Compare AMD and Intel Processors?
406836
AMD is always cheaper then INTEL. AMD had heat sink problem but they have resolved it now. AMD gives very good results while playing games with high graphics. AMD 64 and all are much more advanced then intel counter parts. I would always go for AMD.
778031
Intel's Core 2's are the undisputed kings of processors at the moment.  even the AMD guys have had to admit that the new Intel chips are far superior.  the larger cache memory is important, but you should also know that the Intels are 64-bit processors as well, so they are both Windows Vista-ready.
234913
I would recommend an AMD processor.
309548
the amd 3500. It's like an intel 3.5 gh
565901
if you want to use it for doing fast programming or heavy proccesing INTEL® is the best, but if you want to do graphical jobs or heavy games or normal use AMD® is the best.AMD uses crystal® technology which i love it!! but if you give it hard work for long time the crystals start to burn and you will burn your CPU!!!\nINTEL® uses cabon™ technology which is not bad but if you work on TOO fast and HEAVY proccesing the carbon starts to warm and reduces the CPU REAL time\none more wrong thing the others said is that ANY CPU's clock is standard and there is no diffrence between them(in same clock) the total job is sensible after a full proccesing!!
481956
that's the test report Pentium Extreme Edition 955 versus Athlon 64 FX-60\nThe conclusion in one phrase: the test results make it clear, however, that Intel probably won't be able to catch up with AMD using processors based on the Netburst microarchitecture.\n\nhttp://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/fx60-vs-955xe/index.x?pg=1
142128
They are both the same for the most part. Its the technical details that most end users really need not worry about. From what was taught in one of the classes I took ("Intro to Computer Architecture") I could infer the difference between the two in a very simple way. Consider two guys eating the same amount of ice cream from a similar bowl. One has a small spoon, the other has a slightly bigger spoon. If they both had to finish the ice cream in the same amount of time, the guy with the bigger spoon will obviously take less number of dips per second compared to the one with the smaller spoon. In the end, they get the job done just as quickly. Now, the information your computer processes here is the ice cream, the guy with the smaller spoon is Intel and AMD is the one with the bigger spoon. So, if you notice AMD processors outrun Intel processors if you compare one of each with the same clock speeds(nothing but the giga hertz or GHz tat u hear about a lot of times) which incidentally are the numbers Intel brags about to fool ignorant users. Clock speed doesnt mean as much as Intel portrays it to be. As of price, its just a marketing strategy each of them have. Typically, AMD has been cheaper and if you are looking for more performance per dollar, AMD is the way to go.
809604
AMD is really good for gaming and videos, Intel is better for programs and such. I'd prefer AMD becuase it more faster in my opinion.
639758
the amd and Intel are like Nike and Reebok, they just are the two major processors that everyone knows, basics are that amd did surpass Intel for a time but Intel is now making a comeback, the Pentium4 is better but that will depend on the processor speed, at this time you would want something 2.5 GHz and up.  if you want a better amd i would go with the amd 64 (x)2 which is two processors that work together as one.  it is usually 2.0 to 2.4 and they work as fast and a 4.0 GHz.
327195
AMD has the best processors these days. Go with an AMD FX or X2 processor. Many people prefer Intel because they are familiar with it and so they have brand loyalty, but the latest Intel models are really getting crushed by AMD for gaming. AMD may show a slower clock speed than the Intel chips, but they still end up faster for a number or reasons. First of all, the dual cores (in the X2's and even numbered FX's) talk directly to each other, but on the dual core Intels, the data has to leave the processor to go to the other core, I believe through the North Bridge, which slows it down comsiderably, and kind of defeats the purpose. Also, the new Athlon chips have a dedicated memory bus, which means that they communicate with the computer's RAM on one line and the rest of the computer on another, rather than having all communication jammed into a single bus, like with Intel. On a side note, as it doesn't deal with gaming but should still be noted, Athlon has adopted Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP) which is a processor-level virus blocker. Intel has plans to use this in the future, but Athlon has it now.\nAlso, if you plan to build a good gaming rig, you should know that athlon and Nvidia fit together like a glove. Athlons also tend to run cooler than Intels as well as being more stable.\nIf you have plenty of cash, and are building a system, I'd recommend an ASUS A8N32-Deluxe Motherboard, and Athlon AMD FX-60 Processor, dual Nvidia GeForce 7900 GTX's from BFG, and 4GB or Corsair memory. Then add a pair of 300GB SATA hard drives in RAID setup, a Thermaltake 735 water-cooling system with flow monitor and temp. indicator, a HardCano 13 fan controller and card reader, 2 lightscribe DVD+-R drives, a soundblaster X-Fi Fatal1ty, and (once it's available) an AGEIA PhysX physics processor card. Put all of this into a Thermaltake Armor or Kandalf with the optional side panel fan, and then add in the thermaltake cupholder and car cigarette-lighter-style plug just for the heck of it. (and if you're really loaded, buy me a matching set, as well) The slightly more budget model (although still not cheap) would be the same motherboard, an Athlon AMD 4200+ or 4400+, dual 7800 or 7900 GT's and 2GB or RAM, along with whatever accessories you could afford. \n\nTrust me, AMD is the way to go. I just did a lot of research to upgrade my system, and everything I found showed AMD kicking Intel's @$$.
624456
More directly.\n\nhttp://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu.html\n\nTo save you some time I would say Athlons are for the most part are a better CPU. It is a much more efficent and effective CPU with low energy consumption/heat dissipation, high preformance per watt ratings, nativley desined for dual core and 64bit capacities, hypertransport bus technology. The pentium 4 has been a dog from conception, and the netburst technology from which its based is on its way out. Its in fact intel thats playing catch up with athlon.
1047629
I'd say it depends on what you need to do.  BUT, I prefer Intel processors for laptops.  Someone said that AMD processors run hotter than Intel, they do.  And AMD processors are not as power efficient as Intel when it comes to mobile processors.  That being said, AMD has a dual core 64-bit Turion processor for laptops.  This means you can run 64-bit applications but note that there aren't many, save for Windows x64 and some versions of Linux.  That being said, many programs are not supported under 64-bit environments, those that use 16-bit installers for example.  Most computers with 64-bit processors just come with Windows XP home or Pro (32-bit) which is fine and what I reccommend, only you can't run 64-bit programs in that case (again, not many out there).\n\nNow we come down to it.  It turns out that the Core Duo processors from Intel are faster and more efficient than the AMD Turion 64x2.  You decide, but I'm sold on Intel as far as laptops are concerned.  Note, I still prefer AMD when it comes to desktops because AMD desktop processors still crush Intel.  Intel has caught up in the mobile world, it'll be a while before I trust my desktop to one.
504895
For AMD definitely go for a Socket 939 processor. This the newer and better socket vs. the old socket 754.\n\nFor Intel go for the socket 775. The 775 is Intel's newest socket.\n\nI like both brand of cpu's and will recommend them both to anyone. I will recommend a gamer an AMD cpu and a Video editor etc an Intel cpu. So each cpu has their advantages and disadvantages.
792140
There is a big difference in the architecture of both CPUs. An AMD CPU has an integrated memory controller. This serves as a link between the CPU and the memory (RAM). Intel CPUs do not have this, so it relies on another chip to serve as the link with the memory. This saves up space on the CPU, so Intel decided to increase the cache size on their CPUs.\nMore details.\nBecause AMD has the integrated mem controller, it performs faster than an Intel CPU with same clock speed. You have to know that it is not the CPU clock speed that matters, but the FSB clock speed. So if you need a 'fast computer' you need a lot of memory (RAM) and a high FSB.
236514
That really depends... If we are talking about same frequency.\nWell AMD is cheaper and usualy runs better on games, but Intel performs better on simulations and maths calculations.\nIf we talking about stabiliry and maintenance... then the Intel CPU is much better. And why u might ask.\nWell,... if for example, your AMD CPU gets hot and the protections from MB are off ... he will soon start up a fire in the real seanse of the word witch will burn ur CPU and MB plus if ur lucky will destroy other components too(like removing fan from it). That will not happen with a Intel CPU at same frequency, for if he get's hotter then it should be, he enters in a state of blocking some electrycal power that leeds in the reduction of speed and the quantity of temperature generated. Then the blue screens appear and if no action is taken the computer will just shutdown.\n\nSo if u plan to buy a CPU... and make urself a computer think a little before u do that. What do you prefer... a faster more unstable CPU for games and just that, or a Good performer for games, with stability and low maintenance costs and great performance for simulations and high demanding aplications??\n\nThink about something else too... when people are buying a computer if they choose AMD they buy a lot of thing that just comes like that A LOT, BUT if they buy a Intel CPU ... they are considering the quality of the components they are going to use on there computers.\n\nMe personaly... I prefear Quality not Quantity. I prefear stable and depending. I prefear INTEL.
13617
AMD not just for the value but for superior performance as well.  The latest generation of AMD Athlons completely shredded Intels offerings.  The fastest AMD chip currently is the Athlon 64 FX-57 series followed by the FX-55 series.  Just behind those are the AMD 64 4000+ and the AMD 64x2 4800+.  See the link for a benchmark comparisons of 77 processors, notice how all the ones at the top are AMD processors.  Intel chips are, lacking to say the least.\n\nI'm into gaming so for gamers there is no better choice than AMD.\n\nI'll let the benchmark speak for itself.
913190
Guys.. there is nothing like best... it all depends upon 'your objective' ie your requirements decide the best. Intel offers CPUs in two brands - pentium and celeron. if you've more money, then you could go for pentium. celeron is low-cost processor and it does effective than pentium. Another one is AMD's Athlon its all so cheap and faster. My opinion falls on Athlon.