# AMD vs Intel - thoughts, preferences, opinions...



## Culhwch (Jun 17, 2011)

So some months ago, as I mentioned on these boards, my wife's PC kicked the bucket. I finally got around to fixing it this week - by canabalising my PC. I donated my motherboard, CPU and PSU, as it was proving too difficult to find a socket 775/DDR2 motherboard/CPU combo at a good price, and stepping up to the low-end i3/i5 motherboards and CPUs didn't seem cost-effective either. As I was planning on upgrading my rig in the next twelve months anyway, this seemed like the best solution.

So now that I'm rebuilding my PC pretty much from scratch (I have a case and a video card, though I might get a new video card too....) I'm looking for opinions on AMD processors versus Intel processors. My understanding is that the AMDs generally represent better value for money, but the Intels are more reliable. Is this the case? What is everyone's experience and thoughts?


----------



## Silvio dante (Jul 14, 2011)

Sorry, I'm not techncally savvy enough to give you a response. But I do have an Intel i5 processor in my Acer laptop and it seems to be very proficient...


----------



## Erin99 (Jul 14, 2011)

It depends on what you want the machine for. When I was feeling in a less-buildy mood, I bought myself a shockingly cheap AMD quad-core machine and only added my own graphics card. It's a bit of an overkill for my needs (I don't game, don't render, etc), but the price was just too good to pass up, and I was desperately needing a new, reliable machine.

I am _very_ happy with it, and I highly recommend AMDs for people who don't need the added label of the "Intel" brand and want a good spec at a cheap price. Seph has played FM 2011 on it, and it didn't run any differently than his Intel machine.

However, if you want the cutting-edge, super fast, OMG-I-only-just-thought-about-loading-up-[insert program name]-and-it's-already-open(!!!) type of machine, i7s are the way to go. As a surprise I'm building an i7 machine for Seph, as a congratulations present for when he passes this intensive summer school course he's doing now (and doing extremely well on) and goes into a 3+-year course at uni. (He won't read this, cos his workload is terrible.)

His machine now isn't always reliable, so I want him to have one that is. He also LOVES the thought of an i7 and will be the one who actually makes more use of the tremendous processing power. I've saved up and bought all the parts separately, since it saves a bucketload (spec: 8GB DDR3, but can go up to 24!!! ; i7 950; Arctic Cooling Freezer 13; Lightscribe DVD drive; 500GB HD; USB 3.0; SLI/Crossfire capable; RAID capable; triple-channel memory capable, though I'm only running it in dual mode right now; 700w PSU; Windows 7 64-bit (naturally!); etc.), and now it's up and running, it amazes me with its speed. And the CPU widget I have on the desktop shows EIGHT(!!!!!!) cores! I cannot recommend it enough. It's impressive and quiet, and with the £20 cooler instead of the stock Intel one, the CPU runs at around 30-40 degrees.

The build will have his HDs and graphics card added when I give him the machine, so it will be even better. The board I bought was the Asus P6X58D-E, and is decent for the price. It lacks an ESATA port, but you can add that on with a PCI-E x1 card, or a PCI.

Let us know what you pick(ed)!


----------



## biodroid (Jul 14, 2011)

For gaming AMD is cheaper and runs cooler. Just buy a PS3 for games, if it's for business or work then I guess Intel, but it is more pricey.


----------



## Chaoticheart (Jul 14, 2011)

For high-end gaming I prefer Intel. In my experience they last longer in general, and, when overclocking, can take a lot more punishment than an AMD processor.


----------



## Lenny (Jul 14, 2011)

My current machine has an Intel processor from the previous Penryn family and it runs like a dream - I've thrashed it quite a lot, had it running very hot and I've even had it maxed out for a week or so without break and it keeps going.

My previous machine had an AMD processor and I had no end of problems with it (not all attributed to the processor, I must admit, but a few were). As a result, I've soured towards AMD. However, in the spirit of impartiality, whilst I'm never going to buy myself another AMD processor, they do own the lower- to mid-range market, with cheap processors that give more bang for buck than the Intel offering.

In short, my experience matches Chaotiheart's - I've found that Intel processors (mine and friends) can take a lot more stress and punishment than AMD processors (a few years back, it was generally thought that AMD processors were manufactured and clocked down by something like 20%, whilst Intel processors were clocked down closer to 50% or 60%. As a result, Intel processors could handle stress, and usage above their spec, a lot better than their AMD counterparts).

