AMD vs Intel comparison- best bang for the laptop buck ?

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by - Bobb -, Aug 24, 2006.

  1. - Bobb -

    - Bobb - Guest

    Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    reviews seem to say Intel is better ! Does someone know of a SIMPLE
    online comparison of the CPU products from a potential user viewpoint ?
    http://exactchoice.cnet.com/Type.aspx works pretty well , but doesn't
    tell me why it chose those models and if one is better than other. I'm
    not sure that those companies didn't just pay to be selected.

    Like everyone I'm looking for the best return for my money. I'm not up
    to all of the differences/ benefits of AMD X2, Intel Pentium M , Intel
    Core Duo CPUs these days and when I TRY to evaluate them (either online
    or by reading PC magazines), I'm inundated with comparisons of gaming
    speeds.Means nothing to me! For instance, I don't need to buy the
    latest/fastest CPU for my laptop - I'm gonna use it to run ... IE,
    Office and a few music, photo apps. I would like a 64 bit cpu - just to
    have the OPTION to use 64 bit OS'es. I think that I'd be better to
    upgrade to1gb or 2gb of memory rather than the "best cpu". I'm not a
    gamer so my CPU will probably be idle 98% of the time. But if I'm gonna
    get a pc that would better/ last me for a few extra years, it would be
    worth it to me to spend an extra $100, $200 now to get it. No need to
    get heavy into details, just overviews/ URLs are fine.

    Thanks again.
     
    - Bobb -, Aug 24, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. - Bobb -

    John Barnes Guest

    One thing to consider is how you will use it. Makes a difference if you
    usually have it plugged in, but want to move it from place to place, or on
    batteries. AMD until the latest chips has had the edge on power
    consumption. Intel's latest seem to have gone ahead, but AMD is quickly
    introducing an energy efficient line now. One practical consideration.


    "- Bobb -" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    > reviews seem to say Intel is better ! Does someone know of a SIMPLE
    > online comparison of the CPU products from a potential user viewpoint ?
    > http://exactchoice.cnet.com/Type.aspx works pretty well , but doesn't
    > tell me why it chose those models and if one is better than other. I'm not
    > sure that those companies didn't just pay to be selected.
    >
    > Like everyone I'm looking for the best return for my money. I'm not up to
    > all of the differences/ benefits of AMD X2, Intel Pentium M , Intel Core
    > Duo CPUs these days and when I TRY to evaluate them (either online or by
    > reading PC magazines), I'm inundated with comparisons of gaming
    > speeds.Means nothing to me! For instance, I don't need to buy the
    > latest/fastest CPU for my laptop - I'm gonna use it to run ... IE, Office
    > and a few music, photo apps. I would like a 64 bit cpu - just to have the
    > OPTION to use 64 bit OS'es. I think that I'd be better to upgrade to1gb or
    > 2gb of memory rather than the "best cpu". I'm not a gamer so my CPU will
    > probably be idle 98% of the time. But if I'm gonna get a pc that would
    > better/ last me for a few extra years, it would be worth it to me to
    > spend an extra $100, $200 now to get it. No need to get heavy into
    > details, just overviews/ URLs are fine.
    >
    > Thanks again.
    >
    >
     
    John Barnes, Aug 24, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Ignoring what either company may do in the near future, the Intel Core
    architecture is a bigger bang for the buck right now. You can't go wrong
    with either, however. Simple comparisions are seldom possible but I suggest
    that you navigate to Tom's Hardware and read the most recent reviews on the
    AMD dual-core systems and the Intel Core 2 Duo systems.

    Skip the Core Duo reviews because Core Duo is only 32bit.

