Is AMD better? What makes better?

2559 Views 52 Replies 19 Participants Last post by sccr64472, Mar 15, 2006

Kopi

Discussion Starter · Mar 5, 2006

Alot of people have been telling me that the new AMD's are faster and cheaper than the intels. Even if the speeds are the same, or even if AMD speeds are lower. Whats the main thing that sets them apart? Should I get a new AMD or a new Intel?

1 - 20 of 53 Posts

Zipnogg

· #2 · Mar 5, 2006

AMD chips do 9 operations/sec, while Intel does 6. And I also believe AMD chips usually come with very low multiplier, like x9, which makes the FSB higher.

See less See more

tuchan

· #3 · Mar 5, 2006

To cut a long story short. very short. AMD has a bigger shovel and wheelbarrow and can move more dirt in every load.

13 3 @ 7 l 3 13 0 y

· #4 · Mar 5, 2006

AMD does 9 operations per cycle, intle does 6

2.2GHZ AMDx9 ops=19.8 ops
3.3GHZ intelx6 ops=19.8

phatcars89

· #5 · Mar 5, 2006

dont forhet the temps are lower on amds!

pauldovi

· #6 · Mar 6, 2006

For a rough equation, multiply Intel Speeds by 6/9 to get the AMD equivilent.

So a 3.8 Ghz Intel equals a 2.53Ghz AMD

But, in a few months, Intel will be releasing Conroe, which will do 10-12 ops per clock. That means you will multiply Intel by 10/9 to 12/9 to get AMD.

So a 3.33 Ghz Intel would be a 3.7Ghz AMD (at 10 ops/clock)
or a 3.33Ghz Intel would be a 4.44Ghz AMD (at 12 ops/clock)

To tell you the truth, wait till fall for Intel new architecture (Conroe), but right now AMD better by a lot!

Jori

· #7 · Mar 6, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zipnogg

AMD chips do 9 operations/sec, while Intel does 6. And I also believe AMD chips usually come with very low multiplier, like x9, which makes the FSB higher.

mm no.. All AMD chips on 754 and 939 have 200mhz "fsb" (though its really HTT)

See less See more

ckp64

· #8 · Mar 6, 2006

Also Conroe will be 65nm, so hopefully we can expect A LOT cooler temps then we are used to with our presHOTs.
And a 4mb L2 cache will also help.

pauldovi

· #9 · Mar 6, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by ckp64

Also Conroe will be 65nm, so hopefully we can expect A LOT cooler temps then we are used to with our presHOTs.
And a 4mb L2 cache will also help.

Conroe is suppose to be around 55-65 Watts.... Preslers are 135Watts!

See less See more

Jori

· #10 · Mar 6, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by pauldovi

For a rough equation, multiply Intel Speeds by 6/9 to get the AMD equivilent.

So a 3.8 Ghz Intel equals a 2.53Ghz AMD

But, in a few months, Intel will be releasing Conroe, which will do 10-12 ops per clock. That means you will multiply Intel by 10/9 to 12/9 to get AMD.

So a 3.33 Ghz Intel would be a 3.7Ghz AMD (at 10 ops/clock)
or a 3.33Ghz Intel would be a 4.44Ghz AMD (at 12 ops/clock)

To tell you the truth, wait till fall for Intel new architecture (Conroe), but right now AMD better by a lot!

I havent heard anything about the the ops/clock.

Edit: AMD has a 35W dual core planned for AM2 on 90nm.

See less See more

pauldovi

· #11 · Mar 6, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jori

I havent heard anything about the the ops/clock.

Edit: AMD has a 35W dual core planned for AM2 on 90nm.

Intel already said Conroe will do more than 20% more ops/clock than current AMD processors:

9 x 1.2 = 10.8 ~ 11 (but Intel said more than)

The official Conroe specs are being released this week!

See less See more

2

tuchan

· #12 · Mar 6, 2006

I hope the Intel chip is very good to brings some healthy competition to the market. then it will be better overall

See less See more

The_Jester

· #13 · Mar 6, 2006

ok:

1) AMD 9ops per cycle - not second, cycle
2) Onboard memory controller
2) Higher FSB
4) Lower L1 & L2 Latencys
5) Cheaper than the intels equal

Jori

· #14 · Mar 6, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by pauldovi

Intel already said Conroe will do more than 20% more ops/clock than current AMD processors:

9 x 1.2 = 10.8 ~ 11 (but Intel said more than)

The official Conroe specs are being released this week!

Intell.. Says.. Alot of things.. Well so does Nvidia and ATI.. They are messing with us or something..

See less See more

Namrac

· #15 · Mar 6, 2006

Exactly. Like jori said, that's what intel says. I'll believe it when a 3rd party review/report states it.

pauldovi

· #16 · Mar 6, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jori

Intell.. Says.. Alot of things.. Well so does Nvidia and ATI.. They are messing with us or something..

You can't think that Intel is going to keep the 6 ops/cycle and have 1.6, 1.8, 2.13, 2.4, and 3.33? It would be a downgrade! Intel have to introduce something that I better than all the current chips (Intel and AMD).

1.6 Conroe X 12 = 2.13 Ghz AMD = 3.2 P4

And I don't think we are looking at Intel doing 9 ops/cycle becuase then a 1.6 and 1.8 Ghz computer would be worthless!

See less See more

The_Jester

· #17 · Mar 6, 2006

why is everyone so hyped about the conroe? the AM2's processors will blow it away..6 months sooner

Intel: Yeah, weve got a processor in design that the equivilency to 5ghz
AMD: too late, we've designed it and are ready to release next month
Intel: damn

It must frustrate Intel that AMD (a smaller, less budgeted company) releases faster chips, cheaper than it.

Intel chose its architecture for the moron - higher clock speeds
(no offence intended to the intel users)

Namrac

· #18 · Mar 6, 2006

No one said that they were keeping the 6ops/cycle. Just that we won't believe anything until it actually comes out. Hype always builds around new products, and alot of information that is believed to be true is just that: hype.

Jori

· #19 · Mar 6, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by pauldovi

You can't think that Intel is going to keep the 6 ops/cycle and have 1.6, 1.8, 2.13, 2.4, and 3.33? It would be a downgrade! Intel have to introduce something that I better than all the current chips (Intel and AMD).

1.6 Conroe X 12 = 2.13 Ghz AMD = 3.2 P4

And I don't think we are looking at Intel doing 9 ops/cycle becuase then a 1.6 and 1.8 Ghz computer would be worthless!

No it wouldnt. Perfect entry level, low usage computer. And also Conroe is going to have a very good architecture, so it could still have 9 ops/cycle but still be faster. Besides, im not thinking its going to keep 6 ops. Or 9. Im simply saying I dont beleive Intel until I see the official specs when its out on open market. Lots of companies are just talk and drop the ball when they bring something new out.

See less See more

pauldovi

· #20 · Mar 6, 2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Jester

why is everyone so hyped about the conroe? the AM2's processors will blow it away..6 months sooner

Intel: Yeah, weve got a processor in design that the equivilency to 5ghz
AMD: too late, we've designed it and are ready to release next month
Intel: damn

It must frustrate Intel that AMD (a smaller, less budgeted company) releases faster chips, cheaper than it.

Intel chose its architecture for the moron - higher clock speeds
(no offence intended to the intel users)

AM2 is AMD's version of Window ME. It not much more than a Socket Change and introduction to DDR2 that isn't going to do much good for AMD.

See less See more

1 - 20 of 53 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.