AMD does come out with performance benchmarks higher than intel. But i
find many AMD systems not performing as expected against the intel
counterpart. and almost always its the intel that wins in every
aspect.
This actually does not reflect my experience at all. In my
experience, the processor plays an important role in the benchmark
results, but has relatively little to do with the subjective "feel" of
the machine. Maybe that is what you are encountering? I often find
that a system with a fast processor but slow disk drives will
benchmark higher but it will seem slower when you actually use it.
Why is the bench mark different from the true story?? and if its the
case of ill-configured systems.. then why is most of the amd
ill-configured??
Here's a possible hypothesis for what you're seeing. AMD processors
are less expensive and therefore tend to be used on less expensive
systems. Intel chips are more expensive and therefore are used on
expensive systems with premium components.
Therefore Intel systems are more likely to come with better hard
disks, better video cards, etc. The processor itself has little to do
with the equation?
Or it could simply be a placebo effect, ie I paid more money for this
Intel processor so therefore it MUST be faster, right?
If you ask me, get yourself a nice, fast hard drive, an excellent
monitor and a good *reliable* motherboard first and foremost. If you
play lots of games then the video card should be your priority, and
even if you don't play games then you will want a video card with good
2D image quality. Also make sure that you've got sufficient memory in
the system, AT LEAST 512MB these days and 1GB is probably a worthwhile
purchase. The processor should be well down on your list of
considerations when buying a system, but I think you'll find that AMD
chips do still offer very compelling performance, particularly for
their price.
