| Runescape Bits & Bytes https://www.rsbandb.com/forums/ |
|
| Intel vs. AMD https://www.rsbandb.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=81312 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Duke Juker [ June 7th, 2011, 8:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Intel vs. AMD |
Pretty straight forward. I want to know which is better overall or for specific reasons. For me, I'm a gamer, but I don't think I have major processing intensive games. Which processor is better for gaming and what would you guys recommend? Not really on a budget constraint. Just assume under $250. Also, a motherboard would be nice to recommend along with the processor. |
|
| Author: | Adbot [ June 7th, 2011, 8:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Register and login to get these in-post ads to disappear |
| Author: | Burnt Joint [ June 7th, 2011, 9:01 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Intel vs. AMD |
CPU: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115074 Quad Core i5-2400. Second gen 3.1Ghz. Mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128502 LGA1155 Z68. 4x DDR3. 3x PCI-E 2.0. $310 for both. |
|
| Author: | Shane [ June 7th, 2011, 9:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Intel vs. AMD |
I prefer Intel. Always go with Intel for raw power unless you are looking for a budget build. Intel is also good for the power per clock they use and power technology built in to scale back the CPU to conserve power. The Intel technology is just much more advanced (for now). AMD really needs to play catch up because a lack of competition is never good, for any market. Also is the $250 for both or just the CPU? |
|
| Author: | Duke Juker [ June 8th, 2011, 1:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Intel vs. AMD |
Both preferably. I'm definitely leaning towards AMD because of budget and a few other things. I don't know much about CPU's and thus wouldn't use an Intel to it's full potential anyways if that's what you are referring to. |
|
| Author: | Burnt Joint [ June 8th, 2011, 3:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Intel vs. AMD |
These are my two AMD picks. CPU 1: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103727 Quad Core, 3.4Ghz. Somewhat 'old' technology, but still good. CPU 2: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103808 Quad Core, 3.2Ghz. Again, 'old' technology, but still good. It's the step below CPU 1. Mobo: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813130275 AM3 Support, 4x DDR3, 2x PCI-E 2.0 Cheaper than Intel, but for a reason. |
|
| Author: | Pfkninenines [ June 8th, 2011, 10:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Intel vs. AMD |
I'm going to be building a ~$400 desktop later this summer, and if you're looking to save some cash and can wait a few months, do so. AMD will be coming out with their AM3+ processors late in the summer. When this happens, AMD's previous generation processors will drop in price, and Intel's Sandybridge will also drop to help keep up competition. We don't know the performance of AMD's new desktop processor offerings, but since they will be on the new (to them) 32nm technology, it's expected to offer a boost vs their older technology. It's unknown how well it will match up against Sandybridge, but it's unlikely that it will be the top of the line. If you can hold off, wait until the AM3+ processors come out. Then decide what you're willing to pay for performance wise. |
|
| Author: | Adbot [ June 8th, 2011, 10:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Register and login to get these in-post ads to disappear |
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 7 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|