Intel or AMD

[Alfie]

Building a computer is a learning experience,it offers the individual the ability to save some money,choose the hardware they want and the extreme satisfaction of knowing they built it!
Any build can lead to problems,whether it be Intel,AMD,etc.
One of the abtuse pleasures of computers are the problems that can arise and the discovery of the solutions.
If I recall,this forum is all about that,isn't it.
Both platforms are good.
Via has come a long way.
The news about them running the pci and ide slower than Intel,is old news.
The patches that have been designed to correct this apparently work.
It's true with an Intel system,you don't need drivers as native support is in the OS.
It wasn't until Win98se and later Via chipsets that native support was introduced in the OS,Via's fault?
WinXP has full support,as a result less problems.
With this in mind,I put both about equal,if the components are new,the OS is XP and the builder has studied up!
I have used both and have worked on both.
Why do I like AMD?
They tend to be more fun!
Discovering the secret of the L1 bridges and how the other bridges could be modified to adjust the multiplier created such an outpouring of creativity,that in itself, is a learning experience!
That when coupled with a quality motherboard the options are a little broader than Intel's.
For those that enjoy pushing their systems and overclocking,AMD has not shut us out.
Sure the new XP cpu has become a bit more challenging as far as unlocking(no pencil trick,here)now we have to use crazy glue and conductive paint!Geez!

[lovitz]

like anything crucial, to build a computer does involve research, you cannot " slap " together, this and that. If you are planning on using an AMD CPU, you should know that " yes, they do run hotter than their Intel counterparts " and should invest in a good cooling fan.

[=Mt=Predator]

Personaly i would go for AMD if you are on a low budget.
If you dont know what CPU Fan to buy? Go for a boxed Intel (not for O.C'ers)
I bought a AMD Athlon 1Ghz due to its low costs. (Its working perfectly)
I hope i was helpfull

(P.s Looking for a CPU fan? Buy Coolermaster or Thermaltake)

[HAL9000]

Originally posted by =Mt=Predator If you dont know what CPU Fan to buy? Go for a boxed Intel (not for O.C'ers)

The Intels are very good overclockers and in many cases run cool enough with the retail box fan. The Celeron 1100 I recently upgraded to will go to 1463Mhz no problem, but I do need some more cooling to do so as it runs at about 70'C with my current heat sink and fan at that speed. I could probably even get a bit more out of it.

In another case, I can double clock a Celeron 266 I have at work to 533 with standard cooling. It maxes out at about 52'C.

If you're really into a bit of extra work, check with Toaster. What's that Celeron of yours running at again Toaster, 667@1333Mhz or something like that, not bad for a CPU that's not for overclockers.

Cheaper? Do as much research on Intel parts as on AMD and you'll find that on the overall system, extremely little is saved.

[melloman]

I agree GLC completely.

I was a windows tech, and I had more issues with AMD's and their accompanying chipsets and mobo's than with Intels. There are too many small issues and the bigger one of thermal protection to deal with. If it were only money, AMD might have it. If it were only performance, AMD might have it. But here's the fact: I have a box full of older, perfectly useable Intel CPU's, and they are as useable now as day one. AMD's just don't have the legs to keep going without a helluva lot of thermal protection. Intel allows you to use fewer moving parts (read FANS) therefore increasing reliability. A CPU fan is 10-30 bucks, a CPU is much more. Which goes out first? the CPU fan. With AMD, the CPU is a VERY close second. Also, with the fewer fans, Intel makes for a quieter case. That can be a really big thing in some offices where quiet is the norm, and the case sits on a hardwood floor in a place that echoes travel a lot.

The other comment about Motherboards, video, and all the other peripherals being more important, I almost agree. I think it is as important, not more. I think a good idea is choose the applications and OS first, define video, storage and peripheral needs for those choices, then find the best match for compatibility in drivers, and hardware. I have put together machines that were perfect for the customers use for 450-500 bucks that did as much if not more than what they needed. Sometimes an all in one unit does make sense. (Do you honestly want a 90 year old granny inside the case trying to get her machine to run?)

