| Page 1 of 2 |
Ronhrin
Banned
Posts: 6428
Location: Paradigms are changeable, reality is absolute.
|
 Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 12:10 Post subject: Intel or AMD? |
|
 |
I'm thinking about buying a new rig, and I can't decide in what system I shoule base my new rig on. AMD PHENOM X4 9600 Quad-Core 64Bits Socket AM2 BOX or INTEL Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4GHZ / 1066MHz BOX.
wich architecture has a best perfomance nowadays?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
upstart_69
Posts: 1094
Location: Right behind you!
|
| Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 12:15 Post subject: |
|
|
Intel.
Core i7 920 @ 3.8Ghz | 6GB OCZ DDR3 8-8-8-24 @ 1600mhz | eVga x58 Mobo | 2 x eVga GTX 460 SLI | Intel X25-M + 3x Seagate + WD Black = 2.75TB | X-Fi Titanium | PCP&C Silencer 750 | G15 KB | G5 Mouse | G35 Headset | Z-5500 Digital | Samsung T260HD
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Surray
Posts: 5409
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 12:41 Post subject: |
|
|
amd has the lower prices but intel definitely has the better performance.
Likot Mosuskekim, Woodcutter cancels Sleep: Interrupted by Elephant.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 13:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| Surray wrote: | | amd has the lower prices but intel definitely has the better performance. |
ill make it more clear , where they compete performance wise amd is cheaper , the point where intel is faster prices increase by alot.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
_SiN_
Megatron
Posts: 12108
Location: Cybertron
|
| Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 13:43 Post subject: |
|
|
Your question was wich one performs better: The Q6600.
Watercooled 5950X | AORUS Master X570 | Asus RTX 3090 TUF Gaming OC | 64Gb RAM | 1Tb 970 Evo Plus + 2Tb 660p | etc etc
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 13:47 Post subject: |
|
|
| Stefan F wrote: | | Surray wrote: | | amd has the lower prices but intel definitely has the better performance. |
ill make it more clear , where they compete performance wise amd is cheaper , the point where intel is faster prices increase by alot. |
Don't forget Phenom died on the unveiling, lawl, or atleats 9700+ did, doesn't say much for the rest, I'm using AMD 6400+ so don't go saying I'm an Intel person, but Intel have just been at it longer so I would kinda trust my money in the experienced ones at quad cores...either that or wait for AMD....also Intel OCs better than AMD don't they? AMDs go boomed without heat sync so I'd assuming OCing won't be so great  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZOLLINO
Posts: 138
Location: Cambridge / Bratislava
|
| Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 15:26 Post subject: |
|
|
if you want best to date rig and you dont have to look at amount of money spent, you can go straight away into Intel's Quadcores. If you want the best rig possible, but you have to look at money as well, wait 2 months. AMD has a bug in his Phenom CPUs and is working hardly on performance of these. If you can wait a bit you can get great performance for price lower than Intel.
it's up to you.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 16:34 Post subject: |
|
|
Intel for all things 'cept the most budget-conscious build, even then I'd go for a e4x00 over an x2.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
[sYn]
[Moderator] Elitist
Posts: 8374
|
| Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 17:11 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 8th Jan 2008 17:29 Post subject: |
|
|
The pricing of a Phenom 9600 Quad core (£164 / 220.034 EUR) and an Intel Q6600 SLACR (£168 / 225.359 EUR) is nearly identical.
Without a doubt the Q6600 wins the performance crown and value for money. It is a faster, more efficient processor than the Phenom.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 08:43 Post subject: |
|
|
PHENOM is bugged, avoid it.
