• 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.

Intel v AMD

smurf300

smurf300

smurf300

Associate
Joined
20 May 2010
Posts
183
Now I made a post on fb about how I was getting my new 3570k and this guy who apparently is runnning his own pc store came on and said that I should have gone for a bulldozer, now I swear I read a lot that they just don't perform aswell as they should so he decided to link me this saying

lol so funny how low end amd out performs highend intel http://www.cpubenchmark.net/mid_range_cpus.html

Is he just trolling me? lol
 
That's price/performance
And it's only in that benchmark too?
In gaming for example an i3 2100 would come up and best an FX8150 in pure FPS.

Ollie1132 said:
You're correct in getting an i5. that guy obviously has no clue what he is on about and likes to sell useless things to people.
Click to expand...

Too true.
Bulldozer's a flop.
 
There is'nt really a reason to buy AMD over Intel in any price bracket now as Intel is the better choice every time.

This needs to change or cpu pricing will go through the roof. AMD needs to get their finger out and launch something worth buying.
 
pastymuncher said:
There is'nt really a reason to buy AMD over Intel in any price bracket now as Intel is the better choice every time.
Click to expand...

To be fair, in the HTPC market the AMD E350 and E450 are really nice options since they are low power and offer enough graphics performance to smoothly decode 1080p video. Also AMD Llano can be a good option if you have a really small budget and want a system that can play games relatively well (due to the pretty decent onboard graphics).

The only other usage scenario where current generation AMD CPUs are a good bet is if you use heavily threaded software and your budget can only stretch to the £132 which will net you am FX-8120.

However, for pretty much all other budgets and uses I would agree that the Intel options are much better.
 
Sadly AMD rarely makes sense at any price point. The 8 core chips only perform in a few circumstances and are not cheap enough to make up for their failings.
 
Even if the AMD chip itself does have a price/performance advantage, once you add in every other component including monitors, the relative price differential gets a lot less while the AMD cpu performance stays just as bad.
 
pastymuncher said:
There is'nt really a reason to buy AMD over Intel in any price bracket now as Intel is the better choice every time.

This needs to change or cpu pricing will go through the roof. AMD needs to get their finger out and launch something worth buying.
Click to expand...

buy a amd and give them some cash to rd better cpu's?
 
What a stupid comment. Why should users have to put up with **** performance just to give AMD a sale? They should have got Bulldozer right in the first place.
 
Intel wins everytime, Except the HTPC area in which a nice E450 is perfect,

However Ivy bridge is now apparently a big flop D= what's the world coming too =P
 
I said apparently, From what i've read the TIM is cheap and jokester has proved that without the cheap TIM/IHS he reduced temps by 11c, which is fairly significant.

If I bought something for £250 I would expect some serious overclocking ability, if it didn't perform then its faulty, And I would send it back.
 
I'm sure i read that AMD can be better bang per buck on highly threaded stuff if you're on a tight budget, once you start up the intel ladder though they pull way ahead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom