companies will have to do a looooot of catch up on the consumer market. GPU drivers and mainboard chipsets must act hand in hand to reduce idle power consumption to preferably 0W and boot and loading times must be minimized to a degree comparable to TV screens/ changing channels xD
Plus downward compatibility (pisses me off I cant play classic games from before 2003 on modern AMD cards (the fuck?) Only because architecture was changed... and drivers fail to emulate. AMD? Intel? dont give a fuck!
All I care about arnt the companies (greedy Intelfucks and loudmouth AMD who happen to have aquired ATI boohoo) but the overall lifespan, overclocking capability and undervolting. I dont want to waste a lot of energy and money, especially because I can get the same shit on a phone or tablet which runs half a day and costs 5 cents for recharging the battery compared to a desktop that runs 2 graphics cards and a high class CPU which cant be fully used by most programs and needs 1kW PSU.
However, I got to admit, mathematically and in synthetic benchmarks, the fact I see a top-notch i7 beating the living shit out of the 8-core Bulldozer is something shameful to see.
please answer this question: 2nd gen intel core i5 2500K with 3.30 Ghz or AMD athlon x6 with 2.8 Ghz. Obvs the intel has mor Ghz but what processor is better for gaming?
@d3adlym00Se777 The intel. Intel has far better performance per GHz, meaning that even an intel chip clocked at lower speed will outperform a competing AMD chip. I have an X6, but for gaming the extra cores don't help you. Better to have fewer faster intel cores.
someone replied to my comment saying that i am basically dumb for supporting AMD and not going with whoever has the fastest products for the price at the time.... Well all during the AM3 era....NOT am3+.... AMD was putting out better CPU's for your BUCK than INTEL was ...did the INTEL FANBOYS switch over to AMD during the AM3 era..NO!!! they supported a slower CPU at a MUCH HIGHER PRICE....cuz they are INTEL FANBOYS...I stand corrected! Stay loyal to your favorite company... never surrender!!
im watching this on a 2nd gen 22nm i5, its interesting seing them interested in that processor back then when this processor i have is like 4 times better
@bloodreighn you clearly missed my point i think your brain fails at thinking, please return it for a full refund! and btw, Mclaren F1 is raw power no TCS ABS or anything like that, Bugatti has all the modern bells and whistles, now does my comment make sense to you? god i will dumb it down even more, it would be like you viewing a video of the caveman when he 1st made fire, they you pull out a cigarette lighter and light a smoke!
@TheDh0ffryn the mclaren f1 is designed and built around 1997 were as the Bugatti is designed and built around 2005 in saying that, the mclaren f1 still holds its own against the Bugatti in alot of respects, so i doubt that your original comparison makes much sense in relation to CPU progression,you dont need to be a cunt about it, I was only commenting on how technology always seems really good and always the cutting edge when it comes out, but in really it only gets better a few months later
@bloodreighn you clearly have totally missed my point, you were saying hey this is funny watching a video from a while ago, when these old things were top, and my new one now is soo much better, and i was simply stating, ahh but yours may be topnotch, but back then they were the bomb, so have some respect for older gen stuff, cause up till recently i was still running an Athlon single core, and i had no gaming issues!
oh cmon man u builded my own pc with amd ii x4 and it is running better the games like crysis2 gta4 black ops ON FULL SETTINGS AND I CAN say that its even better than alienware desctops who got i7 processor
Intel needs to buy a GPU manufacturer or create an efficient GPU development department. While AMD is behind Intel in terms of CPU power, they are ahead on APU platforms and cost-saving solutions, and I'm not even gonna mention the top-notch chips being WAY CHEAPER than its Intel counterparts.
Also, Intel should rethink their ARM strategy, their chips are energy-guzzling bitches with worse performance than a Snapdragon.
@TheKoups That won't happen. Intel would let nVIDIA be free, which is something different than what AMD and ATi are doing.
With all honesty, Intel can develop a GPU that could be competitive without purchasing a GPU manufacturer. Larrabee was a nice experiment, which didn't go well because Intel's top guys were pessimistic. If Intel tried harder, Larrabee would have already been released to the market along with the Sandy Bridge launch.
If Intel doesn't want that, then buying nVIDIA would be ok
haha ATI and AMD have been the same company for years and i do mean years. AMD is branded (99% of the time) just above the PCI-E pins. and intel will soon be fucked yet again (if rumours are true) with AMD and DELL (i think) bringing out the new "cell" CPU. haha thats if intel doesn't try to steal it again. haha intel is basicly a company that has stolen everyone elses idea's and made them their own. XD
@TheKoups Not in the case of the very first chip. Remember that Intel brought the first CPU, not Texas Instruments.
And that Intel came with the x86 ideas right before AMD. The only barrier for Intel was laws, and policies between countries.
AMD isn't the one that will fuck Intel, but the ARM Community Intel can't bring up something to show to, since ARM Atoms are shit. And let's not forget IBM, who's back with nice RISC chips since its dismissal after AIM's rupture back in 2005.
oh well they may have done that but they still stole part of AMD hyper-threading and got sued over it. either way now their just over prices chips. intel cant be too good if the top 3 fastest computers in the world are AMD chip sets, i'm talking industrial not home use
@TheKoups Check TOP500 again. The Cray Jaguar, which mounted the Opteron chips, is third overall behind a Xeon-based supercomputer (Tianhe-1A) and the K-Computer, the fastest one, with SPARC64 chips.
Plus, the Tianhe-1A uses 14,336 Xeon chips against the 224,256 Opteron chips in the Cray Jaguar.
The only thing I'm noticing in an Intel chip that makes me think they stole some ideas from AMD is the HD Graphics APU inside their chips, reminds me of 3D Now! from AMD...
@JackBandicootsBunker haha really? buggar. well i did look at that about 8 months ago tho so yeah i wouldn't be supprised if it had changes again. lets see wat happens when AMD releases the new bulldozer arch chips. should make its interesting again lol.
as for the APU side of things, i believe that intel may have done it the legal way coz i havn't heard much about them getting sued over it, yet. XD
@TheKoups Surely changes will arise, don't forget that most of the Cray Jaguar architecture was just revamping 2005 technology from the previous supercomputer designs they had.
I think AMD might pull out something that might kill Intel's top-of-the-line chips, the problem with them is their pricing policy and their recent releases which I think got rushed, like SandyBridge and their SSD units.
However, Intel will still own the low price chunk. AMD Sempron has gotten worse over the years TBH.
@TheKoups The Athlon chips are getting good results when it comes to subnotebooks, thanks to the Vision combination, but in desktops I'm looking at a flop in sales.
Regardless of all that, I think both Intel and AMD will be doomed, but Intel comes first, because if Intel is losing their money-making bit of the market: economy chips. And Intel is losing that part of the market with ARM. If IBM decides to go back to a mainstream market with POWER, Intel will suffer in the high-end segment as well.
@JackBandicootsBunker intel advertise them as on par with low end graphics but they are imo more worse than a integrated radeon 6530 from a apu. My sb i7 took a lil while playing a miniclip game
----
intel should really work on their graphics and stop trying to make 1000+ dollar cpus that only 10% of the world will buy.
