Frag Infinity Tournament, Inc. - FITES LAN Party - www.fites.net

LAN Party Forums => General Discussion => Started by: Frosty on May 18, 2006, 12:10:30 PM

Title: What's better?
Post by: Frosty on May 18, 2006, 12:10:30 PM: Intel or Amd for gaming, i want to know what pros and cons if so, of what u all think. thanks
Title: What's better?
Post by: Pride on May 18, 2006, 12:26:48 PM: From what I have read recently, AMD has surpassed INTEL, especially for gaming.

This might help: http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1194
Title: What's better?
Post by: Fabio on May 18, 2006, 01:42:55 PM: amd has out preformed intel for last 5+ years in gaming...
Title: What's better?
Post by: The Shoctor on May 18, 2006, 01:44:33 PM: Actually my Cyrix pwns them all!!!
Title: What's better?
Post by: TekieB on May 18, 2006, 01:56:25 PM: motorola power pc is still the best :D ;)

(actually amd, they power all my game servers)
Title: What's better?
Post by: Agent4054 on May 18, 2006, 03:40:58 PM: slightly off topic, but I find it continuously funny that Intel originally licensed its cpu technology to AMD from the beginning. Thats how AMD started... then of course AMD went and made their own cpu and intel got mad, sued them, lost, and here we are today. Ahhh life sure is funny.
Title: What's better?
Post by: Dwg115 on May 18, 2006, 04:37:14 PM: I use mostly AMD cpu's but Intel has their Conroe dual core Cpu shipping in july that as tests have shown already that it will be significantly faster then AMD. At least till AMD releases their next range of cpu's in 2007. AT least thats what i've read so far.
Title: What's better?
Post by: The Shoctor on May 18, 2006, 06:25:26 PM: But for me it's about price point. Sure it will be faster, bit no more stable and just cost more.
Title: What's better?
Post by: sully! on May 18, 2006, 10:30:28 PM: What CPU should I use == Let's start a flame war!

j/k

But my fuel to throw into the fire: http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31761
Title: What's better?
Post by: louber1115 on May 18, 2006, 10:38:31 PM: AMD: Cheaper, Faster, Period. What's there to argue!

*AMD pride!*
Title: What's better?
Post by: Agent4054 on May 18, 2006, 11:41:52 PM: Louber is an Intel turned AMD fanboy.

AMD aint nothin to mess with.
Title: What's better?
Post by: sully! on May 18, 2006, 11:59:18 PM: Quote from: "Pride"
From what I have read recently, AMD has surpassed INTEL, especially for gaming.

This might help: [url]http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1194[/url]

Wait, I just clicked this link. You read this recently?

Quote from: "http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1194"

date published
Aug.14.02

Might as well be a hundred years ago. But the fact remains, AMD is still king of gaming.
Title: What's better?
Post by: Pride on May 19, 2006, 07:37:07 AM: LOL I did read some of the article, but didnt take notice of the date... my bad yo!
Title: What's better?
Post by: Mr.Tibbs on May 19, 2006, 06:12:10 PM: I <3 AMD

I have a AMD 64 4000+ San Diego, never gave me any Crap. Considering Pentiums haven't even surpassed 800FSB whereas AMD is like in the 2000 ball park.
Title: What's better?
Post by: sully! on May 19, 2006, 10:24:16 PM: Quote from: "tiburonlover"
I <3 AMD

I have a AMD 64 4000+ San Diego, never gave me any Crap. Considering Pentiums haven't even surpassed 800FSB whereas AMD is like in the 2000 ball park.

1066 MHz FSB (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116246)

And A64's technically don't have a FSB since the memory controller is embedded on die, so in essence the FSB runs at the frequency of the CPU. You may be thinking of the HyperTransport speeds, which are currently at 2000MHz.
Title: What's better?
Post by: Dwg115 on May 20, 2006, 12:01:45 AM: it's just like the ATI/Nvidia war. They just flipflop back and forth most of the time. I know Here of late AMD is really kicking ass but Intel has had it's day in the sun too. Hell I remember the old K6 and K62 series of AMD and they just plain sucked ass. Cheap yes, But by no means were they superior to Intels offering. I have no bias towards either, i buy the faster one.
Title: What's better?
Post by: Bloodpainter on May 22, 2006, 03:27:21 PM: If you are lookin with a budget to most effective CPU, i would choose on
both are 90nm.

AMD's side: the opteron 144 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103600
That proc has had an amazing history of easy overclocking to astounding performance increases. Also has a great gaming history because of it being in the AMD family and also because of the obvious overclocking benefits.
A little more expensive than the Intel overclocker champion but it works better on gaming

Intel's Side: Pentium 805
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116001
This dual core processor was just talked about on Tom's Hardware they oc'ed it to 3.8 Ghz, outperforming the opty 144 in everything besides gaming and most high end AMD single core in gaming. The only thing you need to buy is a better cooler, i recommend the Zalman total copper cooler. Best part about this proc is that u get 2 3.8 cores for $130 and the price of a nice zalman cooler $40 i think?

I use an FX-53 but i was lookin to change cause its the 130nm version = more heat and energy, and yes im usually an AMD fanboy but Intel has come up with some competition, even though AMD consistently beats Intel's in gaming.

Good luck in whatev u choose
Title: Conroe chipzilla
Post by: Dwg115 on May 23, 2006, 06:53:36 AM: heres a great little article with benchmarks of the new Intel versus the New AMD. Those Intel benches slaughter the new AMD. Even at games

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=5692
Title: What's better?
Post by: Fabio on May 23, 2006, 07:17:00 AM: ... are the nex AM2 Fx's dual core???
Title: What's better?
Post by: The Shoctor on May 23, 2006, 09:05:38 AM: They should be.
Title: What's better?
Post by: Fabio on May 23, 2006, 01:37:38 PM: http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTA2NSwxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==