    "- Bobb -" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    > reviews seem to say Intel is better ! Does someone know of a SIMPLE
    > online comparison of the CPU products from a potential user viewpoint ?
    > http://exactchoice.cnet.com/Type.aspx works pretty well , but doesn't
    > tell me why it chose those models and if one is better than other. I'm not
    > sure that those companies didn't just pay to be selected.
    >
    > Like everyone I'm looking for the best return for my money. I'm not up to
    > all of the differences/ benefits of AMD X2, Intel Pentium M , Intel Core
    > Duo CPUs these days and when I TRY to evaluate them (either online or by
    > reading PC magazines), I'm inundated with comparisons of gaming
    > speeds.Means nothing to me! For instance, I don't need to buy the
    > latest/fastest CPU for my laptop - I'm gonna use it to run ... IE, Office
    > and a few music, photo apps. I would like a 64 bit cpu - just to have the
    > OPTION to use 64 bit OS'es. I think that I'd be better to upgrade to1gb or
    > 2gb of memory rather than the "best cpu". I'm not a gamer so my CPU will
    > probably be idle 98% of the time. But if I'm gonna get a pc that would
    > better/ last me for a few extra years, it would be worth it to me to
    > spend an extra $100, $200 now to get it. No need to get heavy into
    > details, just overviews/ URLs are fine.
    >
    > Thanks again.
    >
    >
     
    Colin Barnhorst, Aug 24, 2006
    #3
  4. On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:52:01 +0100, - Bobb - <> wrote:

    > Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    > reviews seem to say Intel is better ! Does someone know of a SIMPLE
    > online comparison of the CPU products from a potential user viewpoint ?
    > http://exactchoice.cnet.com/Type.aspx works pretty well , but doesn't
    > tell me why it chose those models and if one is better than other. I'm
    > not sure that those companies didn't just pay to be selected.
    >
    > Like everyone I'm looking for the best return for my money. I'm not up
    > to all of the differences/ benefits of AMD X2, Intel Pentium M , Intel
    > Core Duo CPUs these days and when I TRY to evaluate them (either online
    > or by reading PC magazines), I'm inundated with comparisons of gaming
    > speeds.Means nothing to me! For instance, I don't need to buy the
    > latest/fastest CPU for my laptop - I'm gonna use it to run ... IE,
    > Office and a few music, photo apps. I would like a 64 bit cpu - just to
    > have the OPTION to use 64 bit OS'es. I think that I'd be better to
    > upgrade to1gb or 2gb of memory rather than the "best cpu". I'm not a
    > gamer so my CPU will probably be idle 98% of the time. But if I'm gonna
    > get a pc that would better/ last me for a few extra years, it would be
    > worth it to me to spend an extra $100, $200 now to get it. No need to
    > get heavy into details, just overviews/ URLs are fine.
    >
    > Thanks again.


    Personally, I had a AMD64 system (Winchester 3500+ )a few months ago, and
    never got any decent stability from it. It ran very hot, and was noisy.

    Sold that, and got a Intel Core 2 Duo E6600, and it's a world of
    difference. It's very quiet, runs very cool, and is stable.

    I know which side of the fence I would shop, next time..


    ---
    avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
    Virus Database (VPS): 0634-2, 08/24/2006
    Tested on: 8/24/2006 9:39:17 PM
    avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.
    http://www.avast.com
     
    Mark Gillespie, Aug 24, 2006
    #4
  5. I've got 3 AMD boxes here, including the best laptop available today, the
    Acer Ferrari, and one Intel. (Of my x64 boxes, that is. Not counting older,
    32bit, boxes.)

    Up until the latest Intel release, I'd have said AMD without a doubt. But
    the latest round of Intel Core 2 Duo releases seem to have a slight edge.
    But seriously, both are excellent and provide an awful lot of processing
    power for your buck. Choose on features, choose on comfort with the brand,
    or on any one specific thing that's important to you. Personally, for
    laptops, I'll stick with AMD because of the Ferrari. I lust after the new
    5000, but it isn't available in North America yet.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    - Bobb - wrote:
    > Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    > reviews seem to say Intel is better ! Does someone know of a SIMPLE
    > online comparison of the CPU products from a potential user viewpoint ?
    > http://exactchoice.cnet.com/Type.aspx works pretty well , but doesn't
    > tell me why it chose those models and if one is better than other. I'm
    > not sure that those companies didn't just pay to be selected.
    >
    > Like everyone I'm looking for the best return for my money. I'm not up
    > to all of the differences/ benefits of AMD X2, Intel Pentium M , Intel
    > Core Duo CPUs these days and when I TRY to evaluate them (either online
    > or by reading PC magazines), I'm inundated with comparisons of gaming
    > speeds.Means nothing to me! For instance, I don't need to buy the
    > latest/fastest CPU for my laptop - I'm gonna use it to run ... IE,
    > Office and a few music, photo apps. I would like a 64 bit cpu - just to
    > have the OPTION to use 64 bit OS'es. I think that I'd be better to
    > upgrade to1gb or 2gb of memory rather than the "best cpu". I'm not a
    > gamer so my CPU will probably be idle 98% of the time. But if I'm gonna
    > get a pc that would better/ last me for a few extra years, it would be
    > worth it to me to spend an extra $100, $200 now to get it. No need to
    > get heavy into details, just overviews/ URLs are fine.
    >
    > Thanks again.
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Aug 24, 2006
    #5
  6. - Bobb -