@XxXPenrdXxX Intel should keep doing what it does. Building a superpowerful chip is like a race, specially when TOP500 has to pick the best supercomputers of the world, e.g.
Intel used to care about GPUs when they had the Larrabee project active. The fact they cancelled it because it was subpar to a GeForce 8600GT by the year 2009 was stupid, they could have tried harder.
Intel has the potential and the means to develop GPUs, but they don't have the will, and the Larrabee project shows that.
@JackBandicootsBunker omg no kidding man, the graphics built into the new apu are sexy for the price! 6570 runs most games at mid range pretty easy. and omg so cheap!
@UchihaSumairu Now they need to change the number of cored in certain APUs, specially the mobile ones. It's unacceptable to see subnotebooks with just a single-core Athlon Neo, a chip that limits the endless possibilities of a GPU such as the 6350.
@JackBandicootsBunker very true, then again those are aimed for super duper low end pc's basically for people who dont even know what a graphics card is. the people who still think the harddrive is the same as the ram lol.
@JackBandicootsBunker Your right, and since OpenCL is taking the world by storm right now, the GPU contained within the AMD APU's has the potential to leave intel in the dust.
@JackBandicootsBunker i7-3930K costs about 500$ and is way more powerful that the best CPU from AMD the AMD Opteron 6272 which is about 500$ too but has only 68% of the power on 8 physical cores while Intel is using 6 physical and 12 threads.
@point6000x Wait a minute, you're comparing a HOME PC CPU against a SERVER CPU. Opterons, even in Bulldozer architecture, weren't designed to be gamer CPUs. That's like comparing a Phenom to a Xeon.
@point6000x I understand you're being guided by benchmarks, but in real-world applications, you can't compare a server chip against a consumer chip. Server chips were designed for other kind of computing. i7s rivals are the FX Bulldozer chips, which are cheaper and albeit inferior, they are so by quite a small margin. I can also say that the 8-core architecture by AMD was, say, rushed a bit?
@JackBandicootsBunker It's just the truth that for users Intel CPUs are faster than those by AMD. Also many applications are more optimized for Intel than AMD.
Bulldozer was a complete fail. They announced 50% performance increase but you don't notice much. That's why I'm still on my X6 1090T which is however enough for many applications. It's not that AMD processors are shit but as AMD themselves said - they don't have any fight with Intel anymore.
@point6000x "Also many applications are more optimized for Intel than AMD." That's AMD's biggest problem so far. Well said.
Bulldozer was too much bragging, I agree. While it's a good processor, it doesn't justify changing the socket and overall architecture just yet. And what you pointed out about its performance is one of the reasons.
Fans AMD ATI Radeon HD 7000 and 900 chipset will be out of this year .Plus new socket will be out for AMD Socket AM3b 942pin. November 2011 to January 2012 we will see new ATI Radeon HD 7000 and 900 chipset. North and south bridge.
They do not say went new socket will be but is black color no more white. No joke just Google your self read more.
The AMD 1090T 6 core is a good deal for the price. It is more than I need, and it works. I have one. But it makes me sick that the AMD 965 performs only slightly worse and costs less, overclocks better and has more cache per core. It also makes me sick that I could've bought an Intel quad core that performs better at only about $40 more. I'm sick of people plugging AMD when they know barely anything besides cores and MHz. There is more involved.
@Frischkaesegurke Well its not the same here in M'sia at least. The prices of the Intel CPU's are still way too expensive in contrast here. i7 2600k 3.4Ghz is RM955 whereas AMD Phenom II x6 1100T 3.3GHz is only RM773. The Intel i7 990x is RM3430 here.... I'm speaking from current prices locally :/
I can't see Intel's benefits. My friends spend more cash than me for them but my AMDs still outdo them. Performance for cheaper. Maybe the P4 days were good but I just can't see it now. However thats just my experience. Please share your experiences with me too, I want to know :)
From what I've read, AMD makes processors which are a much better value and performance for general computing needs of most people, but at the high end, people looking for extreme gaming or demanding professional applications like graphics design and so forth, then the high end intel processors are superior.
Intel, creator of the worlds most f'd up cheap plastic CPU cooler retention brackets! It's a god damn embarresment for anyone who actually builds computers!
intel and amd leap frog each other all the time. if intel is best this week, then amd will be best next week and visa-versa. that is they way it will always be. Same story with ati and nvidia. so just pick a brand and and stick with it and be happy you are part of some of the greatest technology of our time.
Intel seems to be the most reliable. For Intel cpus, I had the 386 sx-16, Pentium 100, Pentium 166 mmx, Pentium 2 400, Pentium 3 800, Pentium 4 1800, & Pentium 3.0 ghzs,
AMD: K6-2 350, K6-3 550, Athlon 1.2 ghz, Athlon 64 3200+, Sempron 2600+, Phenom II 945, and Athlon II Regor 3.0 dual core.
For AMD, I had 3 duds, the Athlon 1.2 ghzs, Sempron 2600+, and the Athlon 64 3200+.
@He101A i've just gave away an old p3 machine.they do last.i was just arguing for the heck of it. seriously though, i'm done my first amd build (2nd amd machine) and it's pretty sweet.it's no i7. for sub$100, it's quite nice. that other guy that was dogging them out i feel wasn't doing a fair comparison of machines and knocking the brand without reason.i still like intel, my penitum d i got from ebay was shipped in a bare envelope and it survived the postal system, previous use and my abuse lol.
@blueovalfan23 The AMD Phenom II 945 is a good CPU; however, the Phenom II series lacks performance. I just ordered a Intel I-7 960 on Amazon for about $289.99. I was going to get a Phenom II x6 1090T but after looking at the benchmarks, and reading the reviews, I chose the I-7 960. It's about a $100 more, but I think it is worth it. I had to tweak the ram for the AMD Phenom II 945 to make it stable. It was never really stable until I replaced it with Corsair XMS3s.
@He101A nice machine. you are correct in the i7s are a better performers. i refuse to spend $300 on a cpu though. my cheapo $80 cpu does fine. i did look at intels as well, the few cheaper cpus i found don't bench as well as my amd according to passmark. my bottom line is the bottom dollar. an x6 wasn't even looked at as an option, nor was an i7. i might have been luck, i don't know. my amd system, so far, is stable. glad you are happy with you cpu though.
@strikerhiryu ummm maybe it could be that you have a poorly cooled system, or maybe its a tad bit old or maybe you are using amds older processors. it runs fine on my Intel Pentium 3 Tualatin core.
Really at this point, processors aren't part of the bottleneck. Most games I run on my phenom x4 945 don't even use 25% of what it could do. Video cards and storage drives are what need to get pushed forward.
Intel i7 running unbiased processes which don't favor any one processor completely shuts down AMD. They may cost more, but intel are for serious gamers. AMD is for your beginner gamers.
@Skastope i've been pleased with intel but when i went to upgrade, i went amd. not looking back either. price to performance amd is better. the bechmarks don't lie dude. sure an i7 is better but i'm not buying a cpu for that going rate. seriously, in these times why not skimp a bit. it's not like it hasn't handled my needs and come back wanting more. just wondering what amd cpu are you running that is not performing to your expectations?
