Better? Amd Phenom Or Intel Core 2 Quad

[ivantoar 0]

Hi, I want to buy a new processor for my old PC (I'm kinda pumping and upgrade it). I've decided to use lastest AMD or Intel procesor. So, which one should I get, AMD Phenom 2.4 GHz or Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 2.4? They both offers same clock speed but diffrent price tough. Motherboard is not a problem, I can buy one to fit the processor. Suggestion needed, thanks.

[amirborna 0]

AMD has ALWAYS been better in gaming and stuffUnless you plan on having lets say Team Fortress 2 / Wow / something else all at once, I would suggest PhenomIf it's AMD, the general rule is to multiple it by 2 to compare it to Intel

[Saint_Michael 3]

Well lets break down the two processors right quick and I will be using the following websites for reference:

Site #1

Site #2

Site #3

Site #4

Well from these four websites it would seem that besdies the expensive price tag to these two processors it would seem that either processor would work, although, it would seem that the Phenom is not only faster in terms of speed, memory, performance and graphically more superior as well. However, the quad core does provide some competition to the Phenom, and so it is the matter of hardware that has to be either AMD or Intel based to get either or working, and it is a matter of preference but from the looks of it the Phenom is the better of the two.

[amirborna 0]

I was right yes, but also remember this, many games nowadays don't even support 2 cores, so 4 won't be a real differnece:D

[ivantoar 0]

I do gaming, mainly games from Valve (HL2 Based game). And besides, I do some basic things like using office program, photoshop, converting/editing MP3, photos, videos. And from the test result, all CPU performance differ depending from what program. Still a hard decision tough.Anyway, does Quad processor with 1 GB PC-6400 RAM (DDR2), and GeForce 7600 make any sense? I'm afraid those RAM and video card can't balance the processor's speed. As a note, my old PC spec currently is :MoBoASUS P4-xxx (some old one, don't remember)ProcessorIntel Pentium 4 1.6 GHzMemory/RAM640 MB PC-3200 DDRGraphicsGeForce 2 MX 100/200So, maybe you can recommend any upgrades different (my budget is $600 or under). And, I don't use this PC as much as I use my current one.

[hitmanblood 0]

Hello,Few years ago AMD was indeed a lot better then the Intel and their processors were able to do more operations on the same clock speeds in comparison to the Intel processors. However today in the time of multi core processors AMD is losing battle to INtel. Since intel's processors are more stabilized and are in fact working better then AMD's processors they also have a lot more buffer space and a larger set of instructions which is important today. And of course one more thing that is important in the multicore world is that they have their processors more optimized for the work with applications. So that one application that in fact is not written for the multi core processor may use all of his features. Also another important thing is the fact that I bought Intel Quad Core and it is working fine. I've tested simultaneously with AMD phenom on teh same machine and Intel was some 5 times better in all aspects but one. In some comparison with the ASP.NET calculations of floating point or something like that. Probably because they lacked one instruction or something like that.SXo I strongly suggest that you use Intel as multicore processor. Of course if you would go for single core then you should take 64 bit AMD processor. Good Luck

[amirborna 0]

For now, AMD Phenom is betterNext year, or 2, when multi core support games come out, then Definately Buy Nehelem, whether it's Intel or AMDBut for now, Phenom is way betterYou can also search in google "AMD Phenom vs Intel (PUTHEREW/E)"Then you can see comparisons that people do with more intelligence on this subject.

[hitmanblood 0]

lol and you are so intelligent. How can someone tell me which is better when I have compared those things on my machine and gained results. It is clear that Intel core 2 quad is better then AMD and AMD is having so many problems with their multi core processors that you cannot count them all. And personal thing to you Amir first don't bring hatred from other discussions into new ones and some manner when speaking would benefit you a lot.

[amirborna 0]

Look at you, you're attacking me.What I said wasn't wrong. Many games ATM don't support multi core (IT works, but doesn't take advantage of it)don't ever post towards me again if it's going to be negative. I understand the amount of hate I have put into you, theists seem to be that way.ByeIf you reply back to me and change the topic again, I will report you.To creator of this thread : For now, I would suggest AMD Phenom.

[osknockout 0]

AMD has ALWAYS been better in gaming and stuff

Since intel's processors are more stabilized and are in fact working better then AMD's processors they also have a lot more buffer space and a larger set of instructions which is important today.

Are you both insane?

Back when Intel released MMX for pentium II, it rocked the socks off of everyone's 2d games that used integer calculation. AMD took the show back with 3D Now! and the ability to do floating point operations at a rate faster than a turtle when 3d games were starting to become feasible. When intel released SSE, it outperformed 3D Now! from the sheer advantage of more than double the circuitry. They've both been flying back and forth. Besides, it's the gpu that matters with gaming anyway. Now if you're talking about recent mergers and what not, then yes you're right AMD's always been better after that merger with ATI since anything Intel has made with graphics has been subpar.

Buffer space? What processor has buffer space? You mean L1/L2/L3 cache memory? The recent processor lines are nearly parallel in cache requirements in the L1/L2 spectrum - differences there are just which part of the market they're trying to sell their stuff to. Larger sets of instructions don't mean anything. Future AMD chips are expected to be preferred in many encryption-heavy circles because of supposed acceleration of encryption-related computations. AMD's processors definitely have less instructions than intel's but are still wanted quite heavily. It's not quantity but quality here.

@ivantoar: I'd suggest you get a quad-core (by that I mean don't get the Phenom X3 cause optimizing for three cores isn't fun at all, X4's fine) but unless you can provide more details on the chips, I can't help you more than just by saying go for the one with the lower price.

[Saint_Michael 3]

I do gaming, mainly games from Valve (HL2 Based game). And besides, I do some basic things like using office program, photoshop, converting/editing MP3, photos, videos. And from the test result, all CPU performance differ depending from what program. Still a hard decision tough.
Anyway, does Quad processor with 1 GB PC-6400 RAM (DDR2), and GeForce 7600 make any sense? I'm afraid those RAM and video card can't balance the processor's speed. As a note, my old PC spec currently is :

MoBo
ASUS P4-xxx (some old one, don't remember)

Processor
Intel Pentium 4 1.6 GHz

Memory/RAM
640 MB PC-3200 DDR

Graphics
GeForce 2 MX 100/200

So, maybe you can recommend any upgrades different (my budget is $600 or under). And, I don't use this PC as much as I use my current one.

To answer your first question no it doesn't, becauser your not even using like 5% of a quadcore processor with those specs. A quad core can handle 4+ gigs, a couple of Nvdia 9600 gfx cards, and whole bunch of other fun stuff. As for your other computer, you night as well buy yourself a new one as yo uwould have to stripped out all the hold hardware just to make everything compatible, and Core2 Duo computers are top of the line for what you need. To be quite honest, a quad core is a bit of an overkill for your needs as you will because wasting a lot unless you get some powerhourse game that is designed to run on a quad processor. Heck you might as well go with a Core 2 Duo extreme with 3GB RAM and 8800GTX XXX gfx card and your set.

Also a friendly reminder stay on topic, take your petty fights somewhere else.

[hitmanblood 0]

I understand there are many tests official and unofficial but this one is somehow putting it all in one bucket they are comparing Intel's and AMD's Quad core processors its a bit outdated but things haven't change a lot since then. Well both companies published new cores since the report was written but status in industry is more or less the same at the time of writing this report.

link to the report by hexus.net

And regard this sentence as one of the strongest ones in the report:

The industry needs AMD to survive and succeed yet it's very difficult to make a compelling buying recommendation for a processor that's a year behind its competitor - one who has already moved on to a more-efficient 45nm manufacturing process - is between 10-20 percent slower in most benchmarks, and costs much the same.

Also disregard the picture at the beginning of the report.

Best Regards

[ivantoar 0]

Okay, I'll think I just buy a new one instead of upgrading. I'll take the Intel Core 2 Quad, with 2 GB DDR2 (I'll add later if I have more money to spend), a GeForce 8800 GT, 320 GB SATAII disks, and other peripheral. Hmm... any solution for the motherboard?

[rpgsearcherz 5]

I am confused by the whole cpu thing. With what I've been reading lately Phenom has issues with a lot of games, and I always thought AMD was the best cpu for gaming but people told me to go with Intel because even though they may be the same speed the Intel will 'clock faster.' Not completely sure how much of that is true.

[majklisko 0]

My advice is to buy one of the newer intel processors from the q9... serie. I don't how much it costs, but I think it has more cache and is produced using 45nm process, it means it has lower power consumpion and heats less.