Processor comparison (Intel v. AMD)
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Processor comparison (Intel v. AMD)

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    106

    Question Processor comparison (Intel v. AMD)

    OK, so I am talking with my friends about hardware and I'm a little lost with these confangled new processors. Namely the AMD Athlon and the Intel Duo.

    The AMD Athlon 64 FX-60 (with HyperTransport and Dual Core Technology) and the Intel Core Duo Processor T2600 to be precise.

    Now, from my understanding, isn't AMD putting two chips into one? Whereas Intel is using two physical chips?

    Does this seriously affect performance that much, or is it not noticeable?

    And price aside, which is "better" (irrelevant to company preference )?
    "The Texan turned out to be good-natured, generous and likeable. In three days no one could stand him." Catch 22 by Joseph Heller.

    Buddies? I have no buddies...


    Give the BSD daemon some love (proud FreeBSD user)

  2. #2
    AFLAAACKKK!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,065
    Intel core duo is one cpu but 2 cores.

    From my understanding Intel is leading the laptop market with their energy efficient dual core processors (intel core duo) and AMD is leading the desktop market with their dual core processors. Though this may change when Intel releases their core 2 extreme edition of processors set to release 3rd quarter of this year... Only time will tell.

    Does this dual core technology boost performance compared to single core? Yes definitely.

    Which company is better with dual core processors? As of now I think that depends if your looking for a laptop or desktop...
    I am the uber duck!!1
    Proxy Tools

  3. #3
    Frustrated Mad Scientist
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,152
    The different companies have produced processors which are better are some functions than the other.

    I can understand why you are lost right now the array of processors out there is bewildering. Intel in particular has a naming scheme which is simply put, "Shite". I don't know if it is deliberately confusing or the marketing guy is a tosser but it is bad.

    BUT really when you get down to it all the processors are very powerful right now and it is hard to split them. I think you'll need to do a lot of readng and review hunting to get your own opinion sorted out and that will depend very much on what you will be using the machine for.

  4. #4
    AFLAAACKKK!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,065
    Well, actually for desktop CPU's AMD's Athlon x2 line pretty much destroyed Intel's Pentium D line... which is probably why Intel is in such a hurry to release their core 2 extreme line...
    I am the uber duck!!1
    Proxy Tools

  5. #5
    Super Moderator: GMT Zone nihil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom: Bridlington
    Posts
    17,192
    Hi The Duck , I guess I still have that feeling that hardware has advanced beyond software still...............what do you think?

    I honestly don't know what to advise these days unless it is for business or extreme gaming (spend everything you can afford, and then some)

    There are people round here quite happily running their businesses on Office 97 and PIII's

    Difficult times old chap?
    If you cannot do someone any good: don't do them any harm....
    As long as you did this to one of these, the least of my little ones............you did it unto Me.
    What profiteth a man if he gains the entire World at the expense of his immortal soul?

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    106
    Which company is better with dual core processors? As of now I think that depends if your looking for a laptop or desktop...
    Maybe I'm a little naive, but does it matter whether it's a laptop or a desktop?

    Intuitively this makes sense since if one company were better at one, it should be reasonable that it is good at the other...but this can also be very very wrong (I s'pose).

    But doesn't that make sense: if a processor company does well with laptops (a smaller processor), then it should logically do even better with desktops (with more space for larger processors)?
    "The Texan turned out to be good-natured, generous and likeable. In three days no one could stand him." Catch 22 by Joseph Heller.

    Buddies? I have no buddies...


    Give the BSD daemon some love (proud FreeBSD user)

  7. #7
    Super Moderator: GMT Zone nihil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    United Kingdom: Bridlington
    Posts
    17,192
    Maybe I'm a little naive, but does it matter whether it's a laptop or a desktop?
    Yes it does, but probably not the way you at first think. There is really no significant size difference between a laptop and desktop processor. The actual processor is a relatively (to overall dimensions) small component anyway.

    The real issue is that a laptop needs to be small and lightweight whereas this doesn't matter so much with a desktop.

    Now, a fast processor generates a lot of heat, and I don't have much space in a laptop for a heatsink and fans. To give you an idea I have just done a comparison on my bench between a Coolermaster heatsink and fan, and a Toshiba laptop. The Coolermaster is TWICE the height of the Toshiba.

    It is thus important to try to reduce the heat generated in a laptop, and this is reflected in the chip design........and in its price . This is not so important in a desktop where the increased design and manufacturing costs would be far greater than the additional cooling.

    Another factor to bear in mind is that laptops are designed to run off batteries, so energy consumption is an issue that does not really apply to desktops.

    So, laptop components are designed with size, weight, heat and electrical consumption factors in mind. I suppose you could say the same about complete machines. The best laptop may not be made by the same people who make the best desktops, who may again be different from those making the best servers.

    Please bear in mind that this is highly competitive, so manufacturers leapfrog eachother over time.

    If you cannot do someone any good: don't do them any harm....
    As long as you did this to one of these, the least of my little ones............you did it unto Me.
    What profiteth a man if he gains the entire World at the expense of his immortal soul?

  8. #8
    AFLAAACKKK!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,065
    Hi The Duck , I guess I still have that feeling that hardware has advanced beyond software still...............what do you think?
    That is still true today but not so much as it was years ago, especially in the graphics card sector...


    There are people round here quite happily running their businesses on Office 97 and PIII's
    Yes, if your computer is for business, then there's no need for a dual core processor and a 500 dollar video card .
    I am the uber duck!!1
    Proxy Tools

  9. #9
    0_o Mastermind keezel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,024
    I'm running into the same confusion on this issue. My girlfriend and I are both looking for laptops, but for different things. I'm after an Athlon 64 processor in mine for gaming, but I don't know if she would necessarily want the same... I'm looking at Intel duo chips for her, but I'm open to suggestions. Also, where does the Turion 64 come into play? Is it decent?

  10. #10
    AFLAAACKKK!!
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,065
    Seeing as how games have yet to be created in 64bit I don't see the urgent need to get a 64bit cpu...


    Are you both getting different laptops or are you sharing one? If you guys are both getting your own then what's the problem?

    Turion 64's are competing with Intel's centrino cpu's for laptops. They are basically a repackaged athlon 64 with some minor changes like the on die memory controller to save power, hence making it more mobile. And the fact that the Turion will be available to many different chipsets will make it cheaper then centrino cpu's most of the time. Centrino's need an Intel chipset hence making centrino's more expensive...

    So yes, it's a good cpu and AMD beat Intel to 64 bit CPU's for laptop's but in the grand cheme of things AMD is still playing catch up to Intel on the laptop front... Intel is going to release their core 2 duo line this summer... or so they say. This line of CPU's will have 64 bit + dual core and be able to process 4 instructions per clock cycle... but now I'm just rambling...
    I am the uber duck!!1
    Proxy Tools

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

 Security News

     Patches

       Security Trends

         How-To

           Buying Guides