---

Leish - Seph is an incredibly lucky fella!! Could I be cheeky and ask for pictures (when you've officially unveiled it for him, of course)? The next best thing to having your own is salivating to others', after all.


----------



## Erin99 (Jul 14, 2011)

Heh, of course, Len. ;p I'm already salivating over it.  I shall wait until it's set up on his desk before I take pics, then - it will look awesome in place! I shall post pics in about a week and half's time.


----------



## paranoid marvin (Jul 14, 2011)

I've had both and tbh there's really not much noticable difference , but if I had to choose and price wasn't a factor then Intel is the way i'd go. Chip names are very confusing these days, never used to be so confusing!


----------



## Culhwch (Jul 15, 2011)

The build is on the backburner at the moment. I was leaning towards AMD for the price, but now I'm not so sure. The i7s are out of my price range, but I was looking at some of the lower-end i5s. 

Besides the usual office applications, my main uses are gaming and photo-editing, so I do want something with enough grunt to deal with those - especially the latter. Will do some more research...


----------



## Tillane (Jul 15, 2011)

I know I'm basically confirming what's already gone before, but I'll say this: i7 if you're a gamer or programmer (unlike me), AMD if you ain't.


----------



## willwallace (Aug 14, 2011)

If your a gamer, what you need is a good video card, the processor doesn't much matter.  I have a 2.2ghz AMD quad core, and it had problems with games slowing down,  had to use lower settings, etc.  Dropped in a Radeon 5770 card, and now it can play anything out there, full settings, at high frame rates.  So the processor isn't as important as the card.  BTW, I've used only AMD for about 12 years, never had a problem yet.


----------



## Wybren (Aug 14, 2011)

We upgraded in April and have an i5 quad core, with a Nvidia 560 graphics card. It definitely has enough grunt for gaming, photo editing and rendering, and we got it for well under $1000. When your researching http://www.overclockers.com.au/ is a handy tool. Oh and don't forget about MSY at Brendale for prices, there service and knowledge is pretty average, but the prices are good.

Loopy, That is an awesome gift for Seph, if that doesn't get you best girlfriend in the world ever status, I dunno what will  I just told Matt the spec's and he is very impressed.


----------



## Culhwch (Sep 28, 2011)

Wow, it's been a long time since I started researching this and then did nothing about it! But my ultra-slow six year old laptop is driving me crazy, so I've gotten back in gear.

I'm fairly set on the Intel i5 2500k processor, and will probably go for the Gigabyte GA-Z68XP-UD3 motherboard. Need to nail down what RAM I'm going to go for, and the hard drive situation.

I've been reading a bit about SSDs, and in particular using small capacity drives to install the OS and some key programs, and then using a larger HDD for storage and installation of other programs. Does anyone do this, and if so do you recommend it? The SSDs are fairly prohibitively priced (for me), although the smaller drives aren't too bad - I've found a 60GB OCZ drive for about eighty. Considering I was looking at a 2TB HDD drive for less than that, I don't know if it is worth it...


----------



## TheTomG (Sep 28, 2011)

Not got an SSD but heard that use of them is awesome - install the OS on it, and a few core programs that would benefit from being on solid state, and the speed benefit is significant when starting up the OS and app (eg I know some folks who do it with Photoshop)

If you do that and install other less essential apps to regular drives, it can be price effective, can let you save on spending the money for a large SSD that could handle all your software!

Let us know what route you go!


----------



## Deathpool (Oct 30, 2011)

Leisha said:


> It depends on what you want the machine for. When I was feeling in a less-buildy mood, I bought myself a shockingly cheap AMD quad-core machine and only added my own graphics card. It's a bit of an overkill for my needs (I don't game, don't render, etc), but the price was just too good to pass up, and I was desperately needing a new, reliable machine.
> 
> I am _very_ happy with it, and I highly recommend AMDs for people who don't need the added label of the "Intel" brand and want a good spec at a cheap price. Seph has played FM 2011 on it, and it didn't run any differently than his Intel machine.
> 
> ...


 
Your computer doesn't have ram and a harddrive? Well I thought the earliest computers lacked a harddrive, but anyway.


----------