@blueovalfan23 I ran an AMD turion x2 in my other laptop and it died within 2 years. Also, when playing games the frame rate skipped a lot, no matter the game. The graphics were well over the amount needed so there was no problem there as the beginning of the laptop's life, it worked fine. My dad's desktop is now 6 years old and it's Celeron D 356 still runs at 3.33ghz with the same performance. Quality over quantity ;o
@Skastope well you compairing apples to oranges now, a laptop is only programmed by the company to run well for a little over a year, you should be suprized that it ran well for 2! and then a desktop runs faster in every way, I have a pentium 4 that ran for six years and beat my centrino duo for my laptop
@AMDsupreme My brother's hp laptop, of the same series, with an intel processor is still running after 3 years. Who's apples and oranges? Desktop & Mobile processors don't have THAT much of a difference in performance over time. Hell, my laptop processor right now is running as fine as the day I got it 5 months ago. ALSO, it's running a full 260 mhz faster than the clocked value says.
@Skastope i know you are not comparing that piece of crap celeron d to a later model amd.... i think you have to do some research to be at a level of having this conversation. let me help... 1. laptops have onboard gpus that are rather watered down. i would assume that was likely your issue... gpu not up to the task. memory doesn't matter as much as you seem to believe. 2. laptops are not gaming rigs. heat tends to be an issue. 3. amds tend to run warm. no think about this....2 yrs of abuse....
@blueovalfan23 You make me lol at your total one-sidedness to this argument. A CPU-Z bench tested that piece of crap celeron D at 8 ghz. Don't know who did it or when it was done, but 8ghz is pretty damn good. Also, the gpu was fine. Even at day ONE, the laptop was choppy. My HP envy 14 = flying high and never and spitting. Also, the air blowing out of the fans is MUCH cooler than my other laptop. And to correct you, Laptops ARE gaming rigs. The new ASUS computers and the M17x.
@Skastope here's my one sided opinion of that pos 3.33 gig celeron d 356. it might perform when overclocked. it doesn't stock. i had one and let me tell you, it wasn't the best thing out there. even at 8 ghz, it was a pos architecture. what gpu was on that amd machine and what game were you running? i would put money on it being the minimal gpu for the game if that. maybe shared memory. could be a stooge setting the settings up to high for the hardware. btw i knew about high end laptops....
@blueovalfan23 Lol. Btw you make me lol. It's an online game requiring most likely the lowest graphics possible for a game. I'm not sure what the graphics was since I scrapped the computer for the parts and then destroyed the hell out of the computer. Most likely integrated. But graphics were working fine when it died.
@Skastope you know where' making our selves look like idiots. i don't hear the specs of the old machine and the system requirements of the game. online or not, it'll take something to run unless it's like a flash game (ie: facebook games and that sort). all you seem to know is you had a bad experience. i never said amd made the fastest cpus. i'm saying compare 2 sub $150 cpus. ofcourse the i7 series is faster but at what cost? i'm not made of money, i'll stick with amd.
@Skastope also, working or not doesn't mean a thing. if the gpu was crap, it was crap working or not. seriously all you seem to know is throw money at it and see where that gets you. i built my last 2 machines. i'm shocked at what i put that pentium d through, it's a joke compared to a newer cpu though. i know intel makes a nice cpu but you pay for it. amd is just a cheaper solution. maybe you had a bad amd, maybe the new intel is par. i would still like to know the specs of the amd lol
@blueovalfan23 Actually, I'm done arguing with you. When someone so avidly defends something, it's almost impossible to convince them of the opposite. Intel works better for me than AMD has, so I'll stick with Intel, end of story. You can keep your AMD to yourself and keep your money you'll "save." I'll pay more to get a cpu that'll last me 5 years.
@MOHH2COD4 i5 is better, performance wise, but Phenom isn't to shabby either considering it's price and depending on what you'll be using your computer for
Last time I checked you can get a hexa core phenom for the price of an I5. Or you can get a phenom x4 BE and raise the multiplier to outperform an I5 and have some money left over for a better video card or more ram. I won't even go into the total cost of the system or that many won't even need to upgrade the motherboard since amd is backwards compatible. Gamers especially like to say Intel is better but I can build a faster gaming rig for 1500 using AMD than you can with INTEL.
@chefslot I say get the x4 BE and a good cpu cooler to push it to 4ghz, black ops likes clock speed more than multiple cores however it will use 3-4 cores well so any high clocked x3 or x4 will be fine.
@nelizmastr ohhh sorry but my last amd athlon x2 SUCK! my new i5 2500k is the best and destroy the phenom x6 1100 hahahahah only look benchmark and MORE CHEAP!!!! the i5 obiusly the i7 is very expensive
@nelizmastr hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP
@MrAMColes sure, raw performance, intel wins. but not everyone has 2000 dollars to spend on a computer. my computer was 400 euros (when dollars were almost equal) and it plays crysis 2 on medium-high settings.
price/performance wise, AMD will always win. especially with the bulldozer core coming out this quarter of 2011
No, price/performance wise Intel is better now For example Core i3 2100 ($125) is faster than Phenom II X4 975 ($190) and Phenom II X6 1100T ($230) in most applications for personal use (e.g. games, office, 2D graphics), even in some pro apps (e.g. CAD). I hope the Bulldozer will change that soon.
@nelizmastr RIGHT! AMD its price/performance, no discussion about that, ur right
i dont know why they fight so much D:
if u have 1000$ for just a cpu then buy it... sorry to say not everyone can afford a complete computer at more than 1000$ and thats spending some real money on it.
@Raditz3666 all I can say is, I only have about 60 euros per component. try to sell me intel for that. not gonna happen. athlon 2 dualcores pwn all the core 2 duos, at 1/4th of the price.
@nelizmastr Seriously? The Athlon X2 is shit compared to the Core 2 Duos. The Athlon chips got SO DEPRECIATED by AMD themselves because the only real competition for them is the Pentium Dual-Core by Intel, which is far superior than the AMD thanks to its low power usage and great overclocking capabilities. So that's the reason why they are cheap. And why the Phenom II is being bashed. Because its competitors are not only the Core iX line-up, but the Core 2 line-up as well.
@nelizmastr I have an Athlon II X2, the 250 model, and what you say is wrong. Its performance, is inferior than any Core 2 Duo.
And I've even bothered to make the comparison tests, with GT220 GPUs and 2GB of RAM in both machines, and the Pentium Dual-Cores were ahead of the Athlon II. Instead of relying on math benchmarks, I suggest you to check the comparison FOR YOURSELF, like I did.
@nelizmastr What about the math processing? Don't forget that... And do you believe the Athlon II is an all-new processor? It's a rehash of the old Phenoms. But myself, I've seen the Core 2 Duos being superior than the Athlon II chips. The Athlon II 4XX line-up beats the Core 2 Duo chips, though.
@nelizmastr Then that's your perspective, once I play above 30FPS, frames per second are a secondary thing. Experience quality starts being the main part of the test since that moment.
@joestar3000 they are not. get your facts straight. I on the other hand, am well educated on computer sciences. A Phenom II X6 is only 10-20% slower than an i7 980X. the 70% price difference is simply not justifiable.
