__THISRES__100357.jpg "Trick or Treat by °chanelqueen17 1 month 1 week ago")
Intel or AMD Processor
1 year 9 months ago
You're going to want Intel regardless of what you do at this point, because Intel's C2D line dominates everything AMD has to offer. With Penryn and Wolfdale, AMD has no chance unless they somehow bring out something new.
1 year 9 months ago
It's pretty much been summed up in the previous posts, but Intel is the better choice for now, at least. The real question is, Dual or Quad? If it's just a desktop that will browse the internet, maybe play a few games, play music, but never do too much hard work, get dual. If it will be doing CPU inexnsive stuff like video editing, or you want an all around pimprig, get quad. quad is more future proof. I also recommend waiting for the new 45nm revision that'll be comming out this year. (I think)
I prefer Intel much more cause its a lot faster. BUT... Only C2D or C2Q are low-energy models. AMD usually eats less than an Intel cpu. I'm using an Intel Pentium D what is eating a huge amount of electricity. By the way, if you get a Chieftec power supply, you can get more efficient PC. (It eats only that electricity what it needs, not what is wrote on the supply (for example. My 450W Chieftec never eat all of the 450W).
honorsharkBy the way, if you get a Chieftec power supply, you can get more efficient PC. (It eats only that electricity what it needs, not what is wrote on the supply (for example. My 450W Chieftec never eat all of the 450W).
No properly working PSU will 'eat' the wattage it's rated for. Many will stop working before they reach the wattage they're rated for, not to mention you would find it quite hard to build a computer that uses the maximum power available on all the lines.
If you're looking for efficiency check the efficiency, for example a power supply that requires 200W AC input to produce 140W DC output has an efficiency of 70%. The efficiency should be in the PSU's specs.
My computer (idle) and all it's peripherals (screen, speakers, Wii) are currently using around 260W, my PSU is rated for just under 1KW. I use a Kill-A-Watt meter to show what my computer is currently using.
#720339 Quote Report Edited by ~DeepDragoon 1 year 9 months ago
+++ So long, and thanks for all the fish +++
In other words!
I have a 1000Watt Powersupply,
But, my computer only needs 300 watts to run.
That means only 300 watts is drawn to run the computer.
However! AC to DC conversion has a Power cost.
Lets say your PC needs 300 watts of DC power so it asks the Powersupply for that energy. However during the conversion there is loss of power through the conversion through Heat (Like a Light bulb). Most powersupplies are around 75% efficient in that regard.
Personally I have a 85% Efficient power supply, just look at the specifications for what you want (More efficient = more expensive).
75% average efficiency means. 300watts/.75 = 400 Watts is used to run the supply.
300/ .85 = 353 watts are drawn in 85% efficiency quite a bit of difference no?
Btw most power supplies can draw more than what they are rated for, however it produces unclean power. Unclean power means the voltage drops or raises above the Tolerances for the computer. Above or below is bad for the computer in both cases.
Currently I have a 750 supply,
I personally recommend a supply that is rated double of the amount of power that you will use.
I have a 1000Watt Powersupply,
But, my computer only needs 300 watts to run.
That means only 300 watts is drawn to run the computer.
However! AC to DC conversion has a Power cost.
Lets say your PC needs 300 watts of DC power so it asks the Powersupply for that energy. However during the conversion there is loss of power through the conversion through Heat (Like a Light bulb). Most powersupplies are around 75% efficient in that regard.
Personally I have a 85% Efficient power supply, just look at the specifications for what you want (More efficient = more expensive).
75% average efficiency means. 300watts/.75 = 400 Watts is used to run the supply.
300/ .85 = 353 watts are drawn in 85% efficiency quite a bit of difference no?
Btw most power supplies can draw more than what they are rated for, however it produces unclean power. Unclean power means the voltage drops or raises above the Tolerances for the computer. Above or below is bad for the computer in both cases.
Currently I have a 750 supply,
I personally recommend a supply that is rated double of the amount of power that you will use.
1 year 9 months ago
A recent review comparing AMD and INTEL dual core processors.
This sums it pretty much up:
So, the results of our today’s dual-core processor shoot-out indicate clearly that Intel processors win the “Best Buy” title in every single price segment. And it will remain this way until AMD reduces the prices on its Athlon 64 X2, which keep rapidly losing their appeal. The situation may also change if they launch revised triple-core and dual-core processors on Phenom-like architecture, which have a chance of become more competitive against Core 2 Duo. However, it will hardly happen any time soon. [X-bit Labs]
AMD needs to step up so we can have some more choice in processors!
