Ok, i'm building a new computer and i've used both P3/4 and AMD (can't remember it's like 1.6).

Now i do prefer my Pentiums, but i was wondering what do you all use? What do you think i should buy? Please note, i already have a 3.6Ghz P4 with HT.

Thanks

James

Personally, AMD is the best. I just find intel processors not to be as powerful.
If you do go with amd, be sure to get the 64-bit x2 (dual-core)

I used AMD

And what's that adam? I'm not to good when it comes to AMD's.

Intel does it as well, I think.
64 bit means twice the amount of calculations per second compared to the current 32 bit.
Dual core means that you basically have two processors in one.

Pentium has been good to me on all my PC's

If your using your PC for gaming get AMD then again our other PC is strictly gaming and Pentium does the job well.

Not going into the technical side of this but theres enough info on the web about the comparisons of both.

AMD all the way for 6 years now

Faken

To be honest, my only problem with AMD's is their heat problem. I've know from my old AMD that they over-heated to fast. But it's all changing.

Just added a poll.

Strange, im using a AMD64 3200+ 2.2GHz and it idles at about 35* C (with stock heatsink + fan)

Beside from that, i prefer AMD over intel because:

-Cheaper
-Doesnt have to clock as fast (cooler)
-Shorter pipelines
-More overclocking friendly

Ive been using AMD for 5 years now, and I have AMD processors in all 3 of my computers now. I do some gaming, but when I was into it hard core, my AMD's out did any pentium processor I had. But its up to you. AMD is the way to go if your building a gaming computer.

Good Luck in choosing one.

Best Regards,

Jason

sorry to jump into a strictly AMD croud so far, but Intel all the way for me..

AMD are unrealiable and generally overheat very easily (i can run my intel with 3 fans including the cpu fan with no problems, i had an AMD of 1.7ghz with 5.. and it blew up)

64bit shouldn't even come into the equation as theres no proven benefit of having 64bit on your computer, or either rendering or gaming.. (I think it was a 1% benefit on last benchmarks i saw a week or two ago..)

AMD are for overclockers who want Intel.. Intels are for people who want a proper processor out the box..

I have a 3Ghz Intel Processor and it idles at about 32 C. I haven't added any special fans or anything.
I'd go with Intel because that's just what I've always used. I have used AMD before, but I just find Intel to be a bit more reliable.

I have both Intel and AMD processors. I have AMD 64 3200+ installed on my own personal machine, and Intel Pentium 4 Dual 3.2Ghz on the Gaming machine. Personally, if I wanted a gaming machine I would go with Intel, and if you already have a spare Intel Processor I see no reason for you to purchase an AMD Processor unless you can easily afford one.

my AMD processor averages around 50C -- yes.

True, its not much help currently, but that will greatly change after the release of Microsoft's next-generation operating sysyem: Vistas. Hopefully Adobe will be quick to release a 64 bit photoshop.

Just remember, processors are expensive, buy one which you will be comfortable with for a while. AND GET IT LIQUID COOLED.

AMD ARENT unreliable but neither are Intel. Intels sometimes overheat (its happened to me on this PC a few times on a hot day and the PC just turns itself off!). AMDs are very reliable, i've had one in my old PC since 2002. Its 1.2ghz AMD Athlon XP. Its ran fine for 3 and half years. Has never overheated and copes fine with most tasks. It just goes slower with more loads, it doesnt crash.

According to a indepth processor review I read a few months ago AMD Athlon 64bit are the best for everything apart from video editing and even then theyre only a little slower than the P4. So if your a person who does lots of different things like me go for an AMD64. If your main thing to do is video editing then us a high spec P4. Bare in mind that a 2ghz AMD 64 is any match to a 3GHZ P4.

Also, pentiums tend to overheat more often. I have a P4 2.93GHZ on this pc and my 1.2ghz athlon on the other. The other PC was rendering something (that PC has more ram) and I was on this PC with photoshop, Firefox, MSN, Dreamweaver open just doing normal tasks, nothing strenious, this P4 pc overheated on this hot day, not doing anything intensive, while the AMD was working its butt off in the same heat and carried on going. I realise this isnt exactly a fare test considering the much lower speed of the AMD but the P4 wasnt running anything intensive and the AMD was which kinda evens it out.

OK, theres my rant over with, I havent read any of my own post so theres bound to be mistakes!

-Adrian

i have an intel and my bro has an amd.. we have the same ghzs that each company says the chip has but his runs much faster and cooler.. it also handles having big things dumped on it much better

The amd dual core are very expensive, i just ordered the athlon 64 3700 in socket 939 version which i found expensive and the dual core is around £300

a big thing i think needs to be said here, is that AMD sell 2.2ghz processors overclocked to 2.9ghz.. and people still buy them

intel sell 2.9ghz processor straight in the box, without overclocking needed to get a half decent processor.. although you could overclock that to around 3.6-3.7ghz

Hmmm still don't know which one to buy o.O price isn't a problem on it at all, and i don't know too much about AMD's as i do Intels =\

Oh and i'll be using my computer for: Video editing, Programming, Graphics, Rendering, Gaming, Web Design and possibly music creation.

I had a 330MHz Intel processor, and it blew my PC up faster than someone wearing a 'I love Bush' t-shirt in Iraq. I had a heatsink, and two fans. But, that was in the times of 3gig Hard drives, and 26 MB of RAM.

I think everyones blown up a processor like that o.O it's funny at college when you try and do it on purpose

have to agree with Jay, AMD seems good enough to with new features but when it comes to use it, Intel is always getting much better results.

I always got Intel processors and always got excellent performances.

For editing, rendering and programming, Intel will give you better results.

P3n71uM 2 R00Oo0Lz!!!!!!!!!111~
299MHz here, ready to go, lol. Oh wait, maybe that makes it a pentium 1, even .

come on guys dont suggest crap like dual cores to this guy... Do your research... A Amd 64 4000 socket p39 is as good as a 1200 dollar dual core...

Dual cores are fatally flawwed

so yea save your money and just get maybe a asus a8n sli deluxe board and a 4000 and your good to go

AMD all the way. If you're going to do gaming, your going to need an AMD. I've never had the pain of using an Intel Processor . No offense to Itel supporters, I just like AMD better.

Go for an Intel.....intel chips are more for power users, amd for gaming.

Well, I'm am going to say go with AMD. Now I see that some people say the AMD chips have a slower clock speed than the Intel P4's do, but there is a reason why they are all called 3000+, 4000+, etc. The rason for this is that the chips run just as fast as an intell of that speed. So and AMD Athlon 64 3800+ will run as fast as an Intel Pentium 4 3.8 ghz processor even though its clock speed is only 2.4 ghz the VERY high Front Side Bus speed makes it just as fast. FSB is everybit as important if not more than the clock speed of a chip. This also means that the chips have room to OC if needed or wanted.

Read this too:

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleID=1194
A lot of this is old and doesn't apply anymore...such as the cooling thing.

Oh and don't get a dual core...yet. They have not yet "unlocked" their full potential. No games or programs that are out fully utilize the dual cores so right not its not worth it. Go with a 4000+ Athlon 64.

Hmm i got a pentium 4 and ive never blown one processor?

Pentium is good for me...



Comment removed by Jaymz. Pm'ing member.

AMD ever since i got into building computers 7 years ago!

im using a AMD for gaming

Just thought to add with I have learned, The new Intel chips run Hoter than the AMD ones and I have alwas found my AMD processor's faster/Less Stalling between process's than Intel ones.

OK from every post in this thread people dont hear the computer world news.

A few years back AMD and Intel were at war with who could make the best processor with the highest gHz rating. Well AMD got their act together and discided we can make a MUCH stabler processor with lower gHz rating and it would still be faster than Intel.

So pretty much all those little Intel 3.6gHz BS processors, a AMD2,200 could hang with it.

If you want good realiability go AMD, If you want to brag about i have the highest gHz rating go with Intel.

I have 2 AMD computers both are great not gave me problems other that this shitty Windows operating system being cheap. But i do own 2 Intel systems that are both laptops Same problem with the Windows. So either way you could get the best hardware but it all comes to the OS and how stable it is.

AMD all the way. I'm a hardcore gamer so, well, there you go . Also, if your planning on doing lots of multitasking, you'll want 64-bit, 64-bit processors can process more calculation every second, which means you'll be able to run more programs all at once without the risk of freezing up. Then again, I have an Intel Pentium 4 running at 2.66 GHz so I haven't joined the 64-bit processor revolution yet . Also in games like Counter-Strike: Source, its usually the CPU that determines your FPS in-game, not your VGA card. If your planning on doing serious multitasking, I suggest you go dual-core, although the price may be a bit steep. I'm not sure about Intel's dual-core systems so just go with the Athlon X2. If you're doing gaming, and your a gamer, get at least an AMD Athlon 64 3500+. I've got my eyes on the 4400+ X2 . LOL .

Cheers.