The biggest things that will affect the speed of a machine are:
Front side bus speed
amount of RAM
CPU speed
Video speed/memory
Storage (ATA 66, 100, 133 SCSI, etc) speed
storage spindle speed (5400, 7200, 10k)
Network card bandwidth


It does little good to match an ata133 drive to an ATA33 motherboard, when in practice the same drive in ata66 or 100 is cheaper. No benefit is achieved. Don't pay for what you can't use, or don't need.

I'd advise, Bigger cases for more expansion room, a decent power supply (300 watt minimum) a Mobo with plenty of PCI slots, and if it's not a work PC, sound card rather than onboard sound. (a work PC doesn't need all the bells and whistles) Video-too many choices. I like Radeons, but Ge force 2's and 3's are good as well.

well, that was about $.03 worth.

[DickD]

A 256 meg stick of rdram 91.50 and must be installed in pairs compared to 256 meg stick of pc2100 ddr at 63.00 would give me pause to consider a p4, but then I have never owned a pentium of any sort. I am on my 4th amd and the old ones went to my kids. My youngest bought a 600 slot a /fic sd11 and it has been troublesome since the start but all the others have worked very well.

[HAL9000]

Originally posted by DickD A 256 meg stick of rdram 91.50 and must be installed in pairs compared to 256 meg stick of pc2100 ddr at 63.00 would give me pause to consider a p4, but then I have never owned a pentium of any sort.

Now this is the kind of statement that I find on a regular basis from those that claim AMD to be so much cheaper. It easily gives one the impression of $183 vs $63. Well, in reality, you're comparing 512Mb RDRAM vs 256Mb DDR. Going by the prices listed above, its $183 vs $126. OK, still a bit of difference there, but not nearly what's implied.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Hal

In addition to the misleading nature of the comparison between one stick of DDR-Ram and two sticks of RDRAM, the statement ignores the installation of a P4 on a motherboard using DDR-Ram. That same stick of PC-2100 can be used with a P4. The royalty demanded for RAMBUS ram no longer needs to be paid if you want a P4.

The issue then becomes one of pure performance. Sometime in the next few months, a P4 using PC-2400 or PC-2700, on a motherboard equipped with one of the new chipsets, is going to outstrip the fastest XP in every respect and on every benchmark. The reason is simple, the P4 is in the beginning (or maybe middle) of its life cycle, while the Athlon is near the end of its theoretical rope. Of course, this is totally off topic.

CH

[=Mt=Predator]

Originally posted by HAL9000 The Intels are very good overclockers and in many cases run cool enough with the retail box fan. The Celeron 1100 I recently upgraded to will go to 1463Mhz no problem, but I do need some more cooling to do so as it runs at about 70'C with my current heat sink and fan at that speed. I could probably even get a bit more out of it. In another case, I can double clock a Celeron 266 I have at work to 533 with standard cooling. It maxes out at about 52'C. If you're really into a bit of extra work, check with Toaster. What's that Celeron of yours running at again Toaster, 667@1333Mhz or something like that, not bad for a CPU that's not for overclockers. Cheaper? Do as much research on Intel parts as on AMD and you'll find that on the overall system, extremely little is saved.

Here in Holland it makes an extreme difference! Exaple, And AMD 1Ghz CPU costs
105 euro's and a Intel Pentium 3 1ghz costs 200 euro's, Thats almost 2x the price of the Athlon!, And 1 euro is 1,12 dollar!
And that the Boxed is not for O.c'ers, i got that from some one else! (On this Forum to be exact, at my first thread)

[Carl Price]

Originally posted by MaidenEmpire For a 1st time builder i would recormend: AMD Because they are low cost and high proformance. Cooling is a big downer tho, but for a few extra $ u can keep a AMD running soomthly at a nice temperature. Amd is the best, i say!

