Csshih 0 Report post Posted June 16, 2008 (edited) Performance wise, Intel trumps AMD, but price wise, right now, AMD wins over, I guess, but the price difference isn't too different. As for gaming, the processor barely matters, if you have a good GPU, then everything will be faster.If you're just upgrading your computer, unless it's a really bad processor, don't upgrade it, just upgrade your GPU, also, make sure the sockets are compatible, you don't want to buy a 300$ processor to find out that the sockets are not compatible. and also, If you're taking my advice, which would make me happy, make sure you have the latest PCI-E, (pci express) and enough space in the case.I see that you're just getting a new computer completely. My suggestion is that you don't need a quad core, just a decent dual core, and get a better graphics card, the performance boost will be much higher, because if the computer has vista, it depends mainly on the GPU to do all that shiny stuff. like that strange tabbing, and 3dness that I seem to strangely like. Edited June 16, 2008 by Csshih (see edit history) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ivantoar 0 Report post Posted June 16, 2008 Nah, I hate Vista, and never use Vista again unless I really need it (maybe later some application or game only run on Vista?? See it later). I think it's good idea as I will not use this computer as much as my current one. Maybe I'll rethink about taking AMD Dual core.Mmm... I can't afford pricey component. In fact, things here quite expensive (OMG, non dollar currency). So, I wont take newest processor. Just a decent one should be enough for me. I agree with Csshih this time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
litchy 0 Report post Posted June 16, 2008 I run an Intel Q6600 i was jumping between buying a Phenom and an Intel Quad. The reason i bought an intel instead of an Amd is because the reviews for Intel were much more positive than Amd. Apparently Intel is leading the market in cpu's nowadays but back in the day Amd was leading, i have no idea where either company lost it.Q6600 replaced a good old working Amd 3200+ which blew up after 5 years of use. I put that thing under so much stress i was trying to run dual core programs (Twice as slow on single core) and probably hitting the max temps on it. The Q6600 and Intel cpu's tend to have more stable over clocking + they over clock much more than phenoms for you overclockers out there. My Q6600 is stock clocking and stays @ 30 Degrees or so and probably 40 on load. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AbdurahmanL 0 Report post Posted June 18, 2008 Yeah, I would probably go with the intel quad core Q6600, cause it can o/c better, and at stock is better in almost every aspect, but not by that much. But the phenoms are cheaper, so go with whichever one you like. They both will help you a lot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ivantoar 0 Report post Posted June 18, 2008 I'll think I'll get a decent single core or core 2 duo. I don't hunger for performance now, just need a sufficient processor with a good price. I'll rethink over it carefully (budget is the main problem) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iGuest 3 Report post Posted September 6, 2008 Replying to hitmanbloodAm a network engineer and can tell you that it will be a long time before intel catches AMD. Sorry Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iGuest 3 Report post Posted September 22, 2008 I'm an IT Engineer myself so not given to brand loyalty only facts. Depends alot how you build a Gaming Machine, suffice to say that I bought a AMD 6400 Black Edition and put a Silent Night cooler on it runs 54C underr Ful Crysis Load, 4 gig Cosair ballistic Tracer, Vista 64 Bit Premium, 9600Gts Nvidia 1 gig on board. Same setup with but with Intel Core Duo . Every time the Black Edition Unlocked hammered the Intels Problem is built a Phenom too, the Dual Core 6400 hammered that too. So Phenoms seem variable. I'l give you the full specs but I'm buying 20 more of theses Athlon 64 X2 black Editions,,my Gam,er customers love them,, one @ 3.9ghz o'clocked totally stable all day play:) I think the Ballistix Tracer helped too.Unemotionally AMD clearly Faster IN PRACTICE QED-reply by Mick Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iGuest 3 Report post Posted March 24, 2009 AMd bestBetter? Amd Phenom Or Intel Core 2 QuadAmd Phenom is always better. Super ziglling speed. I am using AMD Phenom from last 3 months. There is great performance.I would suggest amd phenom..Intel is wastage of money... Last depends on u. -reply by kapil Goyal Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iGuest 3 Report post Posted August 11, 2009 same delimaBetter? Amd Phenom Or Intel Core 2 Quadyeah I'm getting ready to build a quad core system too, and I'm having trouble deciding too, but I'm pretty sure I'm gonna go with the amd phenom. I don't play computer games cuz I have a playstation 2 for that, however I want a fast system to build a pc based home recording studio. I have 1.5 gigs ram and an xp3200 right now and I get a lot of audio dropouts especially when using vst plugins. Hopefully a quad core processor and 4 gigs of ram will cure this issue? any suggestions anyone? -reply by shawn Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iGuest 3 Report post Posted August 16, 2010 HI I WILL SUGGEST U INTEL CORE 2 QUAD BECAUSE AMD PROCESSORS ARE NOT MUCH GOOD AS INTEL PROCESSORS.............AND AMD CANT TOLERATE HIGH TEMPRATURE........... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites