Added: 4 years ago
From: AMDUnprocessed
Views: 43,554
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (302)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • My Old Arch Enemy..................240p!!

  • Nuclear waste idiot7

  • Bulldozer finally Kill Crap i7 4ever

  • Phenom? More like Failnom.

  • AMD ALL THE WAY! F*CK Intel :D

  • AMD is so friggin awesome. I've been using their processors since the Pentium days (90's) up until this day and they have never let me down. Radeon graphics are fanstastic as well.

  • i want to believe but your CPU's are running hot on stock coolers! I have to invest on a 3rd party cooler.

  • Talk is cheap. Looking at the real-time performance benchmark even the greatest highest end 12 core AMD Operton loses out to a cheaper quad core Intel. Look at Passmark's High End CPU benchmark chart. The 12-core $1,400 Operton loses out to an Intel Xeon W3680 which is $350 cheaper. Also their Intel Xeon X3440 benchmarked higher than AMD's Opteron 6128. The only difference is that the memory controller is integrated on the CPU. Cheaper, yes. Faster, not nessecarily. This is where DDR3 helps.

  • @Sealy1986 nope your completely wrong... AMD's architecture emphasizes mainly on its efficiency in transporting and processing information, well DDR3 is now everywhere but at the time of the video its still emerging and not really that efficient. In server's AMD's Opteron is much better than Intel's Xeon.

  • amd is more powerful than intel and yet its more cheaper.

  • it's not more powerful,but it's really close in terms of performance and OF COURSE it's waaaaaaaaayyy cheaper than intel......so FUCK intel/nvidia!!!

  • then i7 comes out and completely shits on AMD even if they did make real quads first

  • amd also. the differense is AMD IS FASTER

  • -intel has pretty much the same clock perfromanse as amd

    - but intel i7 is still 3 times as powerfull per core than a amd cpu

    - to bad the cores at a intel cpu dont works very well together.

    - intel i7 can cost over 800 dollars.

    - i will buy a amd cpu.

  • AMD was the first to use turbo boost and Hyper threading aswell.

  • @GameRemix AMD doesnt have Hyperthreading you moron, its a proprietary architecture developed by intel. Fool.

  • @thedead1ock bulldozer will support hyperthreading :D

  • @amdintelxsniperx

    Not it won't. If your going off of that xbit article AMD has already released a statement that it has not announced not planned on supporting HT.

  • @thedead1ock no im going off a few sites not just x bit a few others including one of amds guys i forget whom it was was saying it has plans of implementing its own form of ht now it didn't say it was going to show two logical threads but.. they stated there would be a form

  • This was true. Intel beats AMD in performance. I still like AMD because it's cost effective in the mainstream segment but if performance is what you are looking for, go with Intel. I'd really would like to see AMD beating Intel again. I remember back in 2004 where AMD won with their superior multicore architecture. When farcry 64bit was the definitive version. I can't wait for AMD's six core CPU to come out.

  • As you can see, AMD is clearly superior!

  • Did you know ATI was:

    -first to support DirectX 10, DirectX 10.1, and DirectX 11 support

    -first to design graphics cards supporting GDDR5 memory technology

    -first to release WHQL certified drivers for both Windows Vista and Windows 7.

    -first to launch a unified shader architecture

    -first to launch GPUs based on a new process node.

    -first to launch 40nm GPUs.

    So yeah, Intel and nSHITia sucks ass.

    AMD/ATI rules!

  • @dunlrock And for AMD:

    -first to have direct connect (HT) technology

    -first to release dual core cpus

    etc etc

  • @dunlrock actually nvidia beat them to dx 10 with the 8800 gtx then ati came out with the hd 2900 xt but got owned by the 8800gtx after that ati beat nvidia to the punch and dx 10.1 was a joke

  • @dunlrock lol

  • @dunlrock Who the fuck gives if company A did it first? how the fuck does that effect me, as a consumer? i dont care who did it first, I CARE WHO DID IT BEST! and great, AMD has better prices for processors almost as good. notice i said almost as good. Intel processors are slightly to alot better, and the prices are also slightly to alot more (when comparing equivalent cpu's). i am willing to pay for that performance, if you arent, STOP BITCHING ABOUT PRICE, THATS YOUR PROBLEM, GET A JOB!

  • Comment removed

  • Did you know AMD was the FIRST to BREAK the 1GHz barrier? Afterwards, Intel pulled out with their HOT, INEFFICIENT P4s.

    Did you know AMD was the first to use integrated memory controller AND L3 cache on a consumer CPU? Now, Intel copied them for Core i7.

    Did you know AMD was the first to design AMD64? Intel later copied it and called it EM64T.

  • Comment removed

  • im better then you

  • Intel copied AMD! DUH!

  • when i type shit i goes than comes back whats up with that

  • oops

  • ,./,./,/,./

  • in spañol

  • haha you guys need to chill out, its just a chip :D

  • Hey go fuck yourself to death with jack-knife asshole ! Amd is the only chip maker with power efficient high quality desktop chip lineup at a sociably acceptable price tag!

    intels line ups are principally made off overheating overrated overpriced chips

    for snobby assed idiots who are easily suckered by TV commercials.

    so why don't you go shove a nice uselessly overheating and overpriced intel quad core up your asshole,and dance to the fucking tick!

  • just face the face the fact you sad son of a bitch. go and rape your mam.

  • Comment removed

  • is that so! gimmy your fucking address ill fucking kill you and sacrifice your soul to a demon

    you fuck

  • go and slit your wrist you sad son of a bitch

  • Comment removed

  • thats it run away you queer searching prick

  • The Core I7 is currently winning in speed, but WAYYY too pricy and besides amd will introduce something better soon.

  • QX9300 is probably the best high performance low power cpu intel has ever made but they had to slap a extreme tag on it so that only celebrities can afford it

    fkn bitches

  • yeah one good overpriced $1000 dollar 45watt chip no one on the planet can afford except fucking millionaires! fucking intel might as well just put the key in the door and close shop.

  • get a microwave oven leakage meter and put it near your cpu, youll be floored

  • cpus over 45 watts emit so much microwave radiation that you can actually see VHF radiowave interference in your monitor if you use lower resolutions in crt's

    high watt dekstop cpus are power draining and

    self deteriorating junk technology

  • Quad core = hundreds of dollars poorer on utility bills, higher latency, heat issues, instability, cpu microwave radiation gradually deteriorating ram and motherboard components and burning watts you dont need

    QUAD CORE dumb technology for those

    who wish they had known better.

  • instability is because its rather new, software isnt realy made for it yet

  • is Intel staff and R&D just stupid or purposely making low quality cpus on purpose? the QX9300 is a 45 WATT top notch QUAD CORE with 12 MB CACHE which has low heat therefore low latency and perfect stability and an exemplary performance per watt ratio for the specs! so why the fuck they make overheating low qualityunstable peripheral and component burning 65 and 95 watts cpus when

    they have a superior low wattage one makes absolutely no sense! anything over 45 watts is a wretched value

  • haha

  • im a AMD man

  • ya even compare to price phenom 2 is hell expansive then intel core 2 quad

  • What a bunch of crap. Looks good in theory AMD and probably is good in theory. Too bad Intel does it alot better! Your Phenom II just caught up to Core 2 Quad in terms of real-world performance. Go check out some benchmarks. Too bad Intel owns you now with Core i7.

  • 1:06

    WTF IS THAT THING!@?

  • u are stupid hahaha

  • yes and when it is time for DDR4, AMD will be able to support it and Intel wont because of their different architecture. They will have to have something else which is SLOWER than DDR4 anyway :D

  • Video is server centric (Opteron processor) where AMD's architecture shines. Intel does not scale as well, especially going from two processors to four+ processor systems.

  • wake up dude phenom support ddr3

  • AMD ftw! cheaper and fast, for me, BUDGET rules my decision, and IT has decided that its pointless to get an i7 or intel core 2 quad that steals my money, i could spend $120 for an AMD quad core with no DIFFERENCE in performance of an intel q6600. Buy i7 if ur rich, or if ur a weather forecaster trying to anticipate weather through 3d model haha! BTW, those people use IBM supercomputers.

  • "if ur a weather forecaster trying to anticipate weather through 3d model"

    Hey! That's my future career! :D I plan on getting a BS in physics and being a weather forcaster/research scientist lol. And yeah, I've heard about the computers they use for that stuff. Forget quad-core, their computers have hundreds of cores, if I remember it correctly lol. Yay Numerical Analysis FTW!!! lol Sincerely, Mr. Fry Richardson

  • if i understand things: in order to get the full effect of a mutli-core design you are going to have to multithread your code (e.g programs)? this would benefit people in the scientific computing arena. but what about non scientific users? I doubt that any games have been multithreaded to take adavantage of multicores or standardized off the shelf commercial software.

  • Haha pity for them my q6600 out performs my 9950, :P

  • The Q6600 does not outperform the 9950BE and I know cos I've got one. I can run Crysis on Vista x64 at 1680x1050 all highest settings with 8xaa and Vsync on while recording 1680x1050 AVI with FRAPS. My CPU is still at stock and I get 15FPS on the last few levels. My specs 9950BE 4870x2 4gbs 1066mhz OCZ DFI LANPARTY UT 790FX-M2R. I also write music using Cubase and I can play 50+ stereo WAV files (all at 48khz 24bit, CDs are 44.1khz 16bit) similtaneously with at least 40 FX and 10 VST instruments

  • No, My 9950 does not do that, it is worse than intel, . . and just in case you dont know, (the cpu does feck all in crysis).

    Wow you can play 50 plus wav files simultaniously. Intel could ONLY do that way back with the core 2 e6850,

  • playing 50+ stereo wavs with 40+ software effects with 10 software synthesizers constantly for 6-8 hours shows that it is a very capable cpu.

  • Yes it does, and my point eniterly is that the q6600 does it the same and in some cases better than a 9950.

    Since Amd have said that by using thier htt link you get better performance, with intel getting better performance by using a fsb setup doesnt say something good about Amds design

  • It does'nt matter it will be outdated in A few months.

  • Wow all that power and I cant hear what the fuck you are saying. What the duce!

  • the bottleneck for the last 2 decades (and still is with those lousy slow random writing junk ssds) is the hard fucking DRIVE!

    thats why they came up with scsi and DDR ram drives get it?

    pretty please simmer fucking down with the cpu craze like its the be all end all solution to a good pc a bit why dont you.

  • Wtf, youre all childish bickering computer illiterate wannabe's, A processor cant fetch data faster than the main storage can give it, getting a 50 GHZ processor with 5 gigs of cache and 5000 cores made of extra terrestrial superconducting silicon wont fucking make your pc any fucking faster you dumbasses, why can't u stupid noobs figure out that a pc is only as fast as its slowest part! why OH fuckng why?!

    hooking up a 3000$ mega core cpu to a slow write&read drive wont do shit difference!

  • AMD Powers the top PCs in the world.

    Mega computors dont use Intel!

    They use a mix up of AMD-IBM as Intel as taken to long to sort out its FBS then only buy copying AMDs HT

    With Intel Making a power PC wouldnt work so well without the CPU being able to compute as fast as it can with direct conect- aswell as dedicated memory!

    In the main page AMD over powers Intel!

    With the new i7 chip they will still need to over come CPU-CPU computing

  • Quad cores have TDP's that can become a health issue, any cpu emiting radio wave pollution over 35 watts can become a risk for radiowave sickness, the maximum TDP for quad cores should be 45 watts max (like their mobile quad) anything over that shouldnt even be sold to the public, the desktop quads emit major microwave pollution.

  • If amd is so superior and they have had this so called better technology for 5 years then why are they still slower than intel which use an older based tech? Wasnt the quad phenom a flop thats why they tried the 3 core thing?

  • Or was it because that one of the cores was faulty so they cheated you amd fans by repackaging the x4 as x3's. Even if Intel are 5 years to late who cares bloomfield is a monster 2.66ghz bloomies are killing cinebench 10 in like 25 secs my quad at 4.5ghz can only do it in 47secs. The fastest stock phenom is well over 1 minute

  • or was it because they planed the triple core cpu at the same time they were designing the quad

  • The bottom line is at the benchmarks. And I'd say AMD has got a lot of catching up to do! Intel put out the "less performing" "Pentium Dual Core -1 mb cache" JUST to compete with AMD! If AMD is so superior, then why does Intel have to make a crappy processor just for some competition? AMD SUCKS!

