AMD Processor vs Intel ones?

Is AMD Phenom X4 750 good for gaming under 1600'1200 rez or intels Corei7 ones though i have read reviews which resulted in Core ones bettering Phenom 2.your Opinions ?SalikSST

Intel is faster. CPU power does not have huge impact on the resolution that you play, GPU is more important.

Intel is faster. CPU power does not have huge impact on the resolution that you play, GPU is more important.

Silicel1

Intel are faster (all Intel generations from C2 up are faster than AMD's CPUs) but, Phenom IIs are fine for gaming.C_Rule

Phenom II Quads are great value and getting better won't make a massive difference in most games. Especially since with the money you save you could by a better GPU.

Where the CPU limmits the performance is very unusual.

Not only it's unusual, often any decent quadcore will give the amount of FPS where it can't be really called a bottleneck. (Limmiting a FPS above 45-60FPS isnt really a bottleneck)

TC: sure you havn't got it all mixed up?, the 7x0 is intels i5 quadcores and is fine with gaming.

The AMD 9xx CPU's is decent and wont really limmit any highend card in a single GPU solution, but putting more than one graphic card in a PC does put more strain on the CPU, a small OC should take care of that however.

Edit: " 't " on " can " make whole lot of difference!

intel pretty much always beats AMD in benchmarks, but where it counts (games here) once you get past the AMD phenom II x4 and x6 line, you wont notice much of an increase in frames by buying, say, a $1000 intel CPU. Any AMD x4 and X6 is plenty of power any gamer needs, and if you go dual or more GPUs, whether using intel or AMD cpus, that's where bottlenecking can hurt and overclocking becomes more needed

[QUOTE="Silicel1"]

Intel is faster. CPU power does not have huge impact on the resolution that you play, GPU is more important.

Daytona_178

which they do less and less these days.

A better graphics card is nearly always preferred to a better cpu.

intel has always been know for it's better quality. A lot of intel dual cores beat a lot of amd's quad cores for gaming. Intel also has the fastest cpu's available. Amd isn't bad though but intel is far ahead in technology when it comes to processors.

When it comes to gpu's i prefer amd most of the time (amd bought ati some time ago). Amd's gpu competitor isn't intel though it's nvidia.

intel has always been know for it's better quality. A lot of intel dual cores beat a lot of amd's quad cores for gaming. Intel also has the fastest cpu's available. Amd isn't bad though but intel is far ahead in technology when it comes to processors.

When it comes to gpu's i prefer amd most of the time (amd bought ati some time ago). Amd's gpu competitor isn't intel though it's nvidia.

evildead6789

Quality? Intel is faster but quality is definitely the wrong word to use.

Pretty much AMD was right at intel in the Q6000-q8000 days. Intel went with hyperthreading, new instruction sets and tried to legally slow down AMD move to anything. It took till last year for AMd to finally win legally most of the things intel tried to put underwraps. This is why people will finalyl get to see how good AMD can really be performance wise to intel with the new chips coming.

Quality? Intel is faster but quality is definitely the wrong word to use. jedikevin2

i said 'have been known' i wonder if amd actually has been able to implement thermal protection in their cpu's by now or do they still go up in flames if you dismount the cooler:D

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]Quality? Intel is faster but quality is definitely the wrong word to use. evildead6789

i said 'have been known' i wonder if amd actually has been able to implement thermal protection in their cpu's by now or do they still go up in flames if you dismount the cooler:D

1. Why would you be removing the cooler when the PC is running?

2. The last AMD CPU's I recall that did that are from the Athlon XP series.

I think when the bulldozer comes out Intels going to be left in the dust.

[QUOTE="evildead6789"]

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]Quality? Intel is faster but quality is definitely the wrong word to use. Tezcatlipoca666

i said 'have been known' i wonder if amd actually has been able to implement thermal protection in their cpu's by now or do they still go up in flames if you dismount the cooler:D

1. Why would you be removing the cooler when the PC is running?

2. The last AMD CPU's I recall that did that are from the Athlon XP series.

The cooler can also stop working or gather so much dust that it doesn't cool enough.

I don't know if the protection is in the cpu itself at this time, if have known they solved it with protection on the motherboard, i don't know if it's actually implemented in the cpu itself nowadays.

intel offers better preformance in non-gaming situations but generally ties with them in gaming power (until you reach their very high end stuff and next-gen stuffs, but by that point your reaching the realm of impracticality)

for gaming fps you get more fps from saving money by getting an amd cpu and spending that on a better graphic cardmucgoo

[QUOTE="mucgoo"]for gaming fps you get more fps from saving money by getting an amd cpu and spending that on a better graphic cardSalikSST

The Phenom II 955 is the best bang for the buck however the i5-2500k is also great.

Between Intel and AMD, I'd go for Intel. Though AMD is less expensive than Intel, I'd still pick Intel, for its reliability and durability. I believe intel processor would always outlive AMD processor. Just my 2 cents. mars080

I don't think that's true. I have several amd k6 2 cpu's at my work that are still running (and they run 24/7, ).I guess they are over ten years old. Well maybe you're right though that the intel would run longer but who cares after 10 years for a home pc.

[QUOTE="mars080"]Between Intel and AMD, I'd go for Intel. Though AMD is less expensive than Intel, I'd still pick Intel, for its reliability and durability. I believe intel processor would always outlive AMD processor. Just my 2 cents. evildead6789

I don't think that's true. I have several amd k6 2 cpu's at my work that are still running (and they run 24/7, ).I guess they are over ten years old. Well maybe you're right though that the intel would run longer but who cares after 10 years for a home pc.

I think when the bulldozer comes out Intels going to be left in the dust.

zaku101

[QUOTE="zaku101"]

I think when the bulldozer comes out Intels going to be left in the dust.

-CheeseEater-

[QUOTE="-CheeseEater-"][QUOTE="zaku101"]

I think when the bulldozer comes out Intels going to be left in the dust.

jedikevin2

[QUOTE="jedikevin2"]

[QUOTE="-CheeseEater-"] I hope this is somewhat correct, but I get the feeling that it might not be the case.C_Rule

AMD is slower but much better value. That's pretty much the big difference. It's most likely going to be the same way for sandybridge vs bulldozer, AMD has been too successful in that regard to give it up and try to fight intel with raw power.

The performance increase on the Intel for me is small, but the price difference is huge. Thats why I go with amd, dosnt cost me a fortune, I can spend that money on the Gpu, ram etc.

AMD Cpus are the best power for the lower price point

Intel Cpus will give you the most power, the i5 2500k is currently a steal at 225