Processor War: AMD Versus Intel
One's Cheaper Than the Other, Which One is Exactly Better?
Normally you would compare the two in gaming situations. We are going to do that but we are also going to add a few extras in it. Intel has been the "leader" in processors forever. AMD has never even came close to producing what Intel has produced. Many gamers though like AMD processors. Why is this? Well, it is quite simple. Gamers look for power which AMD provides splendidly but don't need any of the extras. Whether you are paying for the name or just looking to go out and purchase a computer for your needs than maybe AMD wouldn't be so bad. I'll tell you all why AMD has it's flaws, and Intel too.
One thing people hate in a computer is it overheats. Many people believe the fan helps this problem but it doesn't always. A fan can only do so much. The processor on the other hand can be the main cause for overheating. AMD has had this problem in the past and they have worked on it greatly. With AMD's older chipsets they would run and shut off from time to time. One thing that has recently put AMD all the way in the back is Intel's Hyper Threading Technology. AMD really couldn't compete with that feature that Intel introduced because they were always focusing on how they can make a "better" chip than Intel. We tested an AMD Athlon XP3200+ and it didn't even come close to an Intel Pentium 4 3.4 GHZ processor. Now... That is a bit unfair I know so we put the AMD Athlon XP3200+ up against an Intel Pentiem 4 3.0 GHZ and it still couldn't keep up with it. What is the problem with AMD? It doesn't maximize as many processor resources and it doesn't handle multiple programs very well. RAM in a way helps out but AMD focuses mostly on there processor to do the dirty work. This is another reason they overheat more than an Intel chip.
We move on to Intel now. They just keep getting better and better and better. Will it ever come to an end? We think not. They know they are better than AMD because they have the technology to be better. With Intel's Pentium 4 with HT Technology alone they can blow AMD out of the water. HT allows the Pentium Processor to produce more information and allow programs to run more efficiently. Intel also throws on a fan that cools off the processor even more than it already does by itself. Intel's new chipset the "Xeon" is a dual core processor that boost's performance for business applications. The Xeon also reduces power use by a lot. Is the Xeon going to be used for gaming? I'm sure eventually, but many people might want to stick with P4 with HT Technology. These processors are still going and at 3.4 GHZ how can you go wrong? We have bragged about the Intel's chipsets now we will send some of the bad news over to you. With a great chipset like this comes a very high price range. We aren't talk a couple of hundred dollars either. On average if you purchase a P4 3.4 GHZ with HT Technology or a Xeon Processor you will spend between 4 and $1200.00. AMD splits it cost more than half which is why they are still in business. Intel make a 3.8 GHZ processor with HT Technology. This is a great processor and it does everything you need. We think the 3.4 GHZ is good enough but if you want to spend over $800.00 on it go ahead. The Xeon goes for at least $1000.00. This is the cost of some computers folks.
Although it isn't certain, it is very possible that AMD might have seen the last of there days. I am not a big fan of AMD and never really was. I have always had an Intel chip and have had no problems with them. Then again I could be wrong. AMD could turn around and start producing like they used too. The fact of the matter is if you are a gamer and have a strict budget AMD is fine to go with. They are cheaper and can play most games. Make sure you have your system cool enough though. All in all if your willing to spend the money, go with Intel. They will not let you down.
Published by Jason Freeden
My name is Jason Freeden. I have been writing for over 10 years. I am a broadcaster & run the "Voices On The Net" Network. I am also a voice over artist. I enjoy listening to music, going to concerts, an... View profile
- Acer Aspire Desktop Computer with AMD Athlon Processor: A Not So Well-Known DesktopJust because you don't know the company name by heart, doesn't mean that the product isn't amazing. And this is made true with this Acer Aspire Desktop Computer.
Hewlett-Packard Pavilion and AMD Athlon: A Brilliant Desktop ComputerHP has been making some really great electronics, and this is true with their newest desktop computer. 
EMachines Desktop with AMD Athlon 4400+: A Computer That Can Keep up Wit...If you are looking for a computer that can keep up with the high demands of your personal and business life, than this is the computer for you.
Gateway Desktop with AMD Athlon 6000+ ReviewIf you are looking for a one-of-a-kind desktop computer, than this computer is for you.
Hewlett-Packard Pavilion Desktop with AMD Athlon 64 X2 Processor 4000+ R...There are some computers that are perfect for a wide variety of users, and this Hewlett-Packard Pavilion Desktop will utterly blow your mind.
- AMD Vs. Intel: The 64-Bit Battle
- Intel Vs. AMD Follow Up
- Toshiba Announces Satellite ® A105 Notebook PC with Intel® Core™ 2...