And when you have to spend the extra bucks for a fan, there goes your economic advantage. As someone's sig says "buy AMD and put the fire dept on notice"

[DickD]

That was not the point I was trying to make at all. Lets say I go out and buy a off the shelf gateway that comes with 128 meg of ram, now I have 2 slots left
to fill. Now you begin to see where the real expense comes into play if you want to go to 1 gig you will have some memory to sell.
It is like the guy that buys a new "Mac" and finds that the average best buy
or whatever computer store only has 1 shelf of programs available and most of those were an afterthought by the software designer.
By listing the fact that soon p4's will be able to use Athlon memory only makes me wonder what the benchmarks will look like then!

[Computer Hobbyist]

DickD

I understand your argument, and it is one of the reasons not to buy Rambus, but your statement that "soon p4's will be able to use Athlon memory" is inaccurate. As a look at a December 17, 2001 article inTomshardwarewill demonstrate. The future is now. Anyway saying PC-2100 is not "Athlon Memory" is no more accurate than saying "the P4 was designed for Rambus." The benchmarks will fall to the P4 side of the ledger, not because the XP is a bad processor, but it is at the end of its development cycle. The P4 is still in the middle of its cycle and has more room to grow. The XP is having a hard time reaching 2.0 gig. That's why they changed their nominclature to XP and started talking about "equivalence." I doubt if it will achieve much more. The P4 has a much greater potential. The Rambus royalty premium has been an (the)impediment to the development of the P4. Its gone. Until AMD comes out with a new generation processor, Intel should rule the high end performance market.

CH

[Computer Hobbyist]

DickD

I understand your argument, and it is one of the reasons not to buy Rambus, but your statement that "soon p4's will be able to use Athlon memory" is inaccurate. As a look at a December 17, 2001 article in Tomshardware will demonstrate, the future is now. Anyway saying PC-2100 is not "Athlon Memory" is no more accurate than saying "the P4 was designed for Rambus." The benchmarks will fall to the P4 side of the ledger, not because the XP is a bad processor, but it is at the end of its development cycle. The P4 is still in the middle of its cycle and has more room to grow. The XP is having a hard time reaching 2.0 gig. That's why they changed their nominclature to XP and started talking about "equivalence." I doubt if it will achieve much more. The P4 has a much greater potential. The Rambus royalty premium has been an (the)impediment to the development of the P4. Its gone. Until AMD comes out with a new generation processor, Intel should rule the high end performance market.

CH

[RayH]

This thread is getting uglier than a "Which computer is better, a PC or Mac?" thread. But the question is which I would recommend for a first time builder, an Intel or AMD?

I'd personally recommend an Intel on preferrably on an Intel chipset on an Asus board for someone running Windows. Windows is the whole key to the recommendation. You want to know something interesting? You spend a few more dollars on the board and chip. But amazingly, they are more forgiving about other componenets. Remember, Microsoft consults (or coludes with) Intel about standards!

Also, I wouldn't recommend that a first time builder tackle a cutting edge build. I'd recommend that the builder use some proven technology.

I'm from the generation who used to build their own cars. I don't even change my own oil any more! I used to build kit TVs and stereos! I haven't done that in over 25 years. There's no point. Now I build my own computers. But even that may go by the wayside.

First, I did it because it was cheaper. Then I continued to build because they were better. Then, it's what's the point? Just give me something that works........

[Michael]

So, if we all ran with Intel PcMech would cease to exist? I"m not an expert or a professional, so let me speak for us "common folk" that apparently couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag. The Intel zealots here would give any newbie the impression that AMD and VIA equals total unabshed crap. My second system build was a K6/3 450 @500 on an Epox MVP3g5 (via mvp chip) and I would defy anyone with a similar intel based system to emulate the stability of that setup. I ran it for 2 years 12-16 hours a day and it hardly even hicupped. Compare that to my gf's Intel system that seemed to need periodic servicing and troubleshooting. Now, perhaps both our systems were flukes, but I'm on my third build now: an Abit KT7a/Raid--AMD 1.2 Athlon and it too is rock solid. BSOD...what's that??? my temp at idle is around 32 and I've never crossed higher than 47 with a heavy load. I'm sorry, I respect all you guys, but this preaching about Intel being holier than thou is realling a bit too much. My experience with AMD is that you need to know your tweaks, keep the patches/drivers updated and be marginally computer literate (although my gf isn't and she converted from Intel to an Athlon system 1 1/2 years ago and couldn't be happier). I know I'll get bashed here. Yea, the via 133 chipset sucks, the amd's run hot, yada, yada, yada..........all I know is my system runs just as advertised and I'd have no good reason to give Intel my $$$ (btw, my board and chip cost a whopping $150.......can Intel even come close to that?). Just my two cents, and nothing personal intended.....but sometimes it sounds as if a select few on this board have branded AMD as the PC-CHIPS of the processor industry. People that drove Fords 25 years ago laughed at Toyota.....now they're all driving Camry's. Give Amd and Via time.....they're on the right track (although via does tick me off I must admit!!!!).

