Robbie said:
I am looking to get away from Intel and try the AMD brand. I am having some
trouble comparing the two... Mainly the AMD rated GHZ is so much lower. I
am
guessing that the AMD performs so much better that an equivalent Intel
would
need to have a higher rating? Anyway, I am looking into the 200 - 250
price
range. There seems to be so many to choose from.... I guess if I could
determine how to "compare" it to the Intel, that would help me decide.
Thanks and sorry for such a newbie question.
AMD processors can execute more instructions per clock cycle. The numbering
system of the AMD is family is much easier to understand than Intel.
AN example: AMD Athlon64 3200+ 2.2 GHz. The core frequency of the
processor is 2.2 GHz, but it performs as fast as an Intel 3.2 GHz (3200)
processor.
AMD has other advantages. Since AMD has moved the memory controller to the
processor, and has Direct Connect Architecture on the motherboard, and a
nominal 1600 MHz hypertransport bus, it can run circles around anything
Intel makes, including their hybrid EM64T chips. Everything Intel makes is
still based upon the P4 32 bit architecture, even it the chip is built to
understand EM64T.
Intel still relies on the Northbridge chip to handle CPU-RAM IO ops (read
SLOOOOWWW).
Intel has no direct connect architecture, and definitely does not have
Hypertransport.
Intel used to be the best; they got lazy and stopped innovating. Now AMD
has risen to the point wherein last month 52% of all processors sold in the
US (either as systems or PIB) were AMD.
One final thought; the standards developed by AMD for their Athlon 64 chips
is now regarded as "the" standard. Microsoft is using only AMD processors
not at its two campuses that are responsible for the development of current
and future versions of Windows.
Smart money is on AMD.
Intel fanboy flames will be ignored; I personally use to be a hardcore Intel
fanboy myself until I woke up and realized that Intel is getting left in the
dust.
Bobby