PC geeks - ultimate gaming rig help

[Razorguns]

you just looked for the conclusion at the bottom of this opinion????

If you look at your own post you'll see that the AMD have much better 3d rendering and video encoding was faster. ALso once the video quality of the games went up , you noticed the AMD actually surpass both intel chips in performance. I bet if they did a more intensive test such as the database tests I talk about you would see the Intel's get smoked

I'm posting a general conclusion - you're trying to state specific categories of the chip's performance.

That's like saying "fords suck, they blow up at 30k - but hey, they have nice seats!".

The conclusion is what matters.

r

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Yet Another generality without sources or information to back it up

AMD top of the line quad core processor
http://products.amd.com/en-us/Deskt...+&f6=B3&f7=65nm&f8=125.000&f9=4000&f10=False&

http://reviews.cnet.com/processors/amd-phenom-x4-9850/4505-3086_7-32908353.html

Intel top of the line Server processor
http://compare.intel.com/pcc/showchart.aspx?mmID=889844,33088&familyID=5&culture=en-US

The AMD processor has 4000 MHZ system bus. The Best Intel has to offer is 1600Mhz. One distinction between Intel technology and AMD is that AMD chips don't have front side bus. What that means is the memory controller is on the chip. So the speed of the processor talk to the ram is much higher for AMD machines...

http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_8799,00.html

Intel chips are running 50W more power consumption then the AMD's. Granted the Intel chip is 3.1 GHZ vs a 2.5GHZ AMD, so the processing power edge goes to Intel. The hypertransport makes AMD a good option...

I agree AMD is getting better though, and you're right about the superior chipset design. Still too early to see who holds the best overall performance though. I'll wait for the next cpu review from tom's hardware.