  • Its good that we have Intel thinking their the better of the companies! as without the compatition it would be a single market that would result in higher prices!

    Intel droped their prices ! as I realy think their over priced when you compare performance-technoligy to the AMD setups.

    Phenom-Opteron is the choice of most medicinal computers! Dont that say enough for all them Intel fans

  • Look at the pro's

    Do you see AMD powering the Medical marvels! Yes! Sun servers running the Optertron are much better than any intel based server

  • unfortanetely for amd most people arent buying servers.

  • Intel will soon kick the bucket. I bought a QX and it was a waste of money, My Phenom rapes it up one side and down the other.

  • What are you going on about Intel will never kick the bucket and certainly not soon lmao thats the funniest thing ive heard in ages if anything it will be amd dragged down by the the dead weight money flushing ati.

  • ATI is hardly flushing any money at all. In fact, they're racking quite a bit of it with their HD4xxx. In some EU countries out of 10 top selling GPUs, 9 are made by ATI. I do possess one myself.

  • ....right that phenom couldnt even outperform my e7200. amd is the one looking pretty shaky these days.

  • Umm your e7200 would lose to the Phenom in a an app that is multi-threaded...it would lose by alot... it seems alot of these posts are people just repeating stuff they read or heard somewhere and dont understand the technology behind the statements being made. Amd makes powerhouse cpu's. The Athlon X2 6400+ is crazy fast and can handle anything thats thrown at it, blows through games to. I have an Intel Core 2 Quad 3.4GHZ, but b4 that i always had AMD chips from the Duron to the FX-53.

  • well, i agree that there are a few types of applications that amd can do better, ive owned quite a few amd processors myself and a good buddy of mine is a big amd fan so we have quite a few comparisons goin on. I know benchmarks arent real world ability necessarily, but his athlon x2 6000+ cant even hold a candle to the intel e7200 for what was about 20 dollars more.

  • In all honesty, thats why i went with Intel this time around. They had more sound quad core technology- No not the built in memory controller or direct connect architecture like AMD has, but performance all around was faster and more consistent. Previous to the C2D line, AMD was spankin Intel, its how the CPU wars go, Im glad AMD is still around to level the playing field and to prevent Intel from Monopolizing the business and prevents them from selling their chips at ridiculous prices.

  • intel ftw

  • all great and true points, the AMD architecture is vastly superior to that of intel, but they are all wasted by the fact that AMD's "true" quad cores are beaten in every aspect by intel's equivalents, the bottom of the range intel will still beat the top of the range AMD quad core, and this is before bringing overclocking into the equation. The largest fault of the new architecture, not even AMD can produce it in sufficient quantities due to its complicated nature.

  • Intel is based on an INFERIOR architecture which they still have yet to do anything about. Maybe when Intel stops gluing their CPU's together. Then AMD and Intel can have a FAIR race. That isn't based on HIGH CLOCKS and TONS of Cache to make up for an INFERIOR architecture.

    Until then Intel Fan Boys have a nice time gluing your Pentium 4's together and labeling then Core2Duos.

  • as the vid says!

    AMD as used HT-direct conect for years but Intel is only now copying ,

    So AMD is the winner in selling better chips!

  • that is the dumbest thing ive heard all day. I dont think you have even a clue about the architecture of either intel or amd's processors.

  • Lol, AMD all the way!!

  • AMDs quad core architecture is so superior even AMD can't mass produce chips using it! Their quads may be "true" quads but they still get their ass handed to them by the Intel Core 2 Quads. They aren't even close anymore Intel is smashing AMD into the ground.

  • hell yeh fuk intel FSB AMD is what i will put in to my next computer fuk intel

  • Siempre se ha dicho que amd es para gamers.. Intel para system..! Asi de sencillo..

    todo depende de que mobo pienses utilizar y que grafica tambien.. La msi posee un socket para am2+ que va perfecto con el phenom 9950 de 2.6ghz.. Se lame al q6600 y es mas economico.. Admas que tienen chipset Nvidia 790i.. Esto queda muy bien con la serie 8 y 9 de la Gforce.. Y con 8gb de ram.. Ya eso s suficiente..!

  • Que intel es mejor que AMD? Amigos q les pasa.. El phenom comparador con el core 2 quad de q6600 es mucho mejor.. El phenom trae 4 procesadores en 4 ranuras diferentes, posee 1mb de cache para cada procesador los cuales trabajan independientment cada uno.. El q6600 nisiquiera es un quad core.. pose 2 ranuras con procesdores que tienen 8mb de cache pero que al momento de la verda colapsa.. En conclusion simplemente es otro core 2 duo..

  • Why does the Phenom suck compared to the Core 2 Quad?

  • ja ja ja ja me paso las amd pòr la punto del choto cuando no tiene cramelos para darme me dan un opteron y una phenom x3 ; x4 X10 segovia = amd intel= dios supremo

    segovia supremo supersayamariodaytopokesonicmo­rtalkombanovatientelegendario

  • las intel som mil veses mejores, las AMD las enchufo y se funden al asercarlas al toma corriente.

  • sabes por donde me da las AMD chotas pedaso de hpd las uso de estufa y para arracar la camioneta a diesel los quad los uso de intercooler para el turbo de la S-10 de mauro

  • people think INTEL is just sitting in a lawn chair relaxing

    they are secretly trying to develop the 35nm processor

    NVIDIA is also trying to develop the 45nm processor

    they know theirs no programs the will take advantage of 8 or even 16 cores. this year they introduced skulltrail and programmers said it will take 10 years before you see a game that need 8 cores

    SO yes intel and Nvida know the market right now and its about speeding up with what you got.

  • you know Intel is actually making the 32nm processor, not 35nm.

  • But AMD have teamed up with IBM and already have the technology to start designing a 25nm processor.

  • hes full of shit, NVIDIA boards went toe to toe with AMD boards, no competition they shamed AMD and ATI

    Only thing they had on NVIDIA was its cost, no shit performance machines cost dough

    AMD just doesn't get it its NVIDIA they have to worry about

    AMD made a stupid mistake buying ATI they will intentionally make CPU dependant PCS

    while NVIDIA with NForce 2 makes AMD+ATI look sad

    NVIDIA's 8 sli GPU's test had the same power as 130 INTEL quad CPU's

    the Future is stream processors

  • what planet have u been living on (planet of apes) coz AMD/ATi chipsets beats nvidia and Intel or at least competes 100%, in gpu AMD/ATi is king. nvidia don't have an x86 licence so it don't matter what they invent.

    actually cost is the main factor before all this hardware you see is made (duh).

    AMD/ATi never needs to worry about nvidia but from Intel as they are a threat from cpu and gpu and are the no 1 with over 65% integrated gpu market and over 80% cpu market.

  • you need to keep up with current events NVIDIA has x86 chip ready, you think that their investment is going to be halted over a litigation issue then you do not full understand our corrupt legal system

    NVIDIA is bypassing by trying to acquire companies that have the x86 license its now just a matter of months before AMD/ATI will need to change their diapers

  • enjoy your respective CPUs and stop fighting...but personally I find AMD better anyday!

  • randy allen ill back you up all the way i think am the only person that seems to understand.

  • shadow is a reject with a p4.

    this architecture was used this 478 northwoods.

    it sucks.

    its quite funny how a amd chip with x2 512kb cache can out perform a intel chip with a 4mb cache at the same clock speed.

    AMD must have a hard time trying to explane this you idiots like shadow.

    what do you not understand shadow.

    i bet a 5000+ @stock speeds will leave any intel chip in the dust then it comes to memory bandwidth.

  • INTEL OWNES amd!

  • todays atx desktop cpus are the most power inneficient cpus today and are a waist

    of money to buy. they're power drainers and overkill, overkill because a processor cant fetch data faster than the storage can give it, so the power inefficiency and heat issues and the cost of atx desktops make them a lousy investment.

  • AMD Architecture is simplify and can be faster due to the direct relation to CPU to memory and I/O, no third party is involved. instead of intel which uses memory contr. as a third pary to deal its speed business. the only advantage that the intel has its depending on how fast FSB can relay to the memory controller. If only AMD HT is transformed to much higher hyper transport this may beat INTEL. Because AMD CPU deal with direct speed with it's client.

