AMD vs Intel Processor

[Outcast]

Don't know much about computer hardware, so i thought i could ask you guys about this.

Between the two processors, which offers the best performance? Is it AMD or Intel? I believe Intel is more expensive here, so i can get more memory at the same price for AMD.

How about you guys? What's your preference? ^_^

[zuludelta]

It shouldn't really make that much of a difference, if all you're concerned with is mid-level gaming and doing office/school work on your machine. Traditionally, AMD-based PCs were better at certain memory-intensive tasks (sound file conversion, still image rendering, etc.) while Intel-proc based machines were better overall performers, but that difference has largely disappeared in the last 5 years or so. AMD procs were also cheaper for the equivalent performance but the prices are pretty similar these days.

The more important thing to note when choosing a processor is the speed (noted in terms of Ghz) and cache size (noted in terms of Kb). This gets a little confusing when buying an AMD processor, since they rate their processor speed differently from the performance. For example, the AMD Sempron 3100+ I have on the PC I'm using now is actually rated at 1.82 Ghz (which might make it look slow in terms of raw numbers) but in terms of real-world performance, it's pretty much equivalent to an early 2004 Northwood Pentium 4 or current Celeron D rated at 3.1 Ghz (hence the 3100+ label). Although from what I hear, Intel's current crop of dual core processors are ahead of AMD's by a wide margin performance-wise. If you're buying a more economical entry-level single-core processor though (AMD's Sempron or Intel's Celeron D or the older Athlon XPs and Pentium 4s), you can't really go wrong either way.

Since the performance differences aren't that significant, I think the bigger factor to consider when choosing a CPU is pricing and availability, not just of the processors, but also of the associated parts for building a PC. I personally go for an AMD processor because in my experience, RAM for Socket 754 motherboards (and the motherboards themselves) is easier to come by and cheaper in the local shops in my area, and in many cases, more RAM can make a much more discernible difference in performance than a bump up in processor speed.   

[Cardmaster]

In my experience I've liked Intel better; but please note this is only because I believe they only have tech support.

I've also never been a real tinkerer of parts, so my opinion shouldn't be taken too heavily.

[Epimethee]

After a few years where AMD had something of a lead, Intel seems to be back at the top. Not that it means much, unless you want the top of the line. Getting the right processor for your needs/wallet isn't necessarily obvious; the olde clock speed megahertz frequency ratings are now rather meaningless – for example, depending on software setup, a Core 2 Duo (a nice but still middle tier processor) can be ~ 4 X the speed of a Pentium 4 of the same clock speed.

More to the point, the processor itself is but one component of a system; paying a premium for a top-end processor is useless if the RAM, motherboard, graphic card and hard disc are too limited to feed it correctly. I'd suggest the www.ArsTechnica.com system guides (and forums), which they publish every season. They are geared toward do-it-yourself users (it IS an ubergeek site), but the info is still every bit as useful for evaluating a proposed vendor's setup.

[Outcast]

Thanks for the reply guys. :) I went on ahead with the AMD processor which is cheaper here. Its a dual core processor with 2GB ram i think.