    Kevin B. Guest

    "- Bobb -" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    > reviews seem to say Intel is better !

    ________snip__________

    Here are my two cents: Ever since I began using (2) 64 bit AMD Opterons, I
    had no reason to look back, and now that I am using Windows XP 64bit, I no
    longer have time to lok back :)

    Me hopes this thread doesn't turn into a chip war but if it does, get an
    Opteron for the hell of it, you won't look back either, guaranteed.
     
    Kevin B., Aug 24, 2006
    #6
  7. Doubt he can run an Opteron on his laptop. ;) Or would want to.

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    Kevin B. wrote:
    > "- Bobb -" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    >> reviews seem to say Intel is better !

    > ________snip__________
    >
    > Here are my two cents: Ever since I began using (2) 64 bit AMD Opterons, I
    > had no reason to look back, and now that I am using Windows XP 64bit, I no
    > longer have time to lok back :)
    >
    > Me hopes this thread doesn't turn into a chip war but if it does, get an
    > Opteron for the hell of it, you won't look back either, guaranteed.
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Aug 24, 2006
    #7
  8. On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 22:40:21 +0100, Charlie Russel - MVP
    <> wrote:

    > I've got 3 AMD boxes here, including the best laptop available today, the
    > Acer Ferrari, and one Intel. (Of my x64 boxes, that is. Not counting
    > older,
    > 32bit, boxes.)
    >
    > Up until the latest Intel release, I'd have said AMD without a doubt. But
    > the latest round of Intel Core 2 Duo releases seem to have a slight edge.


    Slightly biased, as I have one, but I would say more than a slight edge.
    an E6600 Core 2 Duo outperforms an AMD FX62, and produces 30% less heat..
     
    Mark Gillespie, Aug 25, 2006
    #8
  9. Well, if you don't want to spend the large premium for FX chips (and the
    extra heat), then at the same price point, their pretty close, IMHO. And
    most of us can't afford the absolute top of the line chips (nor should we).

    --
    Charlie.
    http://msmvps.com/xperts64


    Mark Gillespie wrote:
    > On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 22:40:21 +0100, Charlie Russel - MVP
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> I've got 3 AMD boxes here, including the best laptop available today, the
    >> Acer Ferrari, and one Intel. (Of my x64 boxes, that is. Not counting
    >> older,
    >> 32bit, boxes.)
    >>
    >> Up until the latest Intel release, I'd have said AMD without a doubt. But
    >> the latest round of Intel Core 2 Duo releases seem to have a slight edge.

    >
    > Slightly biased, as I have one, but I would say more than a slight edge.
    > an E6600 Core 2 Duo outperforms an AMD FX62, and produces 30% less heat..
     
    Charlie Russel - MVP, Aug 25, 2006
    #9
  10. On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:46:35 +0100, Charlie Russel - MVP
    <> wrote:

    > Well, if you don't want to spend the large premium for FX chips (and the
    > extra heat), then at the same price point, their pretty close, IMHO. And
    > most of us can't afford the absolute top of the line chips (nor should
    > we).
    >



    That's the point, the E6600 outperforms the FX62 the top of the range AMD
    desktop chip, but has nowehre near the pricetag...
     
