• 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.

real world difference - amd vs intel?

Hamster

Hamster

Hamster

Soldato
Joined
25 Oct 2002
Posts
5,648
Location
location: location
Not a fanboy thread!
I've got an opty 165 at the moment running at 2.85Ghz. If i went for a conroe 6600 and ran it at the same clock speeds but with decent 6400 ram and something like a ds3 motherboard, where and when would i notice any differences in speed between the two?
I know that it would depend on the way in which i use my pc but for simplicity sake let's say i use it for 'a bit of everything.'

m
 
Last edited:
All depends on usage, Tbh i don't expect a diff in normall usage ( a little bit of gaming, occasional photoshop, browsing, mail), however you will definatly notice difference in stuff like unpacking heavily compressed files, decrypting/encrypting files, a lot of photo or video editing, sound editing and heavy gaming with games that have a lot of physics turned to the maximum, one game (fsx) will definatly give you a boost that is visible without a fps counter...
 
my 3ghz opteron 148 encoded lame mp3 at ~17x. with the same settings, my e6600 @ 3.2ghz does it at just over 30x.....on each core. encoding video is a similar story. in gaming, its not so obvious unless you have a high end card which is cpu limited.


oh and windows in general just doesnt stutter anymore when doing a few things at once, task switching ect.
 
intels are crap, thats why im going to sell mine ? And yes I've heard it before why would you wanna sell a decent chip, im fed up with it !

Stick with your amd mate, your not gonna gain much. But mind you this thread might get deleted as its going against the Grain. :D
 
dark4orz said:
intels are crap, thats why im going to sell mine ? And yes I've heard it before why would you wanna sell a decent chip, im fed up with it !

Stick with your amd mate, your not gonna gain much. But mind you this thread might get deleted as its going against the Grain. :D
Click to expand...

maybe tell use why intels are crap... why are you fedup with it?
 
Asrock ain't entirely crap... slightly on the dodgy side and not the best performance but they do a good job of blending different generations of technology...
 
dark4orz said:
intels are crap, thats why im going to sell mine ? And yes I've heard it before why would you wanna sell a decent chip, im fed up with it !

Stick with your amd mate, your not gonna gain much. But mind you this thread might get deleted as its going against the Grain. :D
Click to expand...


I'll have your carp 6600

email in trust! :D
 
I can go one better and swap it for a supreme AMD goodness Athlon 64 3000+ I guarantee you will notice the performance difference! :D
 
Marmoset said:
Not a fanboy thread!
I've got an opty 165 at the moment running at 2.85Ghz. If i went for a conroe 6600 and ran it at the same clock speeds but with decent 6400 ram and something like a ds3 motherboard, where and when would i notice any differences in speed between the two?
I know that it would depend on the way in which i use my pc but for simplicity sake let's say i use it for 'a bit of everything.'

m
Click to expand...

I have an Opty 170 at the moment running at 2.67GHz - how did you get your 165 to run at 2.85GHz? What settings did you use i.e. FSB/HTT speed, multiplier, memory timings etc?

Going to donate my setup - Opty 170, Asus A8R32MVP mobo and Corsair PC4400 RAM to work and get myself a Core 2 Duo E6600 instead. You really do notice the difference in games by as much as 15fps!

A friend of mine has the E6600 which is oc'd to 3GHz on air with no problems whatsoever, completely stable! Clock for clock the Intel does more work than the AMD so at these speeds the performance difference is quite big.

In normal desktop use, I wouldn't say you could notice that much difference but games is where the performance margin is at. Trust me, go for the E6600!
 
james.miller said:
my 3ghz opteron 148 encoded lame mp3 at ~17x. with the same settings, my e6600 @ 3.2ghz does it at just over 30x.....on each core. encoding video is a similar story. in gaming, its not so obvious unless you have a high end card which is cpu limited.


oh and windows in general just doesnt stutter anymore when doing a few things at once, task switching ect.
Click to expand...

Nice fair comparison there then... a single core opty vs a dual core e6600.
 
yes because i had an opteron and i upgraded to the dual core e6600. yes that entitles me to make a direct comparison betwen the two. whats your problems with that?
 
james.miller said:
yes because i had an opteron and i upgraded to the dual core e6600. yes that entitles me to make a direct comparison betwen the two. whats your problems with that?
Click to expand...

What I was getting at was...

james.miller said:
oh and windows in general just doesnt stutter anymore when doing a few things at once, task switching ect.
Click to expand...

..is due to the upgrade to dual core generally regardless of CPU manufacturer.
 
sniper007 said:
What I was getting at was...



..is due to the upgrade to dual core generally regardless of CPU manufacturer.
Click to expand...

I agree - it isn't a fair comparison as a dual-core CPU will always perform better than a single core in general use no matter how good the architecture may be on a single core be it from Intel OR AMD.

The big difference is in how the two dual-core CPUs work. The Intel Core 2 Duo chips do more work per clock cycle than the Opty or A64 Dual-Core chips and therefore are more comparable in terms of performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom