AMD Vs Intel at the request of user zenc

[zenc]

intel pays everyone, for example, where I buy all the parts, I only see intel propaganda, they even give them vests and everything. intel's crap, keep it up and you'll see how expensive the processors will get

[Nemo]

Zenc, it seems to me that you are practicing cheap demagogy.

There are two ways to check the performance of a micro:

• By looking at the results obtained by different processors in various tests, from different sources (the net is full of them) and drawing your own conclusions. Keeping in mind that many tests are done on forums or small review sites that, I suspect, Intel ignores their existence.
• By testing the processor's behavior yourself and subjecting it to the tests you consider necessary.

Since in this forum we spend what Intel pays us in hookers and casinos, we have had to make rankings with benchmark results of our own processors. Thus creating some indicative tables of performance.

• Ranking Fritz Benchmark.
• Super PI Test
• wPrime
• Linx test

I invite you, and all those who want to prove that AMDs have more performance, to run the same tests on them and post the results. Those will be the real ones since there are no business interests involved.
If you have an AMD processor, choose an Intel equivalent in the list, set it to the same frequency and see the result.
I'm not saying whether one is better, or worse, or if one bribes or the other kills helpless kittens, I'm just saying that the best reason to defend a processor (whatever it is) is because it has been proven to be better.

P.D: Well, now you can go ahead with the Windows vs. Mac OSX polemic. The Intel vs. AMD one is already settled. The Nvidia vs. ATI ones can wait for the new batch that's about to come out :troll: :facepalm:

[Yorus]

My story with micros

Zilog Z80
AMD 386DX-40
Intel 486DX2-66
Intel Pentium 100
AMD K6-200
AMD K6-2 500
AMD Duron 800
AMD Athlon XP 1800+
AMD Athlon 64 3700+
AMD Athlon 64 x2 4200+
AMD Athlon 64 x2 4850e
Intel Pentium E5300
Intel Core i3-2100

Why so much AMD in the list?, because of its quality/performance/price ratio. Why are the last two Intel?, because of its quality/performance/price ratio.

I am not a person who spends a lot on each component, that's why I set low money limits and try to get the best out of it, and today except for very specific cases Intel sweeps in pure performance and have an important quality/price ratio. Another thing is for specific environments, for example an HTPC where we want to save on a dedicated graphics card, then AMD's APUs are very good competitors. Or in the case of Netbook, where AMD's APUs are also as good or better than the Intel Atom/ION combination.

Regards!

Edit: I also add that this forum has had very AMD periods, but I don't see it as partiality, just like now with Intel, but simply things are like this and are reflected in what we buy.

[Bm4n]

@zenc:

intel are always better, it seems like you get paid for it, what a disgust you give with so much intel, as if you sponsored the forum and all. talk also about how disloyal intel has been and that it pays everyone to go against amd. and the fine imposed in the european union on intel.
intel pays everyone, for example where I buy all the parts I only see intel propaganda, they even give you vests and all. intel's crap, keep it up and you'll see how expensive processors will get

There have always been 4 fools who defend a brand to the death as if it paid them a salary, in this case you seem to be YOU defending AMD when we all know it is in a bad moment in several ranges. Intel, AMD, ATI, Nvidia, Apple are brands with many mindless fans here, as far as I know there is no such thing.

If you want to discuss about fines for monopoly or unfair practices, in another branch, and you will probably be right. BUT here there has been no place for those discussions that are past their date without sense, data or reasons, we are talking about price versus the FX-4170 which will be better.

And I repeat, now putting it in plural here all the veterans tend to be people who understand a "minimum" and know what they are talking about, so you can save yourself the demagogy

PD. Also it is ridiculous because I, like so many other forum members, recommend and buy AMD. For example for nets with Fusion, PC with integrated with APU, low-mid range PC for OC the FX, AMD+ATI laptops with a more economical price.

[zenc]

Bm4n,I think it's great that you call me stupid without knowing me, with this you already demonstrate what you are like as a person, I have not disrespected anyone, but you have. Alright, alright, I don't consider myself stupid either. You have already demonstrated what you are like, at least for me.
I have already built many computers for different people and for various uses, and there are many processors that, without being Intel (here they always recommend Intel in about 97%), really have more than enough for what they use, like many of this forum including me.
So much propaganda for Intel is bad in general because this is getting out of hand and in the end Intel will do whatever it wants.
In summary, Intel doesn't beat AMD, the people beat it with their comments, and when it's only Intel, you'll tell me what's going to happen

[Bm4n]

Don't get me wrong I said that you look like a silly fan, not that you are, because I don't know you.

[zenc]

I'm not a silly fan, if you notice what I defend is the wallet.
I think there are processors that, depending on who and for what, an AMD is more than enough for certain ranges. If you review several processor topics, you'll see that in the end there's always someone who says to switch to Intel and I think this is not good.Se that Intel is currently ahead of AMD, but do you really need so much power and for what? There may be people who use it but I don't think the majority does.
And forums are an increasingly powerful and credible means of communication, so what would happen with AMD.
Who would be its biggest rivals?
Without realizing it, what we do is say that Intel is much better and corner AMD and everything with time favors Intel and in the end they will raise prices

[Bm4n]

Man, I don't know, AMD and Intel have always regulated prices mutually, almost regardless of their market share. Both will continue to sell, but you have to recommend the best in each case, in this case I had the possibility to buy something better from Intel although as I said in other countries like Mexico perhaps AMD compensates more, so perfect.

But that said, don't get the wrong idea about the forum, here everything is recommended, but since the people who come here mainly look for mid-to-high range equipment for OC, the best is Intel today... so we are not going to recommend AMD just like that. But in many other things why not, a year ago I had an AMD laptop and I did a review of it and there are people who have bought their netbook with AMD and there are forum members who want an economical equipment for OC and they would be recommended AMD, that is, it wouldn't make sense in those cases to do the same and to maintain equality recommend Intel.

[kynes]

Can someone get the broom and sweep the dust? Zenc, go insult, go to your house.

[Fassou]

Stop being silly :ffu:

@__zenc__ I had to edit post #14 because of your insults to the forum users, correct your attitude or more drastic measures will be taken.

Bye!

[zenc]

FASSOU, I have not insulted anyone, when I said that you give me disgust I mean that you always recommend intel, that is the comment I am referring to.
On the other hand, they have insulted me by calling me stupid. But well, it is the same.
I continue to say that many nonsense is said and where the performance of something is best seen is to have it and see it work and know what it is for.

[Bm4n]

Well you disgust me, I think you're silly, trifles, get those nonsense out of there :risitas: but well we have to moderate the tone, everything can be discussed

[zenc]

I have nothing against anyone here; on the contrary, I learn and don't have any store just in case. And if you see reasons to throw me out, then you throw me out.
And I repeat myself when I said that you disgust me, I referred to the comments advising always Intel.
Here comes an indecisive person and surely he will buy an Intel even if he doesn't need it.
You talk or it is talked about as if AMD has regressed 10 years and INTEL has advanced 20 years, that is what it comes down to.
It turns out that Intel doesn't have any 8-core processor and goes with one of two or four and gives it a beating, that's what you give to understand, then AMD makes processors from the year of the war and yields more even a Celeron already and everything. It will continue with the K6 or K7 then
And so with everyone. Well, Intel may be a little ahead of AMD according to which processor, but not all, and the difference is really very small

[kynes]

Come on, Zenc, it seems like you don't get it. Here people recommend what they think is best for others, no one is paid by Intel or any of the other nonsense you've said. You say you're disgusted that people recommend Intel, I tell you that I'm disgusted by your fanaticism for AMD, which makes you incapable of seeing that, except in the low end, and for the price, their processors are not competitive. I'm telling you this as someone who has had multiple AMD computers, and has a clear preference for their graphics over nVidia's, but I'm able to take off the blindfold and say that Intel has learned from its mistakes and evolved since the days of the P4, while AMD has made quite a few decisions that are, to say the least, debatable, including an advertising scam like calling a block of the Bulldozer processors two cores, which is totally uncertain.

I assure you that with this attitude you won't last long here, we don't want fanatics, we want forum members who share knowledge.

[Bm4n]

Let's see if you would bother to inform yourself and you would see that AMD, in this new architecture, has made two cores share certain resources, preventing them from working independently, which is why they really promote having X cores when they really don't perform as if they did.

On the other hand, Intel has had a technology called hyperthreading for years, which uses the time that passes between the executions of the instructions to process another simultaneous thread, so that 4-core processors like the 2600 can really execute 8 threads. Apart from the fact that Intel has 6-core processors and if they have not yet launched the 8-core ones, which I know is in their plan for this year, it is because they do not need it because their competition has not done it very well.

So less fanaticism, and less if you have no idea what you are talking about. What is happening to AMD now happened to Intel in its day with its latest NetBurst processors, which were stoves that performed less than the AMD processors with less price and speed... and I had a Northwood and was very happy with it in almost everything, so of course you can have an FX and be happy, but that doesn't mean it's the best in the world.

[Fassou]

I was writing a long and threatening post :troll:, but it seems like you've come to your senses.

Thanks for making it easy :sisi:

Bye!

[Sylver]

Hello, good afternoon/night.

I was passing by here and I noticed a slight chill at the sight of an avalanche of written nonsense.
Right after that, I came across this:

PassMark Intel vs AMD CPU Benchmarks - High End

[zenc]

KYNES, forgive me for correcting you, I have not said that the people who say that disgust me, I have said that what disgusts me is the comment, which are two very different things.
And I will say again that I am not a fan of AMD, okay.
And when you recommend a product to someone, you break it down and tell them the truth about what one and the other have.
Maybe I am wrong when it comes to giving advice or I don't know (that's why I don't give any), but when I go to buy something, I like to know what I am going to buy, I don't go to a store where they tell me to buy this because yes and that it is the best.

[Bm4n]

@zenc:

And so with all. Vale intel may be a little ahead of amd depending on the processor but not all and the difference is really very small

I was forgetting something, find an AMD processor that can give almost 120 GFlops with 4 measly cores like my i5 and then we'll talk. And if you find any task currently in which AMD has a processor that performs better than any of Intel I'll give you a positive vote so that horrible red color above is removed from you :ugly:

You really have no idea of the difference that Intel currently has. Be thankful that they haven't started to optimize more software for Intel's AVX or AMD will have to bend over again so that Intel lets them copy, like when MMX :troll:

[Sylver]

@zenc:

KYNES, forgive me for correcting you, I did not say that the people who say that disgust me, I said that what disgusts me is the comment, which are two very different things.
And I will say again that I am not an AMD fanatic, okay.
And when someone is recommended a product, it is broken down and the truth is told about what the one and the other have.
Maybe I am wrong when it comes to giving advice or not (that's why I don't give any), but when I go to buy something, I like to know what I am buying, I don't go to a store where they tell me to buy this because yes and that it is the best.

Well, it will be because there are few threads in the forum explaining why each processor is better for certain tasks… see if you believe that here people are told "buy this because it is more beautiful and better because I say so" for that, ask in any meeting of friends, because there are as many opinions as people.