@AidivnAidivn its all based on both online and own benchmarks. go jerk off to intel if you'd like. but dont bother me with incorrect and unrelated comments.
companies will have to do a looooot of catch up on the consumer market. GPU drivers and mainboard chipsets must act hand in hand to reduce idle power consumption to preferably 0W and boot and loading times must be minimized to a degree comparable to TV screens/ changing channels xD
Plus downward compatibility (pisses me off I cant play classic games from before 2003 on modern AMD cards (the fuck?) Only because architecture was changed... and drivers fail to emulate. AMD? Intel? dont give a fuck!
USEYAHOO 3 days ago
All I care about arnt the companies (greedy Intelfucks and loudmouth AMD who happen to have aquired ATI boohoo) but the overall lifespan, overclocking capability and undervolting. I dont want to waste a lot of energy and money, especially because I can get the same shit on a phone or tablet which runs half a day and costs 5 cents for recharging the battery compared to a desktop that runs 2 graphics cards and a high class CPU which cant be fully used by most programs and needs 1kW PSU.
USEYAHOO 3 days ago
at 1:45 what the hell is that behind the guy???
Mr123pspfreak 2 weeks ago
Core i7!
gerbilPROJECT 3 weeks ago
The host is so much better in this show than he was in Dawson's Creek. Yes, I know that wasn't the same guy.
frigginjoe 1 month ago
However, I got to admit, mathematically and in synthetic benchmarks, the fact I see a top-notch i7 beating the living shit out of the 8-core Bulldozer is something shameful to see.
JackBandicootsBunker 1 month ago
I would like the power of an Intel CPU. but nvm. I would rather save 1000 dollars and buy a similar AMD CPU tahts certified to run better with a GPU.
4232267 1 month ago
please answer this question: 2nd gen intel core i5 2500K with 3.30 Ghz or AMD athlon x6 with 2.8 Ghz. Obvs the intel has mor Ghz but what processor is better for gaming?
d3adlym00Se777 1 month ago
@d3adlym00Se777 2500k is better
Fortune2point0 1 month ago
@d3adlym00Se777 The intel. Intel has far better performance per GHz, meaning that even an intel chip clocked at lower speed will outperform a competing AMD chip. I have an X6, but for gaming the extra cores don't help you. Better to have fewer faster intel cores.
andy16666 1 month ago
@d3adlym00Se777 It's not about megahertz anymore, but pipelines, overclocking, lifespan, software optimization and such.
JackBandicootsBunker 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
someone replied to my comment saying that i am basically dumb for supporting AMD and not going with whoever has the fastest products for the price at the time.... Well all during the AM3 era....NOT am3+.... AMD was putting out better CPU's for your BUCK than INTEL was ...did the INTEL FANBOYS switch over to AMD during the AM3 era..NO!!! they supported a slower CPU at a MUCH HIGHER PRICE....cuz they are INTEL FANBOYS...I stand corrected! Stay loyal to your favorite company... never surrender!!
skaczkurkin 2 months ago
I5 is not the leader... i7 is =D
Ptro001 3 months ago
is intel is the best gaming processor dude???
Emmancipationz 4 months ago in playlist Intel Vs AMD Smackdown
@Emmancipationz Yes.
Amuffin456 3 months ago
Apparently Bulldozers break bridges, and I hope for finance sakes, that's right.
dnbmania 5 months ago
im watching this on a 2nd gen 22nm i5, its interesting seing them interested in that processor back then when this processor i have is like 4 times better
bloodreighn 5 months ago
@bloodreighn dude thats like looking at and drooling over a McLaren F1 when im driving a bugatti Veyron
TheDh0ffryn 2 months ago
@TheDh0ffryn if you are implying that the Mclaren F1 is a shit car in comparison to the Bugatti, then you fail at life.
bloodreighn 2 months ago
@bloodreighn you clearly missed my point i think your brain fails at thinking, please return it for a full refund! and btw, Mclaren F1 is raw power no TCS ABS or anything like that, Bugatti has all the modern bells and whistles, now does my comment make sense to you? god i will dumb it down even more, it would be like you viewing a video of the caveman when he 1st made fire, they you pull out a cigarette lighter and light a smoke!
TheDh0ffryn 2 months ago
@TheDh0ffryn the mclaren f1 is designed and built around 1997 were as the Bugatti is designed and built around 2005 in saying that, the mclaren f1 still holds its own against the Bugatti in alot of respects, so i doubt that your original comparison makes much sense in relation to CPU progression,you dont need to be a cunt about it, I was only commenting on how technology always seems really good and always the cutting edge when it comes out, but in really it only gets better a few months later
bloodreighn 2 months ago
@bloodreighn you clearly have totally missed my point, you were saying hey this is funny watching a video from a while ago, when these old things were top, and my new one now is soo much better, and i was simply stating, ahh but yours may be topnotch, but back then they were the bomb, so have some respect for older gen stuff, cause up till recently i was still running an Athlon single core, and i had no gaming issues!
TheDh0ffryn 2 months ago
Is it only me or audio is out of sync ?
Xoog23 5 months ago 8
GO AMD
MrMattman1233 5 months ago
YEAH! ITS GOOD!
minja714 6 months ago
@Frischkaesegurke it out performs in single threaded applications but for multithreaded amd comes at top(not against the i7 9XX series)
XxXPenrdXxX 6 months ago
oh cmon man u builded my own pc with amd ii x4 and it is running better the games like crysis2 gta4 black ops ON FULL SETTINGS AND I CAN say that its even better than alienware desctops who got i7 processor
TheIKAIKAIKA 6 months ago
he´s talking shit
C2Q PWNs
OmniKasume 7 months ago
intel :))
HaztaUK 7 months ago
A single word is enough to scare Intel: FUSION.
Intel needs to buy a GPU manufacturer or create an efficient GPU development department. While AMD is behind Intel in terms of CPU power, they are ahead on APU platforms and cost-saving solutions, and I'm not even gonna mention the top-notch chips being WAY CHEAPER than its Intel counterparts.
Also, Intel should rethink their ARM strategy, their chips are energy-guzzling bitches with worse performance than a Snapdragon.
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago 24
@JackBandicootsBunker as long as they dont buy nVidia, coz that would just fuck nVidia up. No need to drag nVidia down to intel's level XD
TheKoups 7 months ago
@TheKoups That won't happen. Intel would let nVIDIA be free, which is something different than what AMD and ATi are doing.
With all honesty, Intel can develop a GPU that could be competitive without purchasing a GPU manufacturer. Larrabee was a nice experiment, which didn't go well because Intel's top guys were pessimistic. If Intel tried harder, Larrabee would have already been released to the market along with the Sandy Bridge launch.
If Intel doesn't want that, then buying nVIDIA would be ok
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker
haha ATI and AMD have been the same company for years and i do mean years. AMD is branded (99% of the time) just above the PCI-E pins. and intel will soon be fucked yet again (if rumours are true) with AMD and DELL (i think) bringing out the new "cell" CPU. haha thats if intel doesn't try to steal it again. haha intel is basicly a company that has stolen everyone elses idea's and made them their own. XD
TheKoups 7 months ago
@TheKoups Not in the case of the very first chip. Remember that Intel brought the first CPU, not Texas Instruments.
And that Intel came with the x86 ideas right before AMD. The only barrier for Intel was laws, and policies between countries.
AMD isn't the one that will fuck Intel, but the ARM Community Intel can't bring up something to show to, since ARM Atoms are shit. And let's not forget IBM, who's back with nice RISC chips since its dismissal after AIM's rupture back in 2005.
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker
oh well they may have done that but they still stole part of AMD hyper-threading and got sued over it. either way now their just over prices chips. intel cant be too good if the top 3 fastest computers in the world are AMD chip sets, i'm talking industrial not home use
TheKoups 7 months ago
@TheKoups Check TOP500 again. The Cray Jaguar, which mounted the Opteron chips, is third overall behind a Xeon-based supercomputer (Tianhe-1A) and the K-Computer, the fastest one, with SPARC64 chips.
Plus, the Tianhe-1A uses 14,336 Xeon chips against the 224,256 Opteron chips in the Cray Jaguar.
The only thing I'm noticing in an Intel chip that makes me think they stole some ideas from AMD is the HD Graphics APU inside their chips, reminds me of 3D Now! from AMD...
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker haha really? buggar. well i did look at that about 8 months ago tho so yeah i wouldn't be supprised if it had changes again. lets see wat happens when AMD releases the new bulldozer arch chips. should make its interesting again lol.
as for the APU side of things, i believe that intel may have done it the legal way coz i havn't heard much about them getting sued over it, yet. XD
TheKoups 7 months ago
@TheKoups Surely changes will arise, don't forget that most of the Cray Jaguar architecture was just revamping 2005 technology from the previous supercomputer designs they had.
I think AMD might pull out something that might kill Intel's top-of-the-line chips, the problem with them is their pricing policy and their recent releases which I think got rushed, like SandyBridge and their SSD units.
However, Intel will still own the low price chunk. AMD Sempron has gotten worse over the years TBH.
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago
@TheKoups The Athlon chips are getting good results when it comes to subnotebooks, thanks to the Vision combination, but in desktops I'm looking at a flop in sales.
Regardless of all that, I think both Intel and AMD will be doomed, but Intel comes first, because if Intel is losing their money-making bit of the market: economy chips. And Intel is losing that part of the market with ARM. If IBM decides to go back to a mainstream market with POWER, Intel will suffer in the high-end segment as well.
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker
yeah so true, in 1 or 2 years if IBM come back will be saying intel and AMD who? XD
TheKoups 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker do you see their integrated graphics from the SB i7s it just still sux
XxXPenrdXxX 6 months ago
@XxXPenrdXxX We all know SBs are a flop in the graphics dept.
They can be enough for basic tasks, but then it sucks for anything else.
JackBandicootsBunker 6 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker intel advertise them as on par with low end graphics but they are imo more worse than a integrated radeon 6530 from a apu. My sb i7 took a lil while playing a miniclip game
----
intel should really work on their graphics and stop trying to make 1000+ dollar cpus that only 10% of the world will buy.
XxXPenrdXxX 6 months ago
@XxXPenrdXxX Intel should keep doing what it does. Building a superpowerful chip is like a race, specially when TOP500 has to pick the best supercomputers of the world, e.g.
Intel used to care about GPUs when they had the Larrabee project active. The fact they cancelled it because it was subpar to a GeForce 8600GT by the year 2009 was stupid, they could have tried harder.
Intel has the potential and the means to develop GPUs, but they don't have the will, and the Larrabee project shows that.
JackBandicootsBunker 6 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker lmfao
terorvlad 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker omg no kidding man, the graphics built into the new apu are sexy for the price! 6570 runs most games at mid range pretty easy. and omg so cheap!
UchihaSumairu 6 months ago
@UchihaSumairu Now they need to change the number of cored in certain APUs, specially the mobile ones. It's unacceptable to see subnotebooks with just a single-core Athlon Neo, a chip that limits the endless possibilities of a GPU such as the 6350.
JackBandicootsBunker 6 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker very true, then again those are aimed for super duper low end pc's basically for people who dont even know what a graphics card is. the people who still think the harddrive is the same as the ram lol.
UchihaSumairu 6 months ago
@UchihaSumairu Even some retailers mistake the flash hard drive with the RAM, when they talk about Tablets xD
JackBandicootsBunker 6 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker "their chips are energy-guzzling bitches with worse performance than a Snapdragon." LMFAO !!! :)))))
terorvlad 6 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker Your right, and since OpenCL is taking the world by storm right now, the GPU contained within the AMD APU's has the potential to leave intel in the dust.
rich1051414 2 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker Tell that to any Core i7. :P
Adrammalech7570 1 month ago
@JackBandicootsBunker i7-3930K costs about 500$ and is way more powerful that the best CPU from AMD the AMD Opteron 6272 which is about 500$ too but has only 68% of the power on 8 physical cores while Intel is using 6 physical and 12 threads.
point6000x 1 week ago
@point6000x Wait a minute, you're comparing a HOME PC CPU against a SERVER CPU. Opterons, even in Bulldozer architecture, weren't designed to be gamer CPUs. That's like comparing a Phenom to a Xeon.
JackBandicootsBunker 1 week ago
@JackBandicootsBunker I'm comparing the best of each company and not in gaming, no but in passmark or other benchmarks.
point6000x 1 week ago
@point6000x I understand you're being guided by benchmarks, but in real-world applications, you can't compare a server chip against a consumer chip. Server chips were designed for other kind of computing. i7s rivals are the FX Bulldozer chips, which are cheaper and albeit inferior, they are so by quite a small margin. I can also say that the 8-core architecture by AMD was, say, rushed a bit?
JackBandicootsBunker 1 week ago
@JackBandicootsBunker It's just the truth that for users Intel CPUs are faster than those by AMD. Also many applications are more optimized for Intel than AMD.
Bulldozer was a complete fail. They announced 50% performance increase but you don't notice much. That's why I'm still on my X6 1090T which is however enough for many applications. It's not that AMD processors are shit but as AMD themselves said - they don't have any fight with Intel anymore.
Lastly: AMD is good, Intel is faster.
point6000x 1 week ago
@point6000x "Also many applications are more optimized for Intel than AMD." That's AMD's biggest problem so far. Well said.
Bulldozer was too much bragging, I agree. While it's a good processor, it doesn't justify changing the socket and overall architecture just yet. And what you pointed out about its performance is one of the reasons.
JackBandicootsBunker 1 week ago
my i7 2600k at 4.7ghz is far more better than the phenom 2 x6 1100t
fmc77899 8 months ago
@fmc77899 Just dream about that!
milecar91 7 months ago
@milecar91 the only thing i know that is better on the x6 is the 6 cores other than that its an outdateted cpu
fmc77899 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Fatherboard" xD
AbeGunnerZ 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fans AMD ATI Radeon HD 7000 and 900 chipset will be out of this year .Plus new socket will be out for AMD Socket AM3b 942pin. November 2011 to January 2012 we will see new ATI Radeon HD 7000 and 900 chipset. North and south bridge.
