|
AMD 2.6 vs Intel3.0
|
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 09:21 |
Link to this message
|
|
In General which is better to get, AMD 2.6 GHZ or an INTEL 3.0GHZ? Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I'm pretty sure there's something different about AMD and INTEl...
(P4 3GHZ Processor 800Mhz FSB 1MB Overclocking)
Not sure about the AMD though...
-Jay-
Dell I530
Q9300
6GB DDR2
EVGA GTX 470
Antec 750W blue
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 09:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
I heard that intel fakes their speed...is that true?
And they run at slow speeds so a 3.0 ghz would run at 2.0 realistically...is this true? And I also heard that AMD's more trueful and an AMD 3400+ would be a 2.4 ghz...
So overall should I go with the AMD?
-Jay-
Dell I530
Q9300
6GB DDR2
EVGA GTX 470
Antec 750W blue
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 10:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
It depends... AMD has much less gigahertz than say, Intel. But, AMD has a very beefy amount of megahertz.
In example AMD 2.6: about 1500mhz
Intel 3.0: 800mhz
My 2.6 AMD is woking just right... I recomend it.
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 11:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
What is mhz? is that what I should look for before I buy a processor? Not Ghz?
-Jay-
Dell I530
Q9300
6GB DDR2
EVGA GTX 470
Antec 750W blue
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 12:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
Mhz (megahertz)... you should look for both in prosscers. Megahertz is pretty much the core power that the prossecer has, but when your looking for multi-tasking not gaming go for gigahertz instead.
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
9. January 2006 @ 12:33 |
Link to this message
|
|
megahertz = million cycles per second
gigahertz = billion cycles per second
light bulb = 60 cycles per second if in north america
|
Senior Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 13:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
nice comparison ddp lol
System 1 :- Main PC: AMD XP 3200+ - OC Slightly 2.31Ghz, 1024 MB DDR PC2700, 1 x 40GB Hard Drive, 1 x 60GB Hard Drive, ATI 9600XT (256 MB)Graphics Card.
Laptop 1: 1GB DDR2 Ram, 100Gb Samsung HDD, ATI X700 128mb Graphics Card.
System 2: Downloading PC: AMD Sempron 2500+, 512 MB DDR PC2700, 1 x 40GB Hard Drive.
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 16:20 |
Link to this message
|
|
So if I want to have a good processor for games I should go with AMD because it has a higher Mhz. (Comparing above) But if I'm going to "multi task" I should go with the Intel because it has a higher Ghz? Am I correct? oh and i like your comparison too ddp. :)
-Jay-
Dell I530
Q9300
6GB DDR2
EVGA GTX 470
Antec 750W blue
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 16:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
Pretty much Jay...it's really that simple.
AMD=Gaming
Intel=Multi-Tasking
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 16:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
What is multi tasking?
-Jay-
Dell I530
Q9300
6GB DDR2
EVGA GTX 470
Antec 750W blue
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
9. January 2006 @ 16:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
to do more than 1 thing at once.
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 16:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
So if I want to play two games at once wouldn't have be considered multitasking? For example playing lineage 2 but running two games at once to double the experience (Diff character)... or is that a diff multitasking? (sry if this sounds dumb...)
-Jay-
Dell I530
Q9300
6GB DDR2
EVGA GTX 470
Antec 750W blue
|
|
ddp
Moderator
|
9. January 2006 @ 16:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
that is multi-tasking but get more ram than what you have in your sig.
|
Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 16:57 |
Link to this message
|
|
Yeah...my old laptop is now useless for current things...that's why I'm thinking of getting a desktop so i can build and add stuff as i go...Right now I'm thinking of getting 1gb with a 256 video card. Haven't really bought anything just trying to look around for what's best. Still stuck on the AMD vs. Intel... so that example above with the two gaming...would that be considered multi tasking? so = intel? amd?
-Jay-
Dell I530
Q9300
6GB DDR2
EVGA GTX 470
Antec 750W blue
|
Senior Member
|
9. January 2006 @ 23:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
Just a quick note:
If you're planning on using an Intel with Hyperthreading to multitask, you won't get what you think. Hyperthreading is a 'virtual' (fake) core in which some, not all, instructions get sent thru another pipeline to be processed. However, if two separate apps require the same CPU resources, one or the other thread in the CPU must wait it's turn. This is where HT technology doesn't shine as bright as Intel would have wanted it to.
Now, dual core...is a whole other story!
If you are actually going to compare a 2.6Ghz AMD proc (most likely 64 bit?) to an Intel 3.0 (most likely 32bit?) you're going to see the AMD spank the Intel in all apps...multitasking or not.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Member
|
11. January 2006 @ 07:43 |
Link to this message
|
|
Thank you for that info...so AMD it is...check out the "Building the best computer" thread for what I"m trying to build...
-Jay-
Dell I530
Q9300
6GB DDR2
EVGA GTX 470
Antec 750W blue
|