  • Try using an 64bit OS on an AMD Athlon64/Phenom and on an Core 2 Duo/Quad. You'll sure notice the difference and the "gap" closing. Not to mention that AMD cpus have far less possibilities for BSOD caused by hardware errors to occur

  • i know AMD is better. But u have to show us by real benchmark numbers.

  • i agree that AMD has some very cool ideas for their processors... and nice prices too. However, in doing the research for putting together an 8-core computer. I found that the AMD chips have a terribly small cache, making the streamlined buss system irrelivent in my opinion. sure it's fast... if you want to do single-tasking. I mean the socketF quads have a 2MB cache! ...compared to the intel equivalent, wich has a 12MB cache... and all the other speeds are the same.

  • yeh right! your quad architecture (or anybodies for that matter) will get superior when your we can run your quad cores without a fan! OR if you guys pay your customers powerbill for 5 years! Then ill be really dazed and amazed. The add for quads, should be QUAD CORE the chip that keeps on costing!

  • intel were copying from the start.

  • yes they copied the 1 ghz fsb of the FSB.... amd was the first 1ghz fsb

  • yeah but amds dual core architecture doesnt use QDR bus. hyper transport i way more advanced.

    intel have been useing the QDR

  • since 478 celerons.

  • O ya and 1 more thing...Dont u just love those Intel Graphics chipsets..rofl. Ati..owned now by Amd..and the only card with the least compatability issues for games. Go intel!!! if all u wanna do is run really fast spreadsheets

  • i love how most intel processors come in propritory systems (aka dell) yet ne1 with enough sense to build thir own computer from scratch uses AMD. I have 4 comps..dont have a quad core yet..but they are all dual cores..1 intel..3 AMD. n i can say from EXPERIANCE instead of a biased opionion that AMD far outperforms intel. My Singlecore 1.6ghz amd laptop runs faster then the duelcore 1.73ghz Intel

  • Intel developed the IMC way back before Pentium 4. AMD just implimented it first. Intel has a 80 core CPU that runs at 1TFlop worth of bandwidth while using only 62watts.

    In servers right now AMD is great. In the desktop AMD is not the best price/performance/watt.

  • performance > elegance of design

  • yea....amd originated in the designs that intel is using now...

  • AMD might not be the leader in terms of performance, but it beats Intel on price/speed ratio. And the things that guy is talking - it aint no bullshit. Intel copied AMD64 architecture, I guess the same goes for this direct connection thingie.

  • hahah ahahahahah HAHAHAHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHAHA

    OMG ... AMD lamers !

  • that's the intel and amd of old. The core 2 series from intel is more stable, runs cooler, and is way faster. You can brag about architechture, but speed and benches work. The truth is that intel's dual cores more often than not, out perform AMD'S quads.

  • unfortunately i agree with you. i use amd but i must say laity, amd has only been working on its architecture and not performance. my friends 2.66ghz core2 is about as fast as my 3.2ghz x2. amd makes great ideas but in the end they dont perform as well as they do in theory.

  • im running my q6600 and its fine.

  • intel are faster AMD are more stable after using diffrent pentium 4 computers and seeing how fast and how meny problems they have im glad i built my system with a AMD chip

  • ill stick with my Intel Core 2 Quad cpu thank you.

  • Ya thats why AMD Quad Cores get there asses kicked in the majority of benchmarks!

  • Intel have rigged benchmarks before, why should you trust them today?

  • So hasnt AMD, So hasnt ATI and Nvidia, whats your point, its a cut throat industry shit happens, 3dmark06 results get fucked with. What can ya do. The fact is Intel has the faster silicon right now hands down, AMD has the better value but not performance, dude I love AMD, before I bought my current Quad Core Intel, i had an AMD Athlon FX-53 running at 2.8GHZ the thing flew.

  • amd is not really even the better value. could get a cheaper intel that will outperform the best amd has

  • AMD Should pay more attention to the Gaming Community! Processors with UNLOCKED MULTIPLIERS!!! DID YOU HERE THAT AMD!!! PROCESSORS WITH UNLOCKED MULTIPLIERS!!!

    OVERCLOCKING!!!!!!!!!!!

  • amd black edition has unlocked multipliers

  • yeah and they are very useful. i have the 5000BE and its multiplier is at x16

  • so whatcha clocked at now

  • AMD 4 LIFE!!

    I luv AMD

    My mother bord and CPU is all AMD

  • intel is just selling their name, not the performance... AMD RULES!!!

  • Intel its for people who don't know what its a good computer, and each person who buy Intel bullshit cpu , encourage war against terrorist and give 20% OR more to Israel for buy Weapon against palestinian, so you encourage war and encorage death toll and encourage Israel expension.

    So don't buy shit from Israel.

  • AMD its cheaper for better cpu from intel, look the Phenom X3 (3core) with same frequenzy, same price of a Dualcore from Intel , Phenom X3 its better!!, for same damn price you have 3-core , thing about this, and Look AMD was the first who create 64bits, so windows create 64bits edition for people like me who have more 2GB of rams. So say thank to AMD/ATI who do better and for cheap price.

  • they were the ones who mad 1ghz FSB on an amd cpu

  • what do you have

    - x86

    - amd 64

    whats good is that all intel dumpasseswith 64 GIG of ram think

    "i haven't and, so a pick x84..

  • @adolf512 x86 was designed by intel.

  • yes i know. many intel cpu:s was named by (a number)86. dome idiots with intel cpu:s might pick x86 instead of amd becuase they think they should download to the correct cpu.

  • ok this is a prime example of how stupid a intel fanboy is

    he just says the oposing compainy sucks and the other rules

    so smart one tell us why they are so much better>?

    becuase u can o/c it to 3.2ghz right

    ok yea then it wil crash every two seconds!

  • that just shows how stupid an amd fanboy is tho stock intel cpus kill all amds in benchmarks plus can overclock really well which makes them better plus it is proven that intels cpu's usually last longer, a amd fanboy will ignore all those facts and still say his chip is better even tho he has beeen proven wrong. mainly because he is jealous of intel. !!!!!!!!!!!!intel for life!!!!!!!!!!!

  • i ahve an overclocked q6600 and it does not crash at all

    intel q6600 @3.0ghz

    4 gig corsair xms2 @1066mhz

    nvidia 9800gtx oc edition

  • ok llolololol they live longer is that y my amd opteron 185 ps thats the best i could get almost 4 years ago for 939 is still living

    and not only has it been living for 4 years but its been living o/c for 4 years what do u have to say about that? hugh

  • i had an overclocked pentium 4 back in 2000 socket 478 and it is still running to this day but from the research ive done for school, i have found that an amd processor runs the speed of its clock all the time an intel runs low and uses less energy and less ware and tear. then as the task becomes "harder" it increases its usage getting closer to its actual clock. so theoretically the intel will last longer. and the overclocking capabilities are so much greater on an intel chip.

  • ok thats cool

  • The new AMD quads can declock any one of their cores.

  • this has nothing to do with desktop processor, no-one has an opteron nor a xeon at home

  • elpolentatlp, What if they weren't talking to desktop users? Dedi servers use AMD and Intel

  • Yes, that's what I am saying, they're all discussing whether AMD is faster than intel or vicevesa, but noone here has a server

  • Well some do...SOME

  • Well, if they have an opteron, or a xeon, I sincerely doubt they'd be posting shitty comments on a youtube video

  • sometimes i do....

  • Okay, but what about the videos I've seen of AMD CPU's overheating to the point of frying without any kind of fail-safe shutdown?

    I hate to say it, but the Intel chips don't do that. They shut down or slow down, rather than start smoking and burn out...

  • architecture doesnt count for shit if intels faster

  • It could be said that the integrated memory controller of AMD offers very little 'real world' gains over Intels current method of external memory control. I use AMD and have done for many years, but at the moment over a certain price bracket Intel offers faster processors over AMD.

  • AMD isn't doing so great right now, but 5% firing of their employees doesn't mean they are going to die.

    I am a loyal AMD customer and will be with them through out my computing experiance. Go AMD.

  • yea intel sucks!

    my mobo is dead on my pc

    so im using older dell with a intel and just on youtube the cpu runs a 10% !!!!! the fan is loud kind from it

    but 10%!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • AMD Deneb, Deneb FX, & AM3 FTW!!!!

  • Iconaclast666 = Redneck lover.