They do not say went new socket will be but is black color no more white. No joke just Google your self read more.
VOYTASNY 8 months ago
The AMD 1090T 6 core is a good deal for the price. It is more than I need, and it works. I have one. But it makes me sick that the AMD 965 performs only slightly worse and costs less, overclocks better and has more cache per core. It also makes me sick that I could've bought an Intel quad core that performs better at only about $40 more. I'm sick of people plugging AMD when they know barely anything besides cores and MHz. There is more involved.
wc4pwned 8 months ago
@Frischkaesegurke Well its not the same here in M'sia at least. The prices of the Intel CPU's are still way too expensive in contrast here. i7 2600k 3.4Ghz is RM955 whereas AMD Phenom II x6 1100T 3.3GHz is only RM773. The Intel i7 990x is RM3430 here.... I'm speaking from current prices locally :/
PenguinRecordings 8 months ago
I can't see Intel's benefits. My friends spend more cash than me for them but my AMDs still outdo them. Performance for cheaper. Maybe the P4 days were good but I just can't see it now. However thats just my experience. Please share your experiences with me too, I want to know :)
PenguinRecordings 8 months ago
From what I've read, AMD makes processors which are a much better value and performance for general computing needs of most people, but at the high end, people looking for extreme gaming or demanding professional applications like graphics design and so forth, then the high end intel processors are superior.
cantroos 9 months ago
@cantroos no thats untrue.
games mostly run on the gpu.
so the cpu doesn't really help with the gaming needs.
and ati is known to run better than nvidia.
xeadm 8 months ago
@xeadm you mean gigabyte
cantroos 8 months ago
@cantroos what?
xeadm 8 months ago
@xeadm for which one is the best fatherboard
cantroos 8 months ago
@cantroos i'm sorry, you know nothing about computers.
"fatherboard"
xeadm 8 months ago
@xeadm "fatherboard" XD
PenguinRecordings 8 months ago
@PenguinRecordings i'm not sure if he didn't know what it was called.
or if he was trying to be politically correct.
xeadm 8 months ago
@xeadm Hehe either way this series of comments and replies made my day :)
PenguinRecordings 8 months ago
socket 1155 completely rapes anything AMD has so far... I have my i7 2600k and is amazing.
TearsOfWar1 9 months ago
Intel, creator of the worlds most f'd up cheap plastic CPU cooler retention brackets! It's a god damn embarresment for anyone who actually builds computers!
sh4rkbyt3 9 months ago
You all like "I hate amd becoz it suck and hot" " I hate intel becuz it slow"
How about you make 1 =.="
OiShiRaZ 9 months ago
Gay oldman LOL
arelxp18 10 months ago
intel and amd leap frog each other all the time. if intel is best this week, then amd will be best next week and visa-versa. that is they way it will always be. Same story with ati and nvidia. so just pick a brand and and stick with it and be happy you are part of some of the greatest technology of our time.
MrGizmo757 10 months ago
i got the i5 in my imac and it are better than any other cpu i have seen in my life
dennisjonkristensen 10 months ago
Im not saying amd is bad in anyway - but my i7-950 3.17ghz ran better on benchmarks then the 6core amd , i believe it was an 2,8ghz.
I know very little about hyperthreading but my pc shows 8 core when i click ctrl + alt + delete. Could anyone explains me the benefits of that?
currently im hardcore gaming, streaming and user of adobe dreamweaver and photoshop.
igrowweedfromaseed 10 months ago
intel i5 ftw
MrBigGinger 10 months ago
the audio and video are out of synk...
REVOLTAR53 10 months ago
Intel is Good But are OverPriced Thus FAIL.
Thats Why most of the people buy AMD. Cheap And g0000dddd!
ashik007xtreme 10 months ago
Intel seems to be the most reliable. For Intel cpus, I had the 386 sx-16, Pentium 100, Pentium 166 mmx, Pentium 2 400, Pentium 3 800, Pentium 4 1800, & Pentium 3.0 ghzs,
AMD: K6-2 350, K6-3 550, Athlon 1.2 ghz, Athlon 64 3200+, Sempron 2600+, Phenom II 945, and Athlon II Regor 3.0 dual core.
For AMD, I had 3 duds, the Athlon 1.2 ghzs, Sempron 2600+, and the Athlon 64 3200+.
For Intel, I didn't have one dud.
He101A 10 months ago
@He101A i've just gave away an old p3 machine.they do last.i was just arguing for the heck of it. seriously though, i'm done my first amd build (2nd amd machine) and it's pretty sweet.it's no i7. for sub$100, it's quite nice. that other guy that was dogging them out i feel wasn't doing a fair comparison of machines and knocking the brand without reason.i still like intel, my penitum d i got from ebay was shipped in a bare envelope and it survived the postal system, previous use and my abuse lol.
blueovalfan23 10 months ago
@blueovalfan23 The AMD Phenom II 945 is a good CPU; however, the Phenom II series lacks performance. I just ordered a Intel I-7 960 on Amazon for about $289.99. I was going to get a Phenom II x6 1090T but after looking at the benchmarks, and reading the reviews, I chose the I-7 960. It's about a $100 more, but I think it is worth it. I had to tweak the ram for the AMD Phenom II 945 to make it stable. It was never really stable until I replaced it with Corsair XMS3s.
He101A 10 months ago
@He101A nice machine. you are correct in the i7s are a better performers. i refuse to spend $300 on a cpu though. my cheapo $80 cpu does fine. i did look at intels as well, the few cheaper cpus i found don't bench as well as my amd according to passmark. my bottom line is the bottom dollar. an x6 wasn't even looked at as an option, nor was an i7. i might have been luck, i don't know. my amd system, so far, is stable. glad you are happy with you cpu though.
blueovalfan23 10 months ago
my old computer had a AMD X2...and its still workin after 4 years...and i never clocked it =D
zeid012 10 months ago
audio out of sync
loungecorps 10 months ago
This video was enconded in a Sandy Bridge, that's the reason the poor encoding...
strikerhiryu 11 months ago
@strikerhiryu ummm maybe it could be that you have a poorly cooled system, or maybe its a tad bit old or maybe you are using amds older processors. it runs fine on my Intel Pentium 3 Tualatin core.
GAKtion64 11 months ago
Are they speaking in chinese?
kervin3233 11 months ago
Really at this point, processors aren't part of the bottleneck. Most games I run on my phenom x4 945 don't even use 25% of what it could do. Video cards and storage drives are what need to get pushed forward.
JaysonSR 11 months ago
I GET COMMERCIALS ON TV!!!
northpaw2000 11 months ago
Intel i7 running unbiased processes which don't favor any one processor completely shuts down AMD. They may cost more, but intel are for serious gamers. AMD is for your beginner gamers.
Skastope 11 months ago
@Skastope i've been pleased with intel but when i went to upgrade, i went amd. not looking back either. price to performance amd is better. the bechmarks don't lie dude. sure an i7 is better but i'm not buying a cpu for that going rate. seriously, in these times why not skimp a bit. it's not like it hasn't handled my needs and come back wanting more. just wondering what amd cpu are you running that is not performing to your expectations?
blueovalfan23 11 months ago
@blueovalfan23 I ran an AMD turion x2 in my other laptop and it died within 2 years. Also, when playing games the frame rate skipped a lot, no matter the game. The graphics were well over the amount needed so there was no problem there as the beginning of the laptop's life, it worked fine. My dad's desktop is now 6 years old and it's Celeron D 356 still runs at 3.33ghz with the same performance. Quality over quantity ;o
Skastope 11 months ago
@Skastope well you compairing apples to oranges now, a laptop is only programmed by the company to run well for a little over a year, you should be suprized that it ran well for 2! and then a desktop runs faster in every way, I have a pentium 4 that ran for six years and beat my centrino duo for my laptop
AMDsupreme 10 months ago
@AMDsupreme My brother's hp laptop, of the same series, with an intel processor is still running after 3 years. Who's apples and oranges? Desktop & Mobile processors don't have THAT much of a difference in performance over time. Hell, my laptop processor right now is running as fine as the day I got it 5 months ago. ALSO, it's running a full 260 mhz faster than the clocked value says.
Skastope 10 months ago
@AMDsupreme I have laptop with intel P4, it is 9 years old laptop. It still running great.
Maul9999 10 months ago
@Skastope i know you are not comparing that piece of crap celeron d to a later model amd.... i think you have to do some research to be at a level of having this conversation. let me help... 1. laptops have onboard gpus that are rather watered down. i would assume that was likely your issue... gpu not up to the task. memory doesn't matter as much as you seem to believe. 2. laptops are not gaming rigs. heat tends to be an issue. 3. amds tend to run warm. no think about this....2 yrs of abuse....
blueovalfan23 10 months ago
@blueovalfan23 You make me lol at your total one-sidedness to this argument. A CPU-Z bench tested that piece of crap celeron D at 8 ghz. Don't know who did it or when it was done, but 8ghz is pretty damn good. Also, the gpu was fine. Even at day ONE, the laptop was choppy. My HP envy 14 = flying high and never and spitting. Also, the air blowing out of the fans is MUCH cooler than my other laptop. And to correct you, Laptops ARE gaming rigs. The new ASUS computers and the M17x.
Skastope 10 months ago
@Skastope here's my one sided opinion of that pos 3.33 gig celeron d 356. it might perform when overclocked. it doesn't stock. i had one and let me tell you, it wasn't the best thing out there. even at 8 ghz, it was a pos architecture. what gpu was on that amd machine and what game were you running? i would put money on it being the minimal gpu for the game if that. maybe shared memory. could be a stooge setting the settings up to high for the hardware. btw i knew about high end laptops....
blueovalfan23 10 months ago
@blueovalfan23 Lol. Btw you make me lol. It's an online game requiring most likely the lowest graphics possible for a game. I'm not sure what the graphics was since I scrapped the computer for the parts and then destroyed the hell out of the computer. Most likely integrated. But graphics were working fine when it died.
Skastope 10 months ago
@Skastope you know where' making our selves look like idiots. i don't hear the specs of the old machine and the system requirements of the game. online or not, it'll take something to run unless it's like a flash game (ie: facebook games and that sort). all you seem to know is you had a bad experience. i never said amd made the fastest cpus. i'm saying compare 2 sub $150 cpus. ofcourse the i7 series is faster but at what cost? i'm not made of money, i'll stick with amd.
blueovalfan23 10 months ago
@Skastope also, working or not doesn't mean a thing. if the gpu was crap, it was crap working or not. seriously all you seem to know is throw money at it and see where that gets you. i built my last 2 machines. i'm shocked at what i put that pentium d through, it's a joke compared to a newer cpu though. i know intel makes a nice cpu but you pay for it. amd is just a cheaper solution. maybe you had a bad amd, maybe the new intel is par. i would still like to know the specs of the amd lol
blueovalfan23 10 months ago
@blueovalfan23 Actually, I'm done arguing with you. When someone so avidly defends something, it's almost impossible to convince them of the opposite. Intel works better for me than AMD has, so I'll stick with Intel, end of story. You can keep your AMD to yourself and keep your money you'll "save." I'll pay more to get a cpu that'll last me 5 years.
Skastope 10 months ago
Intel processors wins hands down
Mii2626 11 months ago
my AMD K6 is better than I7 :P
Dazzerlikestech1 11 months ago
@Dazzerlikestech1 search some benchmarks in google
a quad core intel beats the shit out of amd x6
thetrialshot 11 months ago
Intel core i5 750 @2.67Ghz.
I think i like :D
rubenhoed 11 months ago
intel rocks
dxz8126 1 year ago 7
Intel inside = Intet inside! (norwegian for nothing inside)
MattiDaimen 1 year ago
@MattiDaimen haha
MrFaradinho 1 year ago
@nelizmastr : intel inside : money outside
xlob3 11 months ago
performance wise, which is better, i5 or amd phenom? Honest opinions please.
MOHH2COD4 1 year ago
@MOHH2COD4 it depends on which i5 and what phenom and what price point your looking to spend
askloglog 1 year ago
@MOHH2COD4 i5 is better, performance wise, but Phenom isn't to shabby either considering it's price and depending on what you'll be using your computer for
royaloreca 1 year ago
@MOHH2COD4 Phenom II for its cheaper price tag for about the same performance
combatdstar 11 months ago
amd is cool_intel is bad
619volkan 1 year ago
@619volkan I Bet You Have Never Tried An Intel Processor.I Was The Saw Way When I Got My
First PC With A Sempron,Now A Core i7 IT NEVER SLOWS DOWN!!
GenuineMW2 1 year ago
Last time I checked you can get a hexa core phenom for the price of an I5. Or you can get a phenom x4 BE and raise the multiplier to outperform an I5 and have some money left over for a better video card or more ram. I won't even go into the total cost of the system or that many won't even need to upgrade the motherboard since amd is backwards compatible. Gamers especially like to say Intel is better but I can build a faster gaming rig for 1500 using AMD than you can with INTEL.
greyfoxzero 1 year ago
@greyfoxzero ok mr fox, which one x4 or x6, black opps
chefslot 1 year ago
@chefslot I say get the x4 BE and a good cpu cooler to push it to 4ghz, black ops likes clock speed more than multiple cores however it will use 3-4 cores well so any high clocked x3 or x4 will be fine.
greyfoxzero 1 year ago
Lol @ the kid "playing" Grid at 6:42 :P
FanOfKOTOKO 1 year ago
Just read an article about intel's false marketing
stealtharctic 1 year ago
problem with the song!the voice is late!
Vitor7478 1 year ago
lol i have i3 but my father is planning to i7 for me..great lol.
MultiMariwana 1 year ago
a friend ha a i5 with a windwos score of 6.9 i have an amd 7750 be in 6.2 socre when i overclock it it reaches 7.0 AND mine was 100$ cheaper
TheBigupz 1 year ago
The Intel Core i5 750 is actually faster than the AMD Phenom II X6 Black Edition CPU. So is my Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9650.
GFG.
