AMD Vs Intel at the request of user zenc

[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.

[kynes]

This post is being processed/translated. The original version will be shown:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5626/ivy-bridge-preview-core-i7-3770k

Un cuatro núcleos de Intel se pasa por la piedra a un "ocho" núcleos de AMD, consumiendo muchísima menos energía.

[amd125]

This post is being processed/translated. The original version will be shown:

No lo he podido evitar :ugly:

Sorryyyyyyyyyyy

[zenc]

This post is being processed/translated. The original version will be shown:

a ver bm4n ,que procesador de amd equibaldria al tuyo,pero no subido como el tuyo

[Bm4n]

This post is being processed/translated. The original version will be shown:

No existe, Intel ha sido el primero en lanzar un procesador con AVX, rinde mejor y ha logrado que los desarrolladores programen basando en los Intel. Con lo cual un FX-8 rinde peor en las AVX que un 2500 como el mío con o sin OC siendo la mitad de núcleos, así que no hay nada superior en AMD… Single Floating-Point Unit, AVX Performance, And L2 : AMD Bulldozer Review: FX-8150 Gets Tested

Al final AMD tendrá que copiar a Intel y "estandarizar" o será una locura para AMD tener una arquitectura considerablemente "diferente" como la que pretende. La idea final de AMD no es mala, pero tenían que haber hecho dos ramas paralelas de procesadores una con un gran paralelismo y otra más convencional porque a día de hoy el software no está preparado para lo que propone AMD.

PD. Y somos muy generosos diciendo que un FX-8 tiene 8 núcleos porque siendo técnicamente exactos tiene 4 núcleos y no 8. Igual que el AVX del Bulldozer (AMD) que permite la mitad de operaciones que el de Sandy (Intel). Luego la gente pregunta porque los AMD no están a la altura…

[cobito]

This post is being processed/translated. The original version will be shown:

zenc ¿cuál es tu problema? ¿en qué te afecta que la gente compre AMD o Intel? ¿No sabes que hay leyes antimonopolio gracias a las cuales Intel va a hacer lo necesario por no quedarse sola en el escenario del x86?

La verdad, me sorprende que haya quienes se han tomado la más mínima molestia en mostrarte datos y responderte de forma didáctica. Para mi, un hilo que lleva el conjunto de caracteres "AMD vs Intel" debería estar restringido por las normas al igual que la política y la religión.

Para hablar de política, religión y de "AMD vs Intel" ya tenemos los bares. Dejemos el foro limpio de debates estériles y que no llevan a ninguna parte.

PD: Como puedes ver en mi avatar, AMD me pagó una generosa cantidad para que patrocinara su linea de micros Core 2.

[Nemo]

This post is being processed/translated. The original version will be shown:

Creo que Zenc confunde los baremos de "rendimiento" con los de "suficiencia".
Me explico:

Si yo, que no tengo ni idea de ordenadores, entro en un foro de "Entusiastas de Hardware" y digo: Quiero un ordenador que me de el mejor rendimiento en juegos, overclock y que reviente todos los rankings existentes. Posiblemente los entusiastas digan al unisono con voz aflautada " INTEL,INTEL,INTEL" (y K si es posible).

En cambio si el mismo sujeto entra al mismo foro y dice : Quiero un ordenador que cubras mis necesidades cotidianas de navegar, ver vídeos, ofimática y jugar al Doom 3 y todo por menos de 400€ . Posiblemente el coro de voces aflautadas coree el "AMD en DO mayor".

Sinceramente, creo que AMD se ha dado cuenta de su fiasco y con la última hornada ha abandonado la categoría de alto rendimiento, y se ha resignado a pelear en precios con la gama media de Intel.
Porque fíjate, que los AMD "tope de gama", se codean en rendimiento con la gama media-alta de Intel, que es la plataforma 1155, que después por encima tenemos los 2011…y lo que está por llegar con Ivy.
Esto hace dos generaciones de procesadores estaba más igualado, pero ahora no hay color.
Intel ha escogido el camino correcto y AMD no, espero que reaccione y cambie el rumbo para continuar teniendo competencia, no me gustan los monopolios.
Pero ha de ser AMD quien se lo curre, no los consumidores los que por lástima nos tengamos que conformar con menos rendimiento.

En serio, de buen rollo, ahora mismo ...Intel. ;D

Un saludo

[kynes]

This post is being processed/translated. The original version will be shown:

Nemo, dicho de esa forma, totalmente de acuerdo. Es más, para un usuario que quiera un equipo de gama baja-media, con gráfica integrada, una APU de AMD es ahora mismo lo mejor con diferencia. El problema es entrar como un elefante en una cacharrería.

[incrediboy]

This post is being processed/translated. The original version will be shown:

yo por ejemplo hace poco compre como "servidor" casero un hp proliant n40l (si, es amd) para almacenamiento de datos, cliente bittorrent y alguna tarea sencilla. elegi ese pc amd por que tiene un consumo bajo y era barato pero aun asi cumple su funcion.

actualmente un pc amd puede ser util para tareas sencillas que requieren un rendimiento moderado, pero ni loco me compro yo un amd para juegos actuales o procesar videos ¬¬

[Tecnho]

This post is being processed/translated. The original version will be shown:

Está claro que como consumidores que somos algunos teneís sentido común justo el que me falta a mi, que compran lo mejor que hay en el momento al mejor precio posible para nuestro bolsillo, y ahora mismo Intel se está llevando la palma, yo si los buldozzer hubiesen salido mejores, ni me lo pensaba, esto es como siempre CALIDAD/PRECIO.