[archie]

A couple of years ago, I was facing the same dilemma as to whether it'd be Intel or AMD and I recall the debates over the same topic.
At the time, the AMD K6/2 500 was priced at $100 and the equivalent Celery was $160. I chose the K6/2 500 with an Asus P5A mobo. I liked it and got a 2nd combo the same and both have and are still performing well. Within a year, the price of the Celery, as observed at the same online location, had dropped down from $160 to $100 and the K6/2 was $90 [only $10 less] ... so based on my own experience, the AMD chip retained it's $ value and has been an excellent product. This is old news/technology but wish to bring it forth as someone mentioned earlier in this thread that the K6-2 and earlier versions of AMD CPUs were crap, and I quote "Since anything from AMD before Athlon was crap", making it sound like they are just now starting to make a product worth considering ... not true.
So, my choice for CPU now would be either one ... and for cola it would be Pepsi.

[Techno Student]

I would recommend AMD. What in the world was Intell thinking with the Pentium 4, anyway. Some serious steps backward.

[Genuine_Mind]

Yes I am an Intel fan, I have an Intel and a AMD and find the Intel more stable and yes I do use quality parts, both computers cost me around $3500.

A quick question about the future of CPUs (Intel vs AMD). Intel is bringing out its Northwood range soon, what will AMD have to match that. Surely the XP 2000+ wouldn't come close to the Northwood range?

[HAL9000]

Originally posted by Michael The Intel zealots here would give any newbie the impression that AMD and VIA equals total unabshed crap.

Nobody said that the AMD was crap. Did they say the VIA was crap, YES, did they say that the VIA is holding AMD back YES, would it be wise for an Intel user to use a VIA with their chip NO. I think a trend is happening here.

[RayH]

Originally posted by Michael

My experience with AMD is that you need to know your tweaks, keep the patches/drivers updated and be marginally computer literate

The above is EXACTLY why I'd recommend Intel for a first time builder. Working with AMDs ain't for everybody! I use them for myself. But I build Intels for others, especially for my family who is on the other coast!

[Michael]

The above is EXACTLY why I'd recommend Intel for a first time builder. Working with AMDs ain't for everybody!

I agree. My point was that AMD has found a niche, or created one, and I'm glad to see some real competition come Intels way. Via is the real culprit in an AMD system, I will not deny that. Thus, AMD'ers have to be on their toes to keep up with bios updates, etc. As one post put it: "AMD is more fun"....I concur,well, most of the time anyway. Both Intel and AMD have their respective issues....AMD made tremendous strides with the Athlon and has, or had, intel reeling. That's good FOR ALL CONCERNED whether you're an Intel or an AMD person. BTW, my backup system is an old Pentium 166 (Hal smiles!)...Guess I can swing both ways (so to speak!).

[Computer Hobbyist]

Originally posted by Michael Both Intel and AMD have their respective issues....AMD made tremendous strides with the Athlon and has, or had, intel reeling. That's good FOR ALL CONCERNED whether you're an Intel or an AMD person.

Absolutely agreed.

BTW I am writing this on my 800 Duron system. It has performed flawlessly from the moment I put it together (after I figured out VIA's 4 in 1 driver.) Its not about to be retired. My wife would never let me replace it.