    Mark Gillespie, Aug 25, 2006
    #10
  11. Mine was about $350 for the E6600 cpu.

    "Mark Gillespie" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:p.tetumgqcj2q9yy@desktop64...
    > On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:46:35 +0100, Charlie Russel - MVP
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Well, if you don't want to spend the large premium for FX chips (and the
    >> extra heat), then at the same price point, their pretty close, IMHO. And
    >> most of us can't afford the absolute top of the line chips (nor should
    >> we).
    >>

    >
    >
    > That's the point, the E6600 outperforms the FX62 the top of the range AMD
    > desktop chip, but has nowehre near the pricetag...
    >
     
    Colin Barnhorst, Aug 25, 2006
    #11
  12. - Bobb -

    Guest

    - Bobb - wrote:
    > Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    > reviews seem to say Intel is better ! Does someone know of a SIMPLE
    > online comparison of the CPU products from a potential user viewpoint ?
    > http://exactchoice.cnet.com/Type.aspx works pretty well , but doesn't
    > tell me why it chose those models and if one is better than other. I'm
    > not sure that those companies didn't just pay to be selected.
    >
    > Like everyone I'm looking for the best return for my money. I'm not up
    > to all of the differences/ benefits of AMD X2, Intel Pentium M , Intel
    > Core Duo CPUs these days and when I TRY to evaluate them (either online
    > or by reading PC magazines), I'm inundated with comparisons of gaming
    > speeds.Means nothing to me! For instance, I don't need to buy the
    > latest/fastest CPU for my laptop - I'm gonna use it to run ... IE,
    > Office and a few music, photo apps. I would like a 64 bit cpu - just to
    > have the OPTION to use 64 bit OS'es. I think that I'd be better to
    > upgrade to1gb or 2gb of memory rather than the "best cpu". I'm not a
    > gamer so my CPU will probably be idle 98% of the time. But if I'm gonna
    > get a pc that would better/ last me for a few extra years, it would be
    > worth it to me to spend an extra $100, $200 now to get it. No need to
    > get heavy into details, just overviews/ URLs are fine.
    >
    > Thanks again.


    The AMD chips use silicon on insulator (SOI) technology. It is a more
    rugged technology that is very difficult to latch up. SOI should be
    less power, but that also depends on the geometry of the process.

    I've built a few systems with the AMD 64. It even runs well on win2k.
    It seems like mature technology to me and I doubt I'll be going back to
    Intel.
     
    , Aug 25, 2006
    #12
  13. * - Bobb -:

    > Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    > reviews seem to say Intel is better ! Does someone know of a SIMPLE
    > online comparison of the CPU products from a potential user viewpoint ?
    > http://exactchoice.cnet.com/Type.aspx works pretty well , but doesn't
    > tell me why it chose those models and if one is better than other. I'm
    > not sure that those companies didn't just pay to be selected.


    Well, of course they won't tell you ;-)

    > Like everyone I'm looking for the best return for my money. I'm not up
    > to all of the differences/ benefits of AMD X2, Intel Pentium M , Intel
    > Core Duo CPUs these days and when I TRY to evaluate them (either online
    > or by reading PC magazines), I'm inundated with comparisons of gaming
    > speeds.Means nothing to me! For instance, I don't need to buy the
    > latest/fastest CPU for my laptop - I'm gonna use it to run ... IE,
    > Office and a few music, photo apps. I would like a 64 bit cpu - just to
    > have the OPTION to use 64 bit OS'es.


    With todays notebooks limited to 4GB RAM max it doesn't make much sense...

    > I think that I'd be better to
    > upgrade to1gb or 2gb of memory rather than the "best cpu". I'm not a
    > gamer so my CPU will probably be idle 98% of the time. But if I'm gonna
    > get a pc that would better/ last me for a few extra years, it would be
    > worth it to me to spend an extra $100, $200 now to get it. No need to
    > get heavy into details, just overviews/ URLs are fine.