This sums it pretty much up:
So, the results of our today’s dual-core processor shoot-out indicate clearly that Intel processors win the “Best Buy” title in every single price segment. And it will remain this way until AMD reduces the prices on its Athlon 64 X2, which keep rapidly losing their appeal. The situation may also change if they launch revised triple-core and dual-core processors on Phenom-like architecture, which have a chance of become more competitive against Core 2 Duo. However, it will hardly happen any time soon. [X-bit Labs]
AMD needs to step up so we can have some more choice in processors!
Intel.Since AMD and ATI merged together there performace and quality start decreasing.At first AMD and ATI were the Top Class in their specific products.After the merging AMD and ATI went to the most worse.So i would really recommend Intel as it is nice,so is its quality and its performace is top notch
Good luck
Good luck
AMDs are pretty much more reliable in my experience. But its more of a "geeks" system. Why? Because most of the people I know who own AMDs overclock them to an insane speed that you need a refrigerator to keep it cool. I've also overclocked my older AMD systems in the past and been known to burn a few chips.
Intels aren't bad either. They've got more quality than AMDs and I think they're more of the "hassle free" type of system for users who don't want to tinker around.
Intels aren't bad either. They've got more quality than AMDs and I think they're more of the "hassle free" type of system for users who don't want to tinker around.
Where will I be and where will you be when I hear the last beating of my heart?
1 year 9 months ago
For all intents and purposes, unless you have very specific requirements from your machine, recent AMD's and Intel processors are not going to perform noticeably different.
The only real thing to look for is price of both the processor and the motherboards.
The only real thing to look for is price of both the processor and the motherboards.
Ive heard that the AMD is better so thats wut ima go w/ the AMD cuz my friend has an AMD and his comp runs really good and mine runs on Intel and it sucks....so yah AMD is better.....i guess
You can't really base your choice on the past processors of both companies. The Athlon 64 series (on S939) were brilliant, but can in no way keep up with today's multicore procs. I've always hated the Pentium series, but the Core architecture convinced me of Intel's power. It's just rock solid. So right now, Intel is your best choice if you want performance. If you're short on budget though, AMD offers a great price/performance ratio. For a Home Entertainment PC, AMD is a perfect base (with AMD 690G or newer chipset).
And I think the Phenom is just crap. It's a product that AMD had to release to at least get some income, before the Shanghai is done. I really hope that thing is going to be kick-ass, because I've always liked AMD. The fact though is that Intel is one step ahead on AMD and it's likely they'll always be.
And I think the Phenom is just crap. It's a product that AMD had to release to at least get some income, before the Shanghai is done. I really hope that thing is going to be kick-ass, because I've always liked AMD. The fact though is that Intel is one step ahead on AMD and it's likely they'll always be.
1 year 9 months ago
Intel is the way to go currently. you can get extremely cheap processors like E21** or E4*** thats cost less than US$150, while they starting speed is like 1.6Ghz to 2.0Ghz, the whole line of core 2duo batch can ran at an average of 2.8-3.0Ghz when overclocked(C2D is very clockable). As a result, cheap Intel CPUs are spanking the hell out of top-of-the-line AMD's current model, which is Phenom, which also have errata problem and cannot overclock decently at all.
Intel cpus are the cheapest, the most power-saving, the most reliable, the most cold(yes i mean cold literally) CURRENTLY. Avoid AMD for now.
Intel cpus are the cheapest, the most power-saving, the most reliable, the most cold(yes i mean cold literally) CURRENTLY. Avoid AMD for now.
Well if you aiming for lowest but better PC tried using AMD it has low consumption of electricity tried using AMD X2 5000+ faster better resources but lower in cumsumption
but if you aiming for better high end user tried using Intel QX9770
but if you aiming for better high end user tried using Intel QX9770
This NatsumeMaya
I reccomend Intel. For now, Intel has the best price-performance ratio for all of the computer class, from low-end till high-end, far from AMD. As you can see, the newest AMD processor, Phenom has lost even to Intel Core2Duo E6850(seen on my computer magazine). So, I suggest you to use Intel for now.
[X]-iLe
[X]-iLe
![User posted image]("http://files.myopera.com/Auvergne/files/Azure Kite Data Drain copy.jpg")
1 year 8 months ago
If you want a cheap computer, AMD is better. If you want performance/overclock Intel is the choice. The new intel processors (Penryn) are simply fantastic, low wattage, low temps, high permorfance, high overclock and new instructions (multimedia).