 Spoiler: | God make games, and God give us the games. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Parallax_
VIP Member
Posts: 6422
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 08:44 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 08:45 Post subject: |
|
|
| Stefan F wrote: | | Surray wrote: | | amd has the lower prices but intel definitely has the better performance. |
ill make it more clear , where they compete performance wise amd is cheaper , the point where intel is faster prices increase by alot. |
I think this was true back in the war of k7 vs p4, but not today.
| Spoiler: | God make games, and God give us the games. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CaptainCox
VIP Member
Posts: 6823
Location: A Swede in Germany (FaM)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 10:41 Post subject: |
|
|
| suicid4l wrote: | It's actually quite sad - a really bad thing - that amd's new chip still isn't on par with intels. Same for their graphics cards. Imagine how disasterous it would be if AMD went bust  |
Yes, it's already a disaster.
I would support AMD today if they had not tried to fuck me with the 64bit bs.
I'd support them to avoid the disaster. If AMD bankrupt, the price of the cpu will always be high with intel only. Canadian sharholder didn't sell ATI for fun, they sold because the future of gpu is not really good. I'm not expecting any better graphics for a long while.
Games are going to have better sound in a near future, as we can see in UT3. UBI is wokring to make their game with 5.1 sound. They need to change the way they develop their game. They need to use multi-core now and I not sure it can work. It appear it can work for better sound thought... I mean, look at the ps3, the cell is total failure.
As Carmack of Id stated, he won't make games for pc until cpu/gpu get better. He said, the 9800/x800 was already a miracle.
DICE is not making the next bf for pc, this is a sing. The new effect we can see in fear and 2142 is probably the last things the current gpu had to offer.
What is selling games on pc is graphics improvement and this will change because I doubt graphics will get any better from now on.
D10 pushed it a little bit. It's somehow a trick to let you believe the graphics are better but they ain't. The hardware didn't get better, the software did by tricking ppl eyes.
| Spoiler: | God make games, and God give us the games. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
$en$i
VIP Member
Posts: 3127
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
upstart_69
Posts: 1094
Location: Right behind you!
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 11:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| TripleNine wrote: | | suicid4l wrote: | | It's actually quite sad - a really bad thing - that amd's new chip still isn't on par with intels. Same for their graphics cards. Imagine how disasterous it would be if AMD went bust |
Yes, it's already a disaster.
I would support AMD today if they had not tried to fuck me with the 64bit bs.
I'd support them to avoid the disaster. If AMD bankrupt, the price of the cpu will always be high with intel only. Canadian sharholder didn't sell ATI for fun, they sold because the future of gpu is not really good. I'm not expecting any better graphics for a long while.
Games are going to have better sound in a near future, as we can see in UT3. UBI is wokring to make their game with 5.1 sound. They need to change the way they develop their game. They need to use multi-core now and I not sure it can work. It appear it can work for better sound thought... I mean, look at the ps3, the cell is total failure.
As Carmack of Id stated, he won't make games for pc until cpu/gpu get better. He said, the 9800/x800 was already a miracle.
DICE is not making the next bf for pc, this is a sing. The new effect we can see in fear and 2142 is probably the last things the current gpu had to offer.
What is selling games on pc is graphics improvement and this will change because I doubt graphics will get any better from now on.
D10 pushed it a little bit. It's somehow a trick to let you believe the graphics are better but they ain't. The hardware didn't get better, the software did by tricking ppl eyes. |
dude WTF are you smoking?
Core i7 920 @ 3.8Ghz | 6GB OCZ DDR3 8-8-8-24 @ 1600mhz | eVga x58 Mobo | 2 x eVga GTX 460 SLI | Intel X25-M + 3x Seagate + WD Black = 2.75TB | X-Fi Titanium | PCP&C Silencer 750 | G15 KB | G5 Mouse | G35 Headset | Z-5500 Digital | Samsung T260HD
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 12:33 Post subject: |
|
|
He is right about Cell... lots of FPS issues. Devs have a real problem to make good multiplatform games for the PS3. Guess we will only see good PS3 exclusive games. (or made separatly for Cell)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
Banned
Posts: 73193
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 13:04 Post subject: |
|
|
| upstart_69 wrote: | | dude WTF are you smoking? |
 the dude's an idiot, don't mind him
just go to the void to see some other of his genius observations |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 13:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| TripleNine wrote: | | As Carmack of Id stated, he won't make games for pc until cpu/gpu get better. He said, the 9800/x800 was already a miracle. |
then later he said he finds Ati shit when they leaked his Doom3
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 16:43 Post subject: |
|
|
| upstart_69 wrote: | | TripleNine wrote: | | suicid4l wrote: | | It's actually quite sad - a really bad thing - that amd's new chip still isn't on par with intels. Same for their graphics cards. Imagine how disasterous it would be if AMD went bust |
Yes, it's already a disaster.
