PDA

View Full Version : Building new PC AMD or Intel



Sil
June 4 2011, 04:14:17 AM
Was looking to upgrade again ... because you have to every other week to play new games. Looked at Intel then spoke to some friends they said unless I'm a massive Intel diehard get a better AMD chip for cheaper still sceptical tho because not being an intel diehard i always hear they are better so what do you think?

Have antek 900 case, psu, monitor, other hdd's ect ect already so just wanted these things. was looking at SSD drives but was told not worth the money at the moment

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/Publi ... r=16375105 (http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=16375105)


G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB (4 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10666) Desktop Memory Model F3-10666CL9Q-8GBRL

ASUS M4N75TD AM3 NVIDIA nForce 750a SLI ATX AMD Motherboard

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition Thuban 3.2GHz Socket AM3 125W Six-Core Desktop Processor HDT90ZFBGRBOX

EVGA 012-P3-1570-AR GeForce GTX 570 (Fermi) 1280MB 320-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card

Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ST31000528AS 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive

thank you internet friends

Takon Orlani
June 4 2011, 04:32:16 AM
Whatever fits your budget m80

Sil
June 4 2011, 04:44:13 AM
well budget is no issue.... being realistic i dont want to bomb 1k on a cpu that will date as quick as the next

but the difference between AMD and Intel was more of the question i was asking


AMD Phenom II six core Vs i5 2500k quad core

performance vs price

Ryas Nia
June 4 2011, 04:46:16 AM
Was looking to upgrade again ... because you have to every other week to play new games. Looked at Intel then spoke to some friends they said unless I'm a massive Intel diehard get a better AMD chip for cheaper still sceptical tho because not being an intel diehard i always hear they are better so what do you think?

Have antek 900 case, psu, monitor, other hdd's ect ect already so just wanted these things. was looking at SSD drives but was told not worth the money at the moment

http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/Publi ... r=16375105 (http://secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?WishListNumber=16375105)


G.SKILL Ripjaws Series 8GB (4 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10666) Desktop Memory Model F3-10666CL9Q-8GBRL

ASUS M4N75TD AM3 NVIDIA nForce 750a SLI ATX AMD Motherboard

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition Thuban 3.2GHz Socket AM3 125W Six-Core Desktop Processor HDT90ZFBGRBOX

EVGA 012-P3-1570-AR GeForce GTX 570 (Fermi) 1280MB 320-bit GDDR5 PCI Express 2.0 x16 HDCP Ready SLI Support Video Card

Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ST31000528AS 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive

thank you internet friends

I can understand going AMD if your buying a dual or tripple core and unlocking and overclocking, because yes thats a good value. But at that price your better off spending the extra $20 on an i5-2500k

To quote myself :P


in price to performance thats not really the case, intel is IMO better priced unless you run heavily multi threaded applications

edit// going on just Anandtech's price performance you get...

i5-2500k: 265 points for $225
X6 1100BE: 204 Points for $200

X6 performs better at rendering/Photoshop with multi core code paths
i5 performs better at everything else for less heat/power/noise

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/203?vs=288

Aea
June 4 2011, 08:58:08 AM
Games / "Consumer Stuff" = Intel, Processing = AMD

Pretty much how I have it in my head. For what 90% of users are doing faster cores = better.

balistic void
June 4 2011, 10:08:14 AM
Intel are way ahead of AMD right now because of sandy vag. Go with Intel.

Bombcrater
June 4 2011, 12:58:42 PM
Definitely Intel. The i5-2500K is better for most uses than the Phenom II X6, very substantially so if you make use of its big time overclocking headroom. SSDs aren't really that expensive anymore ($165 will get you an 80GB Intel drive) and are totally worth it for a high-end build, where the hard drive is by far the biggest bottleneck.

Hurricane
June 4 2011, 09:51:50 PM
to say what everyone else has said:

Intel

Intel has a higher IPC (Instructions Per clock) count as far as I'm aware which basically means that on the scale of Intel Vs AMD:

Intel has less cores then AMD but has a higher "performance" then AMD per core / clock. So basically, unless your running a very good multithreaded app (or a lot of VM's) go Intel. Games are by default still very crap when it comes to multithreading so Intel is still superior to AMD. Depends completely on what you need.

