| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 107605 | 2010-02-23 08:31:00 | AMD Vs. Intel | icow (15313) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 860944 | 2010-02-23 22:36:00 | I bought a Phenom II 945 X4 for about $250 The fastest i7 is twice as fast (on benchmarks) but does it cost $500? No. It costs over $2000. If it was only twice the price I would consider it. However as I said, these are only benchmarks. In real world applications that actually matter (Gaming!) the difference doesn't matter I don't care if the i7 can 160FPS in one game when my Phenom II can only do 100FPS. I am not going to notice the difference at all... But I sure am going to notice the fact I didn't spend $1700 extra (which is more than the total cost of my upgrade!) |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 860945 | 2010-02-23 22:43:00 | However, if the Phemon takes twice as long to compile executeables, render graphics etc, the value comes into the time saved! | SolMiester (139) | ||
| 860946 | 2010-02-23 22:54:00 | Maybe, but compiling code is not the same as a synthetic benchmark.... Besides, I hardly do that anyway - and anything I do write is so small I doubt you would see a difference between either Phenom II, i7, or a 400Mhz Celeron. | Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 860947 | 2010-02-23 23:44:00 | Maybe, but compiling code is not the same as a synthetic benchmark.... Besides, I hardly do that anyway - and anything I do write is so small I doubt you would see a difference between either Phenom II, i7, or a 400Mhz Celeron. How about SQL data warehouse mining, sql scripting.....and think of all the graphic renderers out there, bet your bottom dollar they use the fastest CPU out there, because otherwise there boss is paying them to wait while the CPU renders. |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 860948 | 2010-02-23 23:55:00 | I didn't say the Phenom II was better for that, and I doubt the OP is going to buy it for that purpose. I was speaking more in terms of average desktop PC use. People who are that worried about time for graphics rendering are probably going to use some kind of GPGPU setup with nVidia Tesla anyway |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 860949 | 2010-02-24 00:08:00 | I7 and Phenom II are not really in the same market. AMD have had to go up against Core 2 and core 2 Quad with Phenom II, lets face it Phenom II is what Phenom I should have been, it was somewhat of a false start and they fell way behind Intel. 99% of games are still limited by the GPU at higher resolutions even on Phenom II no debate. I do feel I7's are more responsive in everyday OS functions due to there huge bus which to me is a big deal, and we all know there amazing crunching ability for encoding and rendering etc. But sure you pay maybe $300-400 more for it over a similar spec Phenom II rig. |
Battleneter2 (9361) | ||
| 860950 | 2010-02-24 01:03:00 | I didn't say the Phenom II was better for that, and I doubt the OP is going to buy it for that purpose. I was speaking more in terms of average desktop PC use. People who are that worried about time for graphics rendering are probably going to use some kind of GPGPU setup with nVidia Tesla anyway Discussion has moved away from my point, the question was, which is better, gas(whatever) questioned better how, value or speed. My argument is both! |
SolMiester (139) | ||
| 860951 | 2010-02-24 04:38:00 | Whose is bigger than whose. Male crap stuff! | PENTIUM (426) | ||
| 860952 | 2010-02-24 05:21:00 | Depends what you need it for. Even if price per performance is better on the Intel - let's assume, I dunno. If you don't need it why pay more. At home family just use webmail and the net, maybe MS Office and the printer. We don't get the best price per performance for that ... |
Nomad (952) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||