AMD or Intel?

[Tsutarja]

Which processor brand do you prefer more? The two most common brands are AMD and Intel. Why do you prefer said brand of processors?

 

[Gardevoir the Dragon Slayer]

I Don't mind to much but my new laptop has an AMD A8 in it which seemed better than I3's which were in the same price range.

 

[Meganium]

I never had any "bad" experiences on both processor brands. My current computer has AMD Athlon A4, and even though I heard some bad reviews about AMD processors, I think mine works like a charm. Computer boots up pretty quick, and well responsive.

I'm willing to try a computer with an i3-i5 processor, as those are pretty good in my books in terms of gaming, and other rigorous programs like Photoshop.

 

[Blade_of_darkness]

My gaming desktop's outfitted with an AMD proc. I'm led to believe that they're faster than what Intel has to offer, & quite frankly, most signs point to me being right.

So, I'm biased towards AMD.

 

[Dustmop]

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I've never actually used an AMD processor. Boyfriend had one in his old budget gaming rig, and it did what he needed while he had it, but that's been the only 'experience' I could ever say I've had with them..

However, Intel has never let me down so I can't see any reason to change it up.

 

[Akiba]

My entire stack pretty much relies on AMD FX-series processors. You get the biggest bang for your buck with them, and since the FX-8k and FX-9k series are Oct-core, they make for great hybrid servers as well.

My gaming desktop's outfitted with an AMD proc. I'm led to believe that they're faster than what Intel has to offer, & quite frankly, most signs point to me being right.

So, I'm biased towards AMD.

Actually, Intel can reduce the actual work required to complete a whole segment of instructions by using a look-ahead model and allocating resources accordingly. That's why you don't see Intel CPUs running around with the same number of cores and clock speed as AMD CPUs do at the same price. AMD Oct-cores aren't actually eight cores, it's more of like a Quad-core with a split threading model. They are both still excellent CPU manufacturers.

 

[PinkCatDragon]

I prefer intel on mechines. it been supported on linux more than amd. but i also like ARM processors a bit

 

[donavannj]

I prefer AMD, but that's mostly due to familiarity and not wanting to see a competitor of Intel's disappear off the map, as I've had no issues with either. I have encountered a PITA issue with a specific Intel chipset version for a particular HP Compaq desktop model and Adobe Flash, though.

 

[yadon]

Considering I've only ever used AMD I suppose I am biased.

So, yes, my uninformed opinion is AMD.

 

[Dying Light]

I've used both, and I'm gonna settle with AMD. Intel was okay, and I know they've gotten better, but I remember using an older Intel processor that was... very... slow. Then I bought a desktop from a friend, it had an AMD in it, and to this day it runs smooth. Now I've got newer computers with AMDs in them, and I've had no problems. Maybe I'm being narrow minded, but I guess the Intel one just left a bitter taste in my mouth. :p

 

[Radioactive]

AMD CPUs need to go die in a fire. Time and time again they fail against Intel equivalents, even when Intel tries to let them win. Intel's true capacity for semiconductors is being routed for government-grade tasks not pertinent to the consumer. I want Intel's stock to be invested in by the government and for them to have a monopoly on the semiconductor industry, if that gives you an idea.

For those touting the AMD 8-core thing, a certain Broadwell i7 is about to annihilate that Cracker Jacks nub of junk.

Intel has consistently ousted AMD in semiconductors for a long time… those of you complaining about Intel lacking performance were likely using ancient chips… my 1997 Pentium II wasn't all too great with 2008-standards web browsing either. It can't be compared to an AMD chip made half a decade later, though, that's for sure.

AMD, you make good GPUs. Intel sucks in that department. Please kindly be fking out of the CPU industry kthx

 

[donavannj]

AMD CPUs need to go die in a fire. Time and time again they fail against Intel equivalents, even when Intel tries to let them win. Intel's true capacity for semiconductors is being routed for government-grade tasks not pertinent to the consumer. I want Intel's stock to be invested in by the government and for them to have a monopoly on the semiconductor industry, if that gives you an idea.

For those touting the AMD 8-core thing, a certain Broadwell i7 is about to annihilate that Cracker Jacks nub of junk.

Intel has consistently ousted AMD in semiconductors for a long time… those of you complaining about Intel lacking performance were likely using ancient chips… my 1997 Pentium II wasn't all too great with 2008-standards web browsing either. It can't be compared to an AMD chip made half a decade later, though, that's for sure.

AMD, you make good GPUs. Intel sucks in that department. Please kindly be fking out of the CPU industry kthx

From a consumer standpoint, AMD dying basically means we don't have any choice when it comes to processors and Intel could double their prices with ease, and there's no guarantee that antitrust laws would be used to break up Intel in such a case... your wallet needs Intel to have a competitor, even if you don't want it to have one

 

[Radioactive]

From a consumer standpoint, AMD dying basically means we don't have any choice when it comes to processors and Intel could double their prices with ease, and there's no guarantee that antitrust laws would be used to break up Intel in such a case... your wallet needs Intel to have a competitor, even if you don't want it to have one

I want Intel's stock to be invested in by the government and for them to have a monopoly on the semiconductor industry, if that gives you an idea.

The BBC pulls it off pretty nicely despite being a media entity, which Intel is not. Not saying it couldn't go wrong, though. Still, there's no logical reason besides anti-trust claims for Intel to have competitors. At that point then it's just bickering over different takes on capitalism, and you don't see and end to that anytime soon, do you?

 

[Legobricks]

AMD has more 'bang for buck', or so I've read; less $ per Hz, though they're not as good in the grand scheme of things. So, not being concerned with 'the best', I went with that for my first real CPU and I haven't really had any complaints aside from some oddness with the clock speed (the time clock, not the CPU's hertz) and consequent video game sync errors under Windows XP. Now that's no longer an issue, my (still rather anachronistic) PC works well enough for it seems to matter.

I'd actually be interested to hear about non-duopoly microprocessors, if they even exist.

 

[obZen]

I've never used them, but I'm seriously gonna consider an AMD processor for my custom laptop. Integrated graphics that're actually good is gonna be something!
Plus, the open source ati driver is pretty solid now

 

[Flakey Bear]

AMD because:

• It's cheap (i.e. they made an 8-core CPU that only costs $199 on Amazon)
• Has successfully fusioned CPU with a graphics card, resulting the APU
• Overclock friendly

Intel is also great, but if you're in a budget then what I'm talking about is your choice.

 

[Buoysel]

Intel all the way.

In my experience, the AMD chip is not as powerful of a processors as an equivalent Intel. Sure AMD is cheaper, but you are getting what you pay for.

This is what I know though. Intel Processors are more powerful, generate less heat, and use less power than AMD.

Also, when you start looking at servers, you don't see many AMD powered servers.

 

[Legendary Silke]

I'd try to stick with Intel CPU-based PC builds, seeing as the average modern Intel CPU core tends to do more work per clock cycle, and the entire processor ends up being...cooler and more power efficient. I do also entertain the thought of AMD-based builds, especially their APUs, if graphical performance is desired within a tight budget. (Any semi-decent Radeon, even in APU on-die form, is likely to run circles around even the best of Intel iGPUs that are found on the same CPU-level.)

 

[Starry Windy]

Even though I don't tend to be picky when it comes to processors, I find myself using Intel processors most of the time, because their processor often runs fast.