Sil
June 5 2011, 03:27:37 AM
yea i changed it up a bit and will go intel. what about i5 2500k v i7 2600 standard i dont plan on going full retard and overclocking the shit out of everything so for stock speeds

balistic void
June 5 2011, 11:34:25 AM
i5 actually beats the i7 in some benchmarks hilariously (by tiny margin). Main feature of i7 = hyper threading, which is shit. Standard procedure for any kind of high perforamance computing is to disable HT. At best it can give 15% concurrent performance boost, at worst it gives a penalty due to extra overhead. You do NOT get free cores from it.

Jason Marshall
June 7 2011, 03:56:48 PM
My latest build was a hybrid video/photo/graphic design/gaming rig and I went with the AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition Thuban 3.2GHz x6 and have it overclocked and stable at 4.0GHz. Couldnt be happier.

Tzar
June 8 2011, 02:36:14 PM
wow! 750A SLI! what a old chipset!
It`s impossible to find in china!

emmm~
BTW,R6970 a little better than GTX570?why not?
M4N75SLI.... WHY not msi NF980A SLI or GIGABYTE 990FXUD5/ ud7 ?

Tzar
June 8 2011, 02:36:32 PM
wow! 750A SLI! what a old chipset!
It`s impossible to find in china!

emmm~
BTW,R6970 a little better than GTX570?why not?
M4N75SLI.... WHY not msi NF980A SLI or GIGABYTE 990FXUD5/ ud7 ?

Tzar
June 8 2011, 02:39:54 PM
i5 actually beats the i7 in some benchmarks hilariously (by tiny margin). Main feature of i7 = hyper threading, which is shit. Standard procedure for any kind of high perforamance computing is to disable HT. At best it can give 15% concurrent performance boost, at worst it gives a penalty due to extra overhead. You do NOT get free cores from it.

intel sandy bridge `s HT better than Nehalem`s
when the max theaders=4 I5(quad-core) without HT beat I7 with no doubt!
but in some benchmarks ,things are diffrent.

Don Pellegrino
June 10 2011, 02:05:29 AM
The new generation of amd processors is due in 2 weeks, I really hope they can manage to catch up with sandy bridge or even get a little bit ahead to make the prices drop, but I doubt that will happen. Fuck, I want to be an AMD fanboy again but they won't let me. :(

Bombcrater
June 10 2011, 02:41:19 AM
Actually the next gen AMD family (Bulldozer) isn't due for a couple of months, it got delayed. What's launching this month is the mobile version of the Llano APU, which is basically an Athlon II X4 with a built in 400-shader GPU.

Verizana
June 10 2011, 02:10:17 PM
AMD denied the delay, saying that their roadmap has not changed. IMO time will tell hehe

Bombcrater
June 10 2011, 07:54:03 PM
AMD's public roadmap listed the desktop Bulldozer (Zambezi) as launching in Q2 - ie, by the end of this month. That's not going to happen, there's no way AMD will launch Zambezi and Llano in the same month, and the only BD chips in the wild right now are performance restricted engineering samples. If it was launching in the next couple of weeks there'd be retail chips floating about all over the place, enough that the usual forums would be full of leaks.

My guess is there'll be no BDs until early August at best. Whether or not BD is semi-broken and needs a respin to work right (as some sites are suggesting) the fact is there's only limited 32nm production capacity available and AMD will be using most of it for Llano, which faces no real competition from Intel and is pretty much guaranteed to be a huge success.

Tzar
June 11 2011, 01:50:29 PM
to say what everyone else has said:

Intel

Intel has a higher IPC (Instructions Per clock) count as far as I'm aware which basically means that on the scale of Intel Vs AMD:

Intel has less cores then AMD but has a higher "performance" then AMD per core / clock. So basically, unless your running a very good multithreaded app (or a lot of VM's) go Intel. Games are by default still very crap when it comes to multithreading so Intel is still superior to AMD. Depends completely on what you need.

well,i hear about that SNB has 6-wide (6Insts per cycle) IPC
it is true? :razor: :obama: