Voting question Intel vs. AMD cost

jasong · 2015-02-02, 02:05

As you probably realize, a lot of people are very opinionated about their computer choices. Most people choose Intel because they think it's the best, some people think AMD is better because it's good value and then there's a third category(not the last category) that thinks AMD is good enough and only ignoramuses and vain people buy Intel. And I guess the most obvious 4th category would be for people that go for certain things like AMD's virtual super resolution to avoid jaggies.

So I'm curious about people's opinion about Intel and AMD when it comes to "superusers."

LaurV · 2015-02-02, 03:14

As plain as the survey is, intel is better. Of course, there is a lot of talking. Is a ferrari faster than a tata? (this is not intended to be a proportional comparison, just to show that without other criteria, like price, gasoline consumption, parts availability, etc, the answer means nothing)

BTW: Something's wrong with the percentages, right now there are 3 votes for intel and 1 for amd, and it says 100% and 33%, shouldn't be 75% and 25%???

axn · 2015-02-02, 04:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurV

BTW: Something's wrong with the percentages, right now there are 3 votes for intel and 1 for amd, and it says 100% and 33%, shouldn't be 75% and 25%???

You can select multiple options. Right now, 4 people have voted and all 4 have selected "intel is better" (i.e. 100%). Some have chosen other option as well.

Batalov · 2015-02-02, 04:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurV

BTW: Something's wrong with the percentages, right now there are 3 votes for intel and 1 for amd, and it says 100% and 33%, shouldn't be 75% and 25%???

It is multiple choice poll.
If everyone voted all the options, then everything will be at 100%, and the sum ... who cares about the sum!

kladner · 2015-02-02, 04:07

I have run AMD for a long time, going back to the original in-a-socket-not-a-slot Athlon. The first Athlon64 kicked Intel ass. They haven't kept up, though. To me, things really started slipping when they bought ATI. They over extended, and it cut into R&D. I somewhat regret that the last time I was changing things around I did not switch to Intel. On the other hand, I like for there to be more than one manufacturer, even if one is a distant second

chappy · 2015-02-02, 13:23

I agree with Kladner in that I want there to be more than one manufacturer (and more than one process) to drive competition and improvement.

However, I have been disappointed everytime that I buy an AMD. My Intel based laptop died recently while I was on vacation, so I resurrected a slightly older amd based laptop which has only served to remind me why I upgraded so soon the last time.

The energy use over the lifespan is better for intels right? So some of the cost is recouped there. But, less stress and frustration is worth it for me.

In desktops it has been a while since I've veered from Intel. But, the near indestructibility of the i7-9xx series chips and the i7-3600 that I run at home as well as the xeons at work (which run constantly in brutally hot conditions) is impressive. My i5-3570k was more finicky--but I played with the OC some without really knowing what I am doing.

I've been holding off getting the newer chips because the old ones just keep running.

Mark Rose · 2015-02-02, 15:54

For what it's worth, I run an Athlon II X4 640 (4 cores at 3.0 GHz, 512 KB L2 each) at home. I bought that CPU for $99 4 years ago. It's basically a Phenom II without the L3 cache. I wish it had the AES-NI instruction set, but otherwise it still does everything I need.

If I were buying new now, I'd probably go with an i5 for the better power efficiency and best single thread performance. I might do that to play X-plane, which while multithreaded, demands high single threaded performance (also one of the few games that will make a GTX 980 cry).

henryzz · 2015-02-02, 19:23

We run an athlon II x4 and a Q6600 here and they run fine still. The only real problem is lack of memory on the ddr2 Q6600. 4Gb is barely enough these days.