Phenomental1ty 1 year ago
@Phenomental1ty considering that on almost all benchmarks i have seen the phenom II X6 BE has better scores than the i7 hexa core cpus.....
RecklessDrift 1 year ago
Intel inside: Idiot outside
nelizmastr 1 year ago 67
@nelizmastr
Simple but brilliant, AMD should use that in their commercials xD
fickdichus 1 year ago
@nelizmastr ohhh sorry but my last amd athlon x2 SUCK! my new i5 2500k is the best and destroy the phenom x6 1100 hahahahah only look benchmark and MORE CHEAP!!!! the i5 obiusly the i7 is very expensive
FEGTTTSDH 10 months ago
@FEGTTTSDH idiot outside.
nelizmastr 10 months ago
@nelizmastr hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP IS BETTER AND MORE CHEAP
FEGTTTSDH 10 months ago
@FEGTTTSDH correction: both an idiot in- AND outside.
nelizmastr 10 months ago
@nelizmastr you are gay? AMD fan?
FEGTTTSDH 10 months ago
@FEGTTTSDH umadbro? hardcore intel fanboy...
nelizmastr 10 months ago
@nelizmastr You do know that the intel core i7's destroy the 1100t? BTW, all my pc's have amd cpu's.
MrAMColes 9 months ago
@MrAMColes sure, raw performance, intel wins. but not everyone has 2000 dollars to spend on a computer. my computer was 400 euros (when dollars were almost equal) and it plays crysis 2 on medium-high settings.
price/performance wise, AMD will always win. especially with the bulldozer core coming out this quarter of 2011
nelizmastr 9 months ago
@nelizmastr Please dont brag about being able to play crysis 2. Pathetic game.
MrAMColes 9 months ago
@MrAMColes the single player is epic. way better than crysis 1, that was just a graphical showoff with 2005 gameplay.
nelizmastr 9 months ago
@nelizmastr That may be, but it has normal graphics.
MrAMColes 9 months ago
@MrAMColes not really. on a 8800GT, its only playable om gamer settings. so its quite intensive.
nelizmastr 9 months ago
@nelizmastr on a 8800GT :L update PLEASE!
MrAMColes 9 months ago
@nelizmastr Linear CoD-like single player is better? What the...
Fucklesticks 9 months ago
@Fucklesticks let it rest. facts are in. discussion closed.
nelizmastr 9 months ago
@nelizmastr Mediocre game for mediocre people.
Fucklesticks 9 months ago
@nelizmastr
No, price/performance wise Intel is better now For example Core i3 2100 ($125) is faster than Phenom II X4 975 ($190) and Phenom II X6 1100T ($230) in most applications for personal use (e.g. games, office, 2D graphics), even in some pro apps (e.g. CAD). I hope the Bulldozer will change that soon.
PLAvenger 9 months ago
@PLAvenger give it a rest.. jesus. I will never buy intel for a desktop. not even if its free.
nelizmastr 9 months ago
@nelizmastr
Because you are fanboy :) I will buy AMD for a desktop as soon as it will offer better processors than Intel.
PLAvenger 9 months ago
@PLAvenger ...ok O.o
...if u.... say so 9.9
Raditz3666 9 months ago
@PLAvenger That's the most false thing I've ever heard in my life.. Get you facts straight mate.
DJCRISIS111 9 months ago
@nelizmastr RIGHT! AMD its price/performance, no discussion about that, ur right
i dont know why they fight so much D:
if u have 1000$ for just a cpu then buy it... sorry to say not everyone can afford a complete computer at more than 1000$ and thats spending some real money on it.
Raditz3666 9 months ago
@Raditz3666 all I can say is, I only have about 60 euros per component. try to sell me intel for that. not gonna happen. athlon 2 dualcores pwn all the core 2 duos, at 1/4th of the price.
nelizmastr 9 months ago 7
@nelizmastr My i5 2500k wants to say hi.
BlaineDeschain 7 months ago
@nelizmastr Seriously? The Athlon X2 is shit compared to the Core 2 Duos. The Athlon chips got SO DEPRECIATED by AMD themselves because the only real competition for them is the Pentium Dual-Core by Intel, which is far superior than the AMD thanks to its low power usage and great overclocking capabilities. So that's the reason why they are cheap. And why the Phenom II is being bashed. Because its competitors are not only the Core iX line-up, but the Core 2 line-up as well.
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker athlon 2 X2 not athlon x2. buy glasses, cry out @ ur mom, then read again.
the athlon II X2 250 owns the E8500 in almost any benchmark, yet at a 3rd of the price
nelizmastr 7 months ago
@nelizmastr I have an Athlon II X2, the 250 model, and what you say is wrong. Its performance, is inferior than any Core 2 Duo.
And I've even bothered to make the comparison tests, with GT220 GPUs and 2GB of RAM in both machines, and the Pentium Dual-Cores were ahead of the Athlon II. Instead of relying on math benchmarks, I suggest you to check the comparison FOR YOURSELF, like I did.
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker I tested out various things: Core 2 duo E8400 vs Athlon II X2 245 with GTS 250 and 2GB ram:
GTA IV high 16x AF (cpu heavy game) : Intel 31fps - AMD 42 fps
MW2 Maxed 4x AA: Intel: 76 fps AMD: 93fps
Left 4 Dead 2 4xAA 16xAF: Intel: 97 fps AMD: 117 fps.
seems clear to me. also: the athlon II scores about 2000 marks higher in 3DMark Vantage.
nelizmastr 7 months ago
@nelizmastr What about the math processing? Don't forget that... And do you believe the Athlon II is an all-new processor? It's a rehash of the old Phenoms. But myself, I've seen the Core 2 Duos being superior than the Athlon II chips. The Athlon II 4XX line-up beats the Core 2 Duo chips, though.
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker All I care about is frames per second. I have a e-green video card that doesnt max the cpu out, so its a good enough benchmark.
nelizmastr 7 months ago
@nelizmastr Then that's your perspective, once I play above 30FPS, frames per second are a secondary thing. Experience quality starts being the main part of the test since that moment.
JackBandicootsBunker 7 months ago
@JackBandicootsBunker the smoothness was more or less identical. the minimum fps was lower on the intel, so slightly more stuttering.
nelizmastr 7 months ago
@nelizmastr 1/4th the price because they are shit.
joestar3000 7 months ago
@joestar3000 they are not. get your facts straight. I on the other hand, am well educated on computer sciences. A Phenom II X6 is only 10-20% slower than an i7 980X. the 70% price difference is simply not justifiable.
nelizmastr 7 months ago
@nelizmastr I dont know where you get your information from.... but my guess is that you dont.
AidivnAidivn 7 months ago
@AidivnAidivn its all based on both online and own benchmarks. go jerk off to intel if you'd like. but dont bother me with incorrect and unrelated comments.
nelizmastr 7 months ago
@nelizmastr no they dont. get a 39$ pentium dual core they will pwn ANY AMD x2 processor
BTW: get it at micro center.
GenuineMW2 7 months ago
@GenuineMW2 pentium dualcore HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
nelizmastr 7 months ago
@nelizmastr Its beats any AMD x2 processor so im "hahahing" at your stupidity.
GenuineMW2 7 months ago