Game Development Community

Amd Or Intel

by Daniel O'Malley · in General Discussion · 01/05/2007 (11:10 pm) · 23 replies

Now i begin to look at a new system, but i don't know wich one is better, AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core Processor or Intel Core 2 Duo Processor E6300 and for the graphic card,NVIDIA GeForce 7900GS (256MB)or the ATI Radeon X1300 pro
Page«First 1 2 Next»
#21
01/07/2007 (8:19 am)
I appreciate the apology. It seemed like you were saying Intel was better than AMD, not the specific two processors. I apologize if you meant those chips specifically, as then your statement was correct.

It seemed as though you were still thinking Intel vs AMD on most however such as:

Quote:The truth of the matter is that Intel CPU's outperform AMD's in a greater range of tasks, run cooler and are more stable (especially when over-clocked). AMD's are a good and cheaper alternative however if money is no objective and you want to use your PC for a wide range of tasks Intel is the wisest choice. There's a reason why AMD's are drastically cheaper when compared to an equivalent Intel CPU.

Nearly every comparison done by nearly every major PC magazine and review site boasts AMD over Intel in almost every fight. AMD typically beats out Intel and has for quite some time. Intel generally comes up with the better proc first, but AMD usually puts out better procs overall, just late at times.

#22
01/07/2007 (10:57 pm)
For gaming, I was reading an interesting article a while back that was testing games by their average FPS rather than their peak FPS, drawing a line at about 40FPS as a acceptable threshold. The Intel CPU's were peaking higher but were below the threshold 2/3 of the time whilst the AMD had a more consistent FPS and higher average FPS.

This wasn't with the latest Processors though. As far as GPU's go, ATI seem to have the better technology from one generation to the next, but they have worse compatibility and consistency in their release drivers. Especialy with OpenGL.

The R600 from ATI is rumoured to be significantly faster than the 8800's, wouldn't surprise me if this was true otherwise MS would probably have gone with Nvidia again.

I personaly prefer Nvidia for their reliability, there have been games for the ATi cards that have had appaling FPS from one build to the next. And Nvidia seem to have the better drivers for GL applications, allthough these days GL is being used less and less in apps like 3ds max. Where FX shaders and realtime preview make DX far more attractive to 3d artists.
#23
01/08/2007 (9:53 am)
Nvidia has a universal driver as well, which is REALLY nice to have IMHO.

MS also used all AMD boxes during the development and testing of Windows XP FYI.

Page«First 1 2 Next»