Hi,

I want to assemble a new computer for me.

I want to know which processor should I use Intel Dual Core or AMD Athone 64

I use my computer for editing works,animation,video editing,converting videos and internet.I need very good performance,Graphix and good speed.

WHICH PROCESSOR SHOULD I BUY: AMD OR INTEL ( HELP ME)

I have already buyed this items---

1GB Ram
DVD Writer
160 GB Hard Disk
256 Mb Graphix

But I have not purchased a processor...


AMD OR INTEL

Help me...

You want Intel Dual Core... it's better for video and graphics... AMD is better for gaming. If you do a lot of graphics try putting together a Mac computer(use Intel Dual Core as well)... once you get used to it, it works better

The intel dual cores are some of the best processors in their price range. A single core cannot really compete for any application.

Hi,

I want to know which processor is good in:

1)Graphix
2)Video Editing
3)Audio Recording
4)Video Converting
5)Protection
6)Long Lasting
7)Powerfull
8)Guaranty
9)Loads Windows XP in less time

AMD OR INTEL

Specify which type in intel or amd For Example: Dual core,Athlone etc

explain in detail

Hi Jasir, you're probably better off by replying here:
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/computers-beginners/amd-athlone-64-intel-dual-core-104124.html

And asking further questions.

Ok first, both the AMD Athlon 64 and the Intel Dual core are OLD technology. The Athlon 64 is a single core processor, the Intel Dual Core has been supplanted by the Core 2 Duo prcoessor.

AMD offers the Athlon X2 as their dual core offering. Every Athlon X2 beats the pants off any Intel Dual Core. However, the Core 2 Duos have finally caught up and do hold an edge against the Athlon X2s. Its not that great an edge since a high end Athlon X2 will beat out a low end Core 2 Duo.

As for the specific items you mentioned I would go to tomshardware.com for specific reviews.

I trust intel... Intel processors have proved over the years that their products don't degrade as time goes on but stay or perform constantly!


So I would say go with Intel Dual Core...

I trust intel... Intel processors have proved over the years that their products don't degrade as time goes on but stay or perform constantly!


So I would say go with Intel Dual Core...

I've had several AMD based machines without any problems. AMD has proven over and over again that they make the better processors. I've never heard of AMDs "degrading" over time.

I would take an AMD over the comparable Intel any day of the week. This doesn't mean that Intels are bad, just that AMD has proven they can make a better performing processor.

I am with you with that scott, I am only using an intel currently because of the edge that core2duo had over the athlon competitor in that price bracket when I built my PC. All my previous PCs were AMD and were awesome.

Don't forget about the motherboard and power supply. If you want reliable, IMO, Asus is the way to go. Also don't go cheap on the power supply. This is the most important component to consider.

In the way of performance:

I have both a Socket 939 Athlon X2 3800+ overclocked to 2.4 GHz and an Intel E6600 Core 2 Duo at stock, 2.4GHz.

Running the super PI 1 million digit calculation, the AMD does it in 38 secs, the Intel does it in 23 secs.

Right now there is a sort of price war going on with AMD and Intel. Intel will have additional price cuts this July 22 on some of their high-end cpus. Intel already did a major price cut back in April, forcing AMD to lower their prices too.

You can't go wrong with AMD or Intel. Plus, RAM prices are currently really really cheap now for 2 Gigs, so you may want to consider more RAM. Do it quick though, as they say that ram prices will go up soon.

Running the super PI 1 million digit calculation, the AMD does it in 38 secs, the Intel does it in 23 secs.

Same processor overclocked to 3.2GHz, 16secs superpi :)

Hehehe, nice :D 3.2GHz is a crazy OC, is that with water-cooling?

I need my X2 to run reliably so 2.4 GHz on air is good enough for me :)

But the E6600, 23 sec at stock speed. Once I get my high-performance ram, I'm going to OC it as far as possible on air. I believe I should be able to get 16 sec SuperPI also :D

I have both a Socket 939 Athlon X2 3800+ overclocked to 2.4 GHz and an Intel E6600 Core 2 Duo at stock, 2.4GHz.

Running the super PI 1 million digit calculation, the AMD does it in 38 secs, the Intel does it in 23 secs.



The problem with that is that while benchmark tests will show a difference, most people will not be able to tell the difference. But it does bear out what I said that Core 2 Duos are better right now.

What I'd be interested in seeing is how a AMD X2 5000+ performs against the E6600. Since I have one where can I find that test and I'll run it and post my results. By the way how much RAM do you have in each machine?

Here you go Scott:
SuperPI - 1.1e Download - EXTREME Overclocking (http://files.extremeoverclocking.com/file.php?f=36)

Ad here's more about it:Super PI - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_PI)

For reference I have just run SuperPi to 1M on my XPS M1710 laptop.
Core2 2.0 Ghz with 2Gb RAM took 25 seconds.
That's with all my normal stuff open, e.g. FF, thunderbird, IM and a couple of other bits.

I found it. Using the 1M test I came in at 18Ms on an AMD Ahtlon X2 5000+ running at 2.6 Ghz with 3 MG of RAM running Vista Ultimate 32 bit.

Hey ScottGem, I think you mean 18s right? :) That is fast :D without overclocking too.

My E6600 is running with 1GB of generic DDR2 ram, the X2 3800+ has 2GB of high-end OCZ Platinum DDR.

Here is a site (http://www.bleedinedge.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30652) with people showing their SuperPi scores with stock cpus.

If you consider all the sites that use SuperPI as a overclock and stability test, you'll see that 18 sec. SuperPi 1M is overclocking territory. Fantastic :D