CH

[GangstaAngel]

It all depends on who you are and what you need. For any home user I would suggest going with an AMD product, but for business servers or business paltforms they usually stick with Intel.

[AlwaysUp]

Just go back in the threads and COUNT! How many posts do you find where the subject is My PIII or My Celeron has problem XXXX! Now check for My Duron, Tbird my Athlon won't post or is hot enough to fry ostrich eggs....I don't need headaches I need reliability. Oh, yeah before you jump down my throat about this all you AMDers you may want to wait until the P4 has had 3 years to mature as the Athlon has and see if you are still bragging about it's performance! Intel has the R&D bucks and my money is that they STAY at the top of the heap, even though you don't like it.

[Joker]

Ok, this seems to be getting out of hand. It's almost like a Chevy vs Ford debate. Yes, one CPU has its benefits while the other has its own, too.

My decision in my first project was the AMD. Not becuase of performance benchmarks or because of Intel's "monopoly". But because I just can't afford it. Yes, it may only be a few $$$, but those few dollars are what might keep me from getting to work or eating. Also, I'm buying parts as I go. I can't afford to purchase a barebones or OS-less/monitor-less PC in one lump sum.

I'm not a gaming buff or anything like that. I am an adrenaline junkie, but not when it comes to computers. I just want something that is MINE and my parents won't be using 24/7.

I'm writing this post on a Gateway (ugh) AMD Athlon 600. This system does have a good heatsink and fan, which may be why my CPU is luke warm to the touch after some fairly moderate surfing. Therefor, as said in an earlier post, if you use a good heatsink on the Athlon, you won't experience an overheating problem. I have experienced problems with this system, but I highly doubt it's the CPU's fault. I think it's more OS decay than anything else.

The specs for my new system are in my sig. I have read the reviews on the MOBO, and all have given it a high rating. From what I've read, the KT266A chipset has fixed the problems found in the earlier KT266.

End of rant.

[GangstaAngel]

I want to know somethign from you guys....after all of this debate....how many of you can actually tell the difference in performance between a P4 1.5 and an Athlon XP1500+? I sure as hec can't. Well you can, but you need software to tell you which is better. My point is this...no matter how faste procs get, after a certain point we can't even tell which is faster. Our eyes can't see the difference. As far as this comment

Just go back in the threads and COUNT! How many posts do you find where the subject is My PIII or My Celeron has problem XXXX! Now check for My Duron, Tbird my Athlon won't post or is hot enough to fry ostrich eggs....I don't need headaches I need reliability

I think you see more problems with AMd machines because about 70% of the people on this forum own AMD machines. Now why would you see mroe problems from pentium users if there is only a handful of them? As far as the comment

Oh, yeah before you jump down my throat about this all you AMDers you may want to wait until the P4 has had 3 years to mature as the Athlon has and see if you are still bragging about it's performance

Pentium has had 4 generations of chips to "evolve" P1, P2, P3, P4. And in btw those numbers you have P1 Pro, P2 MMX, Xeon, all types of things. The Athlon only has Classic, Thunderbird, XP. There are changes through those 3 chips that make them different in each class, but far less than Intel did with the Pentium chips. Intel should feel like idiots. Both are scared of each other and what each other has. I mean look, both companies are struggling day and night to put fiber optic in their procs. It is getting rediculous. I will stand corrected when someone in here can tell the difference between their Pentium 4's performance from my Athlon XP performance with just their eyes, and no software. Just palynig a game for instance.....any takers?

[HAL9000]

Originally posted by GangstaAngel I think you see more problems with AMd machines because about 70% of the people on this forum own AMD machines.

Which leads to my earlier comment of how can something with 30% or less of a total market share be taking up 70% of the users on the board But that's a whole new debate

I like Pepsi and will never own another Ford again.

[GangstaAngel]

I like Hal's thinking.

[Michael]

Well, the implication is that AMD makes up 70% of this boards posts because they are a more problematic platform than that "other brand". Regardless, I always root for the under dog and I just quite frankly love my AMD setup. Period!

[HAL9000]

So do you run Microsoft or Linux(the underdog)?