- Intel Core2Duo E4300 Desktop Processor: A Worldwide Best
- Intel Announces New Processor
- AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ Review
- Product Review: AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ Black Edition
- Knowledge. www.google.com \ intel vs. amd
- Intel has been the leading chip producer over AMD for over 10 years.
- AMD is cheaper than Intel.
- Intel's new Xeon Chip is more money than some computers.
15 Comments
Post a CommentOk if u ask me HELL YEA intel is more money. But it is better no joke. Intel cpus can be kept on WAY longer than AMD and that is wat i need. But yes i ant rich and the way to go is for soming that gets the job done for cheap and thats amd its cheap and does the job. But that dude is right it over heats and if u ask me its not meant for games or more than 1 thing at a time but remember just get the job done. ty for listening to me. peace Cr££d.
what a totaly biased topic .written by someone that states at the end of his topic I have always liked intel....waist of reading
Ok I have read all the info about ADM and Intel Processor but i would like to know exctly what is prons and Cons of using ADM processor than Intel.
NOTE: Please read these in order. Thanks
[better] and therefor introducing a low quality motherboard will hinder results majority. In all the REAL tests I have seen, and had, as long as you have quality parts, and do not use a Sempron CPU, AMD beats Intel. I think many people just listen to bloat adds and generally bullshit, but believe whatever you want. I think part of the problem is that AMD advertises much less than Intel and most people, the close-minded ones anyway, base purchases and half their decisions on advertisements without doing the legwork to find the true results - kind of like, I'd hate to say it, believing everything on Wikipedia without double checking (don't get me wrong, most is accurate) and believing bugus sites and obvious PhotoShop'ed BS, like alien sitings, Bigfoot and especially the ones about Giant man.
[and] their new line HD cards are geared towards entertainment and for that they work spectacular, and also their pro cards like the FireGL line are fantastic for AutoCAD & related applications. Also nVidia cards work great for CAD, hint: if you want a video card that has been fully tested by AutoCAD, passed and don't want to pay booko-bucks, go with the nVidia 8600GT with DDR3 for 70 bucks on newegg and tweak your card with nhancer, which is free to download). By the way, just a little side note, that's how you handle unbiased opinion, both do quite well in different arenas.
I have a few points I would like to get to: firstly, this battle between AMD/ATI and Intel/nVidia is great for the consumer; there is even talk about 8-core processors in the near future; such 'battles', for lack of a better word, bring down the price of hardware and force the market into new technologies. Secondly, AMD processors with good parts perform better than Intel boxes; the architecture of AMD is bette
Okay, minus your little grammar issues ('you are' is abbreviated you're, not your, and 'they are' is their, not there) and completely biased article, I think you have a few point as Intel has always been a 'powerhouse' in the CPU marketplace and their merger with nVidia just boost their already good stance but AMD is not only cheaper, but also more compatible with hardware and software (32-bit and 64-bit) but if you ever noticed the bus speed of AMD is three and four fold that of Intel. This equates to reliability, faster boot time on the PC users end, faster reaction time for games and so on, thus why AMD is for gamers in general. I use Ubuntu Linux exclusively and VM which boots in under 20 seconds, which for Linux is outstanding (for windows, my entire computer boots into the OS in 14 seconds). Also sadly, AMD owns ATI which I don't like because nVidia cards completely obliterate ATI cards in gaming, and are by far more fault tolerant and compatible (but ATI cards use less energy an
Intel is just the best
The first computer I bought (P3 i think) ran on Intel chipsets, and I've been sticking to Intel all these years. There haven't been any major problems with Intel processors, at least for me, but since I haven't tried using computers running on AMD chipsets, I can't say much pertaining to which is better among the two. All I can say is, Intel processors are trustworthy, will last for years before they become antiques, and definitely worth dumping in the money to get 1.
Intel is a powerhouse because they started the PC revolution and therefore had a better start from the get go, AMD is the runner up and has done a great job considering all challenges before them. It is clear you don't like AMD but for those of us who do your stance on hyper threading is tame at best.
When it comes down to quad core technology this is where, I think, AMD will outshine Intel. It won't be about power or power consumption either but shear multi-tasking performance. With Intel' dependence on FSB the bottleneck this creates with multi-tasking will be clear after a few benchmarks are run when that time comes.
Native quad core or 2 dual cores on a die? I prefer a native solution myself. Go AMD!
every time i buy a used pc/or parts, i normaly look for intel, i have only had 1 bad cpu/platform in my restoring days, now with amd on the other hand, they have board problems, cpu problems, most bad harddrives/memory modules that i have pulled come out of amd. Not a single problem with my P4 640, 511, 2.4, and 1.7, yet all i seem to find at goodwills,yardsales,savers and such are amd's with bad powersuplies, boards, cpu's. Thats the real deal. every intel ive picked up used or new were resold and still running or i still own for personal use.