Well there is the point of the matter.
Your not getting what you pay for in real terms, your paying more for more performance but your not getting that amount extra in cost = to the amount extra in performance.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Have Intel Killed AMD Off...............
- Thread starter Chuggerboom
- Start date
Well there is the point of the matter.
Your not getting what you pay for in real terms, your paying more for more performance but your not getting that amount extra in cost = to the amount extra in performance.
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2010
- Posts
- 602
- Location
- Disneyland
Now that Intel have Sandy Bridge out AMD will have to slash their prices to compete. So maybe that is a good thing.
You must have miss quoted me as your reply has nothing to do with what i have said.
Last edited:
do you know anyone who isn't computer savvy? my best mate is clueless when it comes to computers, he has no idea what sandy bridge is so that is pointless argument, at the end of the day people will buy what they are told to buy by the people in the highstreets telling you that more Mhz is better and the more memory a video card has, the better performance, i.e. a 512MB 4870 isn't as fast as a 1024MB X1650, because 99% of the population don't know any better.
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2010
- Posts
- 602
- Location
- Disneyland
Ok let me ask you a question: Which would you rather have out of the following?
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-253-AM&groupid=701&catid=6&subcat=1328
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-339-IN&groupid=701&catid=6&subcat=1672
I would pay the extra few quid for the faster Intel part.
Last edited:
cause an intel processor is great without any motherboard, etc. to go with it...can't forget these factors...! doesn't really make much of a difference which you go with to be honest, will you ever notice the difference unless you go looking at FRAP or such...?
I would take the AMD as it will slot straight into my mobo.
Now as i have said your reply is nothing to do with what i have said.
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2010
- Posts
- 602
- Location
- Disneyland
I'd take the AMD too, even with his crap comparison. Cheaper, cheaper motherboard, should hit 3.8GHz easy, enjoy your 1fps extra.
BTW, nice comparison
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-244-AM&groupid=701&catid=6&subcat=1328 = better comparison
Also correct me if i'm wrong, but is a phenom 2 at 3.4GHz not faster than an i5 at 2.8GHz
Last edited:
Not everyone has a mobo that it will slot straight into though have they
Exactly and that's why you should not have put out that comparison to me is the first place because its reliant on personal circumstances & is not the point.
The point is that you rarely get what your paying for in top end products when in comparison to the rest of the range, having the odd exception to the rule now & then because of brand crossover points changes nothing.
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2010
- Posts
- 602
- Location
- Disneyland
I'd take the AMD too, even with his crap comparison. Cheaper, cheaper motherboard, should hit 3.8GHz easy, enjoy your 1fps extra.
BTW, nice comparison
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-244-AM&groupid=701&catid=6&subcat=1328 = better comparison
Also correct me if i'm wrong, but is a phenom 2 at 3.4GHz not faster than an i5 at 2.8GHz
AMD will have to slash those prices even lower now Intel have Sandy Bridge out.
am i missing something, or is that the same reply about three times? people keep giving input on the topic only for 'AMD are gonna have to slash those prices, now intel have sandy bridge out...'
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2010
- Posts
- 602
- Location
- Disneyland
I'd take the AMD too, even with his crap comparison. Cheaper, cheaper motherboard, should hit 3.8GHz easy, enjoy your 1fps extra.
BTW, nice comparison
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=CP-244-AM&groupid=701&catid=6&subcat=1328 = better comparison
Also correct me if i'm wrong, but is a phenom 2 at 3.4GHz not faster than an i5 at 2.8GHz
I will gladly correct you. An i5 at 2.8Ghz beats a Phenom 3.4Ghz.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/191?vs=102
And all based on allot of assumptions.
1) AMD users will be willing to scrap there more than capable systems that they have.
2) There is not really any more reasons now to go Intel then there was before since the i series has been out because Intel still had the lead even then but people still bought AMD.
3) There are personal taste & feature reasons for individuals to not go Intel that are a bigger factor than out right speed.
4) That cheapest Unlocked multi Sandy Bridge is what ?
Batman & Dragon age are the only things on that list that i use.
The AMD wins at 1 & the Intel wins in the other & both are at more than needed fps so it does not matter which is faster in that case for me.
think about it this way, back in the day when AMD stamped all over intel with K8 vs. Netburst, did intel suddenly die because the AMDs beat them at literally everything, judging by how the thread is about intel killing AMD im guessing they are still around...K8 vs. Netburst, K8 won hands down though Netburst was still a huge success for the company, Phenom II vs. I3/I5/I7, fair enough the intels win hands down more or less all of the time but there are still tons of Phenom IIs being sold. think about it this way, an entry level car is x amount, a more premium version is a bit more but has more features, is faster, etc. does everybody buy the premium version? don't think so, most people (unless they are the tiny minority, like ourselves) will be content with something that can do what they want, they don't give a damn whether it has an intel badge or an AMD badge, as long as it works thats more than enough..!
Every build i do for people is AMD even though they know about Intel & AMD is a new word to them they still dont care that AMD is going to be used as long as it reaches the requirements as cheap as possible.
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2010
- Posts
- 602
- Location
- Disneyland
The old i5 Intel chip beats it at most things even at a lower clock. Now just look at what the new i7 Sandy Bridge chip does to it.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/287?vs=102
Its clear by now that your not really getting some of the points posted.
Its does not matter how fast it is at running software that i have never used or if i do use it, it will be in very limited fasion.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Oct 2003
- Posts
- 16,324
- Location
- Chengdu
^^
You're still not thinking of the price difference for a decent motherboard with both CPUs.
I'd take the AMD, but would save some more cash and go for the 955.
The Intel will perform better, but I'd have to shell out more for a motherboard. Being honest, I wouldn't notice the performance difference for anything I do between Intel/AMD CPUs. Both will achieve good overclocks and both of them would sail through any task they are given.
You're still not thinking of the price difference for a decent motherboard with both CPUs.
I'd take the AMD, but would save some more cash and go for the 955.
The Intel will perform better, but I'd have to shell out more for a motherboard. Being honest, I wouldn't notice the performance difference for anything I do between Intel/AMD CPUs. Both will achieve good overclocks and both of them would sail through any task they are given.