amd versus intel

[John A Grandy]

who's got the edge right now ... and who's got the best bang/buck ...

non-multithreaded apps

multithreaded apps

 

[Dustin]

Id have to say Intel
Even though AMD Chips are cheaper
Most of the computers i see for sale have Intel CPU's
I dont think it really matters. I've used a computer or two with AMD cpu's
and they are not that bad

 

[nkjg]

It depends on what you need. If you're looking at a
common desktop to surf, e-mail, listen to music, watch
movies, you probalby shouldn't even be thinking about
what's up and what's down. Just about any system you buy
out there will do all fo the above. For higher end
processes, Intel has the advantage with Hyper-threading,
but it comes at a fairly steep price, although I have
seen pretty high end systems (P4-HT 3.0, 1 GB DDR RAM,
120 GB HD, 128 MB ATI 9600 Radeon, etc etc) for about
$1000 USD.

For laptops on the other hand, it's a totally different
story. AMD laptop chips are HORRIBLE!!! They run very
very hot, and burn through the battery like there's no
tomorrow. Intel definately has the advantage here with
their new Pentium-M chips. And, the P-M chip is dropping
in price pretty quickly as well, so if might be worth
your while to wait a bit for this to happen.

Hope this helps.

Nick

 

[Quaoar]

It depends on what you need. If you're looking at a
common desktop to surf, e-mail, listen to music, watch
movies, you probalby shouldn't even be thinking about
what's up and what's down. Just about any system you buy
out there will do all fo the above. For higher end
processes, Intel has the advantage with Hyper-threading,
but it comes at a fairly steep price, although I have
seen pretty high end systems (P4-HT 3.0, 1 GB DDR RAM,
120 GB HD, 128 MB ATI 9600 Radeon, etc etc) for about
$1000 USD.

For laptops on the other hand, it's a totally different
story. AMD laptop chips are HORRIBLE!!! They run very
very hot, and burn through the battery like there's no
tomorrow. Intel definately has the advantage here with
their new Pentium-M chips. And, the P-M chip is dropping
in price pretty quickly as well, so if might be worth
your while to wait a bit for this to happen.

Hope this helps.

Nick

I do not know where you get this advice, but it is completely wrong.
AMD laptops perform as well, if not better than, any but the fastest P4.
The PM is another story. For average business or personal applications
a user might not be able to discerne the difference between an AMD
laptop and a P4/P4M, the battery life is clearly superior to any P4/P4M
if using the AMD speed stepping. Laptop heating is more of a design
problem than it is a characteristic of AMD and P4/P4M, IMO. Some HP
AMDs run very hot; others do not, as an example. The price differential
between an AMD mobile and a PM is clearly a reason to carefully examine
the price/performance of the AMD; many users will never have reason for
the additional battery life of the PM, which is merely incremental to
that from an AMD at a substantial price premium. Battery life is the
only PM characteristic that cannot be had at a lower price with AMD
AFICS.

Q

 

[Eric Witte]

For laptops on the other hand, it's a totally different

story. AMD laptop chips are HORRIBLE!!! They run very
very hot, and burn through the battery like there's no
tomorrow. Intel definately has the advantage here with
their new Pentium-M chips. And, the P-M chip is dropping
in price pretty quickly as well, so if might be worth
your while to wait a bit for this to happen.

Hope this helps.

Nick

I just picked up a hp ze4610us laptop that uses a mobile Athlon XP
2500+ and it has none of those problems. The bottm gets a little warm
when running high CPU utilization but not hot. I have an old Dell
Celeron 500 that is definately hotter. Running on battery I get about
3.5hours of low cpu usage or about 2.5hours at 30-40% CPU usage (DVD).
I'm not sure about the mobile 2500+ but the mobile 2400+ only puts
off 35W of heat max. The P-M probably is less, but I doubt the P4 or
P4-m is at 100% utilization.

Eric