I would support AMD today if they had not tried to fuck me with the 64bit bs.
I'd support them to avoid the disaster. If AMD bankrupt, the price of the cpu will always be high with intel only. Canadian sharholder didn't sell ATI for fun, they sold because the future of gpu is not really good. I'm not expecting any better graphics for a long while.
Games are going to have better sound in a near future, as we can see in UT3. UBI is wokring to make their game with 5.1 sound. They need to change the way they develop their game. They need to use multi-core now and I not sure it can work. It appear it can work for better sound thought... I mean, look at the ps3, the cell is total failure.
As Carmack of Id stated, he won't make games for pc until cpu/gpu get better. He said, the 9800/x800 was already a miracle.
DICE is not making the next bf for pc, this is a sing. The new effect we can see in fear and 2142 is probably the last things the current gpu had to offer.
What is selling games on pc is graphics improvement and this will change because I doubt graphics will get any better from now on.
D10 pushed it a little bit. It's somehow a trick to let you believe the graphics are better but they ain't. The hardware didn't get better, the software did by tricking ppl eyes. |
dude WTF are you smoking? |
I smoked a lot of crack, but this is like 3 years ago.
No but cmon, why don't you come with a better argumentation?
| Spoiler: | God make games, and God give us the games. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 16:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| BlueSkyz wrote: | | TripleNine wrote: | | As Carmack of Id stated, he won't make games for pc until cpu/gpu get better. He said, the 9800/x800 was already a miracle. |
then later he said he finds Ati shit when they leaked his Doom3 |
He was a fanboy of nvidia, no doubt.
What he said is really starting to make sense when we see dice making their next bf for console and many other things I have pointed.
ppl call Carmack a fool. For example they say he is a fool because he also said the future is in the mobile phone games. Everybody said he was crazy. Couple of time later, we find out the americain congress want to legalize gambling on cellular phone. A fool?
| Spoiler: | God make games, and God give us the games. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
[sYn]
[Moderator] Elitist
Posts: 8374
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 19:26 Post subject: |
|
|
| TripleNine wrote: | | suicid4l wrote: | | It's actually quite sad - a really bad thing - that amd's new chip still isn't on par with intels. Same for their graphics cards. Imagine how disasterous it would be if AMD went bust |
Yes, it's already a disaster.
I would support AMD today if they had not tried to fuck me with the 64bit bs.
I'd support them to avoid the disaster. If AMD bankrupt, the price of the cpu will always be high with intel only. Canadian sharholder didn't sell ATI for fun, they sold because the future of gpu is not really good. I'm not expecting any better graphics for a long while.
Games are going to have better sound in a near future, as we can see in UT3. UBI is wokring to make their game with 5.1 sound. They need to change the way they develop their game. They need to use multi-core now and I not sure it can work. It appear it can work for better sound thought... I mean, look at the ps3, the cell is total failure.
As Carmack of Id stated, he won't make games for pc until cpu/gpu get better. He said, the 9800/x800 was already a miracle.
DICE is not making the next bf for pc, this is a sing. The new effect we can see in fear and 2142 is probably the last things the current gpu had to offer.
What is selling games on pc is graphics improvement and this will change because I doubt graphics will get any better from now on.
D10 pushed it a little bit. It's somehow a trick to let you believe the graphics are better but they ain't. The hardware didn't get better, the software did by tricking ppl eyes. |
Some of that actually makes sense.. AMD and Intel both made a stupid move with there "64bit processors" .. I was working there at the time and had a moan at the developers.. BAD! DON'T DO THAT AGAIN! They didn't listen of course..
Cell is a total failure, but we all knew that was going to happen  ..
Most importantly the point about the future of GPU's, I wouldn't say they wont improve, because the next step for them is obviously going to be multicore. Still, on the CPU front, we need to see developers utilising the cores by shoving various different engine components on its own core.. one for GFX rendering, one for physics, one for maths.. etc.. I am willing to bet my left nut that Intel is hoping for developers to start doing just that.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 9th Jan 2008 19:48 Post subject: |
|
|
| [sYn] wrote: | | TripleNine wrote: | | suicid4l wrote: | | It's actually quite sad - a really bad thing - that amd's new chip still isn't on par with intels. Same for their graphics cards. Imagine how disasterous it would be if AMD went bust |
Yes, it's already a disaster.
I would support AMD today if they had not tried to fuck me with the 64bit bs.
I'd support them to avoid the disaster. If AMD bankrupt, the price of the cpu will always be high with intel only. Canadian sharholder didn't sell ATI for fun, they sold because the future of gpu is not really good. I'm not expecting any better graphics for a long while.
Games are going to have better sound in a near future, as we can see in UT3. UBI is wokring to make their game with 5.1 sound. They need to change the way they develop their game. They need to use multi-core now and I not sure it can work. It appear it can work for better sound thought... I mean, look at the ps3, the cell is total failure.
As Carmack of Id stated, he won't make games for pc until cpu/gpu get better. He said, the 9800/x800 was already a miracle.
DICE is not making the next bf for pc, this is a sing. The new effect we can see in fear and 2142 is probably the last things the current gpu had to offer.
What is selling games on pc is graphics improvement and this will change because I doubt graphics will get any better from now on.
D10 pushed it a little bit. It's somehow a trick to let you believe the graphics are better but they ain't. The hardware didn't get better, the software did by tricking ppl eyes. |
Some of that actually makes sense.. AMD and Intel both made a stupid move with there "64bit processors" .. I was working there at the time and had a moan at the developers.. BAD! DON'T DO THAT AGAIN! They didn't listen of course..
Cell is a total failure, but we all knew that was going to happen ..
Most importantly the point about the future of GPU's, I wouldn't say they wont improve, because the next step for them is obviously going to be multicore. Still, on the CPU front, we need to see developers utilising the cores by shoving various different engine components on its own core.. one for GFX rendering, one for physics, one for maths.. etc.. I am willing to bet my left nut that Intel is hoping for developers to start doing just that. |
It's why I said we can expect better sound, because of the new cores. It work for ut3 and for the ps3 if my information is correct.
If the future of the gpu is also in the multicore, then it will take time for the developer to use it. The multi-core cpu are on the market for years now and they still don't use it. It's why I have my doubt in the multicore cpu/gpu.
They managed to sell us multicore cpu before the software use it, I don't think this is going to work for gpu. ppl will move to console if buying expensive gpu don't give anything good. That's my guess.
| Spoiler: | God make games, and God give us the games. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
$en$i
VIP Member
Posts: 3127
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
$en$i
VIP Member
Posts: 3127
|
| Posted: Thu, 10th Jan 2008 04:20 Post subject: |
|
|
@TripleNine
Yeah for the existing games it was not really used for now.
Otherwise, of course that it can be a marketing trick to sell 64-bit as useful in everything for the PC average user, but the more users are migrating toward 64-bit the more apps and games will take advantage being built for it and thus help make the earlier allegation true.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 10th Jan 2008 05:24 Post subject: |
|
|
But "for now" is getting kinda old.
Because it's not like dual core has been release 1 or 2 years ago, I think it got release like 5 years ago. Anyway, they say dualcore is like the old 2 cpu on one mb. And they always said this will never be good for games back in the days. It's why nobody bought that even if it was not very costly.
I heard it only need to be compiled in 64bit, I don't understand how this can be a hard task. My guess is they don't do 64bit version of their software because they think it's totally useless.
| Spoiler: | God make games, and God give us the games. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
