For me AMD is better than the Intel but it depends of the user (gamer, designer, programmer, or normal user (browser) )

for the people they really spend a lot of time in game or designing i prefer the AMD processor cos it's more stable in this stuff

but the people they are more interest in programing or normal use i prefer the Intel processors

as Example : what is better or more comfortable for you to drive in 2 side road with a traffic or 4 side road with a traffic ??
the 2 side road is Intel and the 4 side road is AMD

If i will buy a new computer, I will choose AMD. As AMD is really cheap.

If you are a hardcore programmer that needs to work with A.I. and lots of maths and you like to overclock your hardware to the maximum, then I would say:"Go for Intel", but if you just want to play games and being economical, yet you want good performance, then I would say:"Go for AMD". In the end its really up to you and what do you prefer and what do you want to do with your pc.

As a gamer, I always go Intel. Right now I am running an Intel Core 2 Duo and I am very happy with it. Some of my friends recommend AMD, but to me, Intel is the way to go.

Triple core isn't better than intel i7

I have two machines and both are from AMD. Personally I like AMD, my first processor is an AMD Athlon XP 2000+ bought at the end of 2003, for a project I worked in a room where the temperature was around 35 degree C in Summer for more than four months and my PC ran from 5.00 am till midnight, but so far I haven't noticed any problem. Sometimes it would run really slow so I added a 256 RAM. Still its working superbly without any disturbance.

Recently I bought another machine powered by AMD 64 Bit Athlon 4000+, and have noticed the processor temperature is always below 45 degree C, plus I've come to know, that a computer will shutdown automatically if the processor get overheated above a certain temperature. You will get all these info from www.amd.com. Please not that I'm not using any extra fan for both of my computers. I'm even considering to purchase a new laptop which should have an AMD Processor. One more thing I should mention, that an AMD Processor runs much more faster than an Intel Processor.

BitCloud

AMD Processor runs much more faster than an Intel Processor.

Well it really depends on what you are doing with your PC and with the new Intel i7 ,which might go up to 16 cores by the end of this year, AMD is really falling behind and their nano-technology is not catching up to Intel's, Intel is currently running on 45nm and AMD is still using 65nm. It is only beating Intel in some games and with games that supports multi-core CPU's, AMD is falling behind.

Personally, i prefer AMD. I say this because AMDs tend to overclock more, meaning you can push them faster without it being fried. AMD processors also tend to be cheaper than Intel.

If you're trying to decide which on to use, consider what you will be doing with the computer.
If you're going to be hardcore gaming AMD is the way to go.
If you're going to do light stuff that doesn't require you to push a processor to it's max, use an Intel.

Both the processors have their pros and cons
Intel-great performance,low on power,reliable,also get support.
AMD-equally good performance,Good for use if you are into gaming,animation, and related fields and most importantly cheap. But AMD is not that much established as Intel. It is not much energy efficient whereas as Intel's processing power is overpowered by AMD in the above mentioned fields of animation and all but
there is not much difference in the heat produced by these processors.

Intel da best (intel i7)

Lol amds never clock better than their intel counterparts, beginning with the x2 series that used 90nm die compared to intels 65 nm die, the 90 nm are bigger and create more heat due to more material, intels smaller die conserves energy better and therefore uses less heat. The cathode gate amd uses in its brisbane series is very inefficient, they recently switched their x2 series to 65nm to lower power consumption and therefore heat, but intel's core2duo series is 45nm now meanign even less power consuption and less heat. intels overclock much better than amds both for their quad core q6600 and their duo cores. The brisbane(x2) series of amd coudl only be pushed to about 3.3ghz b4 the heat became an issue, core 2duo can overclock well over that to 3.6ghz on air. thats also the reason of the price difference, intel's parts are smaller and altogether of better quality, amd focuses on mass production at a stable price so their products tend to be of lower standards. About the phenom II and intel's i7 core, the phenom II is truly amazing, amd managed to complete its hyperthreading "true" quad core without any bugs and it benchmarked almost on par with intel's i7 core (the one priced around $600). Plus the phenom II is only about $285. Amd is gonna make a comebac if it markets the phenom II processor rite and keeps its prices low

I don't really know about the benchmark's battle between intel and amd.but i think i'll go get cheaper processor with good performance, and i choose amd

My brother works for a major computer manufacture and i asked him the same question. From what he told me Intel is the way to go if you want better performance.AMD is not bad ,but they aren't coming out with any processors that can compete with Intel's best performing processors.They don't have the resources Intel has to spend on developing new technology.Hopefully they can catch up with Intel, AMD is the only competitor Intel has.

I think just about everything im gonna say has been said but just small tid bits here and there. Umm, For starters Intel is much better for performance and AMD is the more "bang for your buck" type processor. Also an AMD 3.0 Ghz processor single core is going to run slower then an Intel 3.0 Ghz single core(same cache size and everything) Now with quad core, Intel had a phase of cleverness when coming up with the quad core and just kinda smashed two dual cores into one processor and made them work together. There is nothin wrong with that and it works perfectly, its just makes sense haha. AMD took the other root and made an actual Quad core processor but had TONS of problems with it and had lots of set backs, thats why AMD's slogan for their Phenom CPU's is "True Quad Processing" or something like that. AMD's quad cores are still lacking, and on a side note there Tri-cores that they put out while they were having problems with quad core just make me giggle haha. And i saw it somewhere, they said that they thought that AMD was better cause thats what most computers at Best Buy had in them, its not a matter of performance, its a matter of cost for them, so they chose AMD and their ATI Radeon graphics equivalent.

well hope that helped someone =P

Wow... this thread is still going... amazing...

We can discuss the details all people want, the truth of the matter is Intel Processors are better than AMD in every way EXCEPT price. AMD is cheap and if you don't need the top notch performace, AMD is fine.

Note the new i7 processors have less power use than the Phenom 2's, however, the new Intel motherboard chipset is a bit of a power hog, overall system power use, AMD is gonna be lower than Intel right now.

Intel: fast
AMD: cheap and low power (compared to i7's and Core 2's, obviously not compared to the atom)