    Forget about the CPU. Intels Pentium-M is great as is the Core Solo/Dou
    and probably also the Core 2 Solo/Duo. AMDs Turion64 is also great but
    the available chipsets (usually something from ATI or VIA) are still not
    on par with intels mobile chipsets...

    What is much more important than the CPU is the kind of notebook you
    choose (subnotebook, widescreen notebook, desktop replacement etc) and
    that it fits to your usage profile, and what also is important is who
    made it because the manufacturer is the one that decides about build
    quality, driver/BIOS updates and service. First, you should think about
    what you want to use the notebook for, and then choose a suitable
    category. After that you have to decide what you want. There basically
    are two groups of notebooks: consumer models and business models.
    Consumer notebooks usually come with a lot of software and multimedia
    stuff (like TV tuners etc). Consumer notebooks usually also have glare
    type displays today. These displays look great in the shop but the
    downside is that these panels are basically like mirrors which reflect
    everything around you. For working in a standard office environment
    these displays are simply useless. However, they are good for certain
    tasks like picture editing if not used for long periods. Consumer
    notebooks usually are made out of cheaper plastic parts which are not
    very durable when used as a mobile device on a daily base, and the usual
    silver kind of painting shows signs of wear when used intensively. The
    support for consumer notebooks also is usually limited, with call
    centers in Asia or East Europe and repair turn around times of several
    weeks. Examples of consumer notebooks are HP Pavilion/Presario, Acer
    Travelmate, Toshiba Satellite etc...
    Business notebooks (like HPs nx-/nc-/nw-Series, IBM/Lenovo Thinkpad etc)
    usually lack the goodies of consumer devices like the ton of software,
    the TV tuner, and they usually also lack the glare type displays. The
    design is konservative and dark (which together with the much better
    material quality makes scratches very hard visible), and the service is
    usually excellent.

    Benjamin
     
    Benjamin Gawert, Aug 26, 2006
    #13
  14. - Bobb -

    Gene Guest

    Bob,

    I recently learned about http://www.xbitlabs.com/, and have started reading
    their reviews. They slant towards gamers and overclockers, and I am like
    you, but I still am learning about the different CPUs. Some of their reviews
    give charts showing ratings of a large number of CPUs in a single chart.
    Very graphic and easy to use.

    Regards,
    Gene


    "- Bobb -" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Well, I THOUGHT I was all set: I was gonna get an AMD box, but now the
    > reviews seem to say Intel is better ! Does someone know of a SIMPLE
    > online comparison of the CPU products from a potential user viewpoint ?
    > http://exactchoice.cnet.com/Type.aspx works pretty well , but doesn't
    > tell me why it chose those models and if one is better than other. I'm not
    > sure that those companies didn't just pay to be selected.
    >
    > Like everyone I'm looking for the best return for my money. I'm not up to
    > all of the differences/ benefits of AMD X2, Intel Pentium M , Intel Core
    > Duo CPUs these days and when I TRY to evaluate them (either online or by
    > reading PC magazines), I'm inundated with comparisons of gaming
    > speeds.Means nothing to me! For instance, I don't need to buy the
    > latest/fastest CPU for my laptop - I'm gonna use it to run ... IE, Office
    > and a few music, photo apps. I would like a 64 bit cpu - just to have the
    > OPTION to use 64 bit OS'es. I think that I'd be better to upgrade to1gb or
    > 2gb of memory rather than the "best cpu". I'm not a gamer so my CPU will
    > probably be idle 98% of the time. But if I'm gonna get a pc that would
    > better/ last me for a few extra years, it would be worth it to me to
    > spend an extra $100, $200 now to get it. No need to get heavy into
    > details, just overviews/ URLs are fine.
    >
    > Thanks again.
    >
    >
     
    Gene, Aug 27, 2006
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jon Wordsworth
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    420
    Jon Wordsworth
    Aug 6, 2003
  2. Best bang for ya buck ?

    , Sep 12, 2005, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    414
  3. Jack Dotson

    Best bang for the buck?

    Jack Dotson, Dec 19, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    468
  4. Arawak
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    442
    phrogee
    Dec 2, 2005
  5. Arawak
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    416
    Arawak
    Mar 4, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page