View Poll Results: Intel vs. AMD
Intel is better.	33	82.50%
AMD is better, and also tends to be cheaper	3	7.50%
AMD is better value, only idiots and vain people spend the extra on Intel	2	5.00%
AMD used to be awesome, now not so much	20	50.00%
My parents/brother/best friend/store worker told me to buy this, I have no clue why	2	5.00%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll

2015-02-02, 02:05	#1
jasong "Jason Goatcher" Mar 2005 3·7·167 Posts	Voting question Intel vs. AMD cost As you probably realize, a lot of people are very opinionated about their computer choices. Most people choose Intel because they think it's the best, some people think AMD is better because it's good value and then there's a third category(not the last category) that thinks AMD is good enough and only ignoramuses and vain people buy Intel. And I guess the most obvious 4th category would be for people that go for certain things like AMD's virtual super resolution to avoid jaggies. So I'm curious about people's opinion about Intel and AMD when it comes to "superusers."

2015-02-02, 03:14	#2
LaurV Romulan Interpreter Jun 2011 Thailand 2·5·31² Posts	As plain as the survey is, intel is better. Of course, there is a lot of talking. Is a ferrari faster than a tata? (this is not intended to be a proportional comparison, just to show that without other criteria, like price, gasoline consumption, parts availability, etc, the answer means nothing) BTW: Something's wrong with the percentages, right now there are 3 votes for intel and 1 for amd, and it says 100% and 33%, shouldn't be 75% and 25%??? Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2015-02-02 at 03:18

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Braswell: Low power, low cost mprime?	Mark Rose	Hardware	9	2015-11-26 22:23
I need a cost estimate for some data.	Kathegetes	Data	40	2014-07-28 18:49
Cost to compute prime	Unregistered	Information & Answers	30	2013-12-18 03:34
New report: Cost per Factor Found...	chalsall	GPU to 72	14	2011-12-09 16:54
Electronic voting fraud vs. the old-fashioned type	cheesehead	Soap Box	22	2011-10-26 19:50

2015-02-02, 04:07	#5
kladner "Kieren" Jul 2011 In My Own Galaxy! 2×3×1,693 Posts	I have run AMD for a long time, going back to the original in-a-socket-not-a-slot Athlon. The first Athlon64 kicked Intel ass. They haven't kept up, though. To me, things really started slipping when they bought ATI. They over extended, and it cut into R&D. I somewhat regret that the last time I was changing things around I did not switch to Intel. On the other hand, I like for there to be more than one manufacturer, even if one is a distant second

2015-02-02, 13:23	#6
chappy "Jeff" Feb 2012 St. Louis, Missouri, USA 13×89 Posts	I agree with Kladner in that I want there to be more than one manufacturer (and more than one process) to drive competition and improvement. However, I have been disappointed everytime that I buy an AMD. My Intel based laptop died recently while I was on vacation, so I resurrected a slightly older amd based laptop which has only served to remind me why I upgraded so soon the last time. The energy use over the lifespan is better for intels right? So some of the cost is recouped there. But, less stress and frustration is worth it for me. In desktops it has been a while since I've veered from Intel. But, the near indestructibility of the i7-9xx series chips and the i7-3600 that I run at home as well as the xeons at work (which run constantly in brutally hot conditions) is impressive. My i5-3570k was more finicky--but I played with the OC some without really knowing what I am doing. I've been holding off getting the newer chips because the old ones just keep running.

2015-02-02, 15:54	#7
Mark Rose "/X\(‘-‘)/X\" Jan 2013 101101110100₂ Posts	For what it's worth, I run an Athlon II X4 640 (4 cores at 3.0 GHz, 512 KB L2 each) at home. I bought that CPU for $99 4 years ago. It's basically a Phenom II without the L3 cache. I wish it had the AES-NI instruction set, but otherwise it still does everything I need. If I were buying new now, I'd probably go with an i5 for the better power efficiency and best single thread performance. I might do that to play X-plane, which while multithreaded, demands high single threaded performance (also one of the few games that will make a GTX 980 cry).

2015-02-02, 19:23	#8
henryzz Just call me Henry "David" Sep 2007 Cambridge (GMT/BST) 2³×3×5×7² Posts	We run an athlon II x4 and a Q6600 here and they run fine still. The only real problem is lack of memory on the ddr2 Q6600. 4Gb is barely enough these days.