Dual Core Intel vs AMD

[broman55]

Right now I'm trying to decide on what processor to get for my brother who is entering college. He is looking for a gaming pc and will probably get some bad grades because of it . However, I'm trying to decide which processor would be better for him.
AMD Athlon 64 3200+/3500+
vs
Pentium 4 D 830 Dual Core Processor

Do you think it would be a wise choice to go with Pentium's dual core processor or stick with AMD?

[TwoRails]

Most Intel versus AMD threads start a "war." Before dual cores, even though I'm an AMD fan, I'd say "both are good," as because both are.

Dual cores are a little different in the sense that they "behave" differently, and there are certain advantage and disadvantages.

The biggest for me, at least, is with the AMD dual core units, you don't have to wait for a new chipset or buy a new motherboard, or memory or whatever. AMD duallies will fit into current 939 pin mobos. A very big plus for folks like me that already have a 939 mobo. Take out the "old" unit and drop in the new!

Secondly, Intel and AMD CPUs talk to each other differently. Basically Intel goes out to the buss to talk to the second CPU. AMD is able to communicate directly with the second CPU. As you can imagine, there is a performance difference, and so far the benchmarks are showing the AMD to be faster than the Intel duallies.

Note that I am Not slamming Intel. Both are good, but in the case of dual units, there are strong indicators that AMD does have an advantage. There'll be a lot more reviews, tests, and benchmarks coming out as these CPUs hit mainstream. We'll have to wait and see if things change.

[Snod Blatter]

Yes, AMD does have the upper hand right now since the A64 was designed from the beginning to be dual core, whereas the P4 was not.

Also, because he is gaming, AMD would perform better. If he was encoding or doing other kinds of work, the Intel would probably be a better choice.

[ror_b211]

I would wait until the non-extreme edition dual core P4's have a chance to gain a reputation, they're very new. Meanwhile Athlon 64's and Pentium 4 Prescotts both have solid reputations. Hyper-threading simulates a dual-core or processor environment, while not being as efficient as the real thing, does do a great job of multi-tasking.

Also, if you were to increase your budget, Athlon X2's outperform every Pentium 4 apart from the high-end 3.73ghz Extreme Edition, and it's half the price, I would get one if I had the money over any P4.

[kram 2.0]

I too agree with TwoRail's assessment of the situtation - Intel and AMD are both very fast processors - they will get the job done.

You will get no performance increase from purchasing a dual core processor - the only advantage is the ability to take two tasks and simultaneously process them. My recommendation is to stay with Intel Pentium 4 or AMD Athlon 64 - dual core is still young.

Originally Posted by Snod_blatter Also, because he is gaming, AMD would perform better.

While I am by no means naturally absolutely impartial, I have yet to notice the difference.

kram

[broman55]

Thanks for the help everyone. I think I'll push him towards AMD (it's cheaper and I like AMD). If you still have something to add, keep the posts comin!