guessing it just comes down to preference.

...Intel or AMD isn't matter. they are good. Intel's CPU has better control on the Power saving. If you want to built gaming Pc , go AMD. If you don't want a $$$ power supply ,go to intel..

I think AMD is better ... and AMD have triper core while intel doesnt

null

I think AMD is better ... and AMD have triper core while intel doesnt

Intel have quad core)
Intel processors have no problems with hardware, they are colder than AMD, have lower power consumption and...its Intel)

Intel is currently dominating the market with their Core i7 processors. AMD has the Phenom II in the works, and it's supposed to be pretty impressive.

So currently Intel has the lead, but AMD will give them a run for their money once the Phenom II is out.

Intel For My PC's
I run
Core 2 Quad Core
Pentium 4
Centrino
Never had Issues and love all of them!
I run a 45nm Processor for my quad core and it runs very cool!

Have a AMD Quad 9550 based pc,it heats up when stressed.I think Intel's Quad cores are slightly better than AMD.

I had issues with intel processor twice somehow but so far ive seen major diff between amd for gaming and intel more for notebooks than anything else, cheaper price beter quality, amd is the way to go

I prefer Intel processors, because with my empiric notes it looks like Intel's processors won't heat much nowdays as they did some years before. So AMD's heat more and i prefer using laptops.

Ive always been an intel person. ive tried AMD once and hated it.

I find AMD processors to be more reliable than Intel. In my IT class, we have 8 computers with an AMD processor and 8 with a Intel processor. We had more problems with the Intel machines as opposed to the AMD machines. I also can't wait for the AMD Phenom II 940 coming next month.

Intel is my preference. They're very similar though. It's like choosing between coke and pepsi.

Well, actually AMD used to beat Intel in the processing game, until now that is, Intel's multi core system overtook the later. So right now, I'm guessing Intel is the best choice. Three years ago, I was wishing for an AMD processor because I had a Pentium 4 at the time, right now I'm proudly using a Duo Core!

First I had an Intel Pentium 4 2.5 GHz (although AMD had the edge in games at that time) and I was very pleased about it. But then came AMD with his 64 series which annihilated the Pentiums (even the later dual core pentiums didn't stand a chance) so I just couldn't resist to buy the AMD 64 3500+ of which I'm also very pleased about.

But as time passes, so came Intel with a new challenger which turned the world of CPU's up-side down by giving WTF performance for an almost WTF cheap price (like AMD/Ati did this generation with the HD4870 for GPU land). I was planning on buying a dual-core and I was looking at the X2 series of AMD but then came Intel with there C2D series and the thought of buying an X2 didn't even reached my mind anymore. So I bought the E6600 which I immediately overclocked to 3 GHz and at this very moment of writing it's still running at the same speed :p. I was hoping the Intel Nehalem would be another big performance hop but that was a disappointment (although an octacore might be hard to resist in the future :p) so I'm still stuck with the E6600. But don't get me wrong, I'm very very pleased with the E6600. It gave me high-end performance for a mid-end price.

Bottomline is, I have no preference for AMD or Intel (or for Ati or Nvidia). I just buy the one that gives me the best performance for a reasonable prices. That's why I bought the P4 2.5 GHz, that's why I bought the AMD 64 3500+ and that's why I bought the C2D E6600. There's not a single fiber in my body that thinks about ever buying the overpriced high-end stuff.

It has been more than a year since i last visited and been active in the forums here. i got here today 'cause i'm bored.. hehhehehe

well in any event, i have been reading tech forums here and there. i have not heard much from amd since intel dominated the market with their conroe's (or the core 2 duo processor line for those who don't know). that was the time when i last bought a pc, my c2d e6600. well, that was the era before quad cores became the mainstream processors for enthusiasts.

during those days, amd tried its best to catch up. unfortunately, they never won the market back.

now, i am looking forward to what they are brewing over at the amd labs. phenom ii, or the deneb. engineering models have come out and have been tested, benchmarked and even overclocked. sounds promising, all of them have been getting good results from this processor. we'll have to see when this comes out of the market.

answering to the thread topic - this has always been a question for every tech-savvy people around. but the real question is "which processor for what use". me, i get my answers from official benchmarks... then i think of what i am going to use my pc for. i take no sides when it comes to their products. but i like amd better because of the price:performance ratio. you get more out of your money.