which is better, and why

I think you may get some differing opinions on that question, opinions based on individual experience. Some will say that AMD will provide more processing speed for fewer dollars, and thus be on the AMD bandwagon. There are others who are just as dedicated to Intel.

My experience makes me lean towards Intel. The biggest reason is that most of my problematic machines have been ones with AMD processors. Having a PC down and a user sitting idle is not an acceptable price to pay in order to save a few dollars on the processor. Again, that's just my experience. Others have not had such problems with them. I think it's probably because there are more motherboards designed around the Intel processor. Another reason is that the AMDs tend to run hotter than their Intel counterpart, and most systems don't increase the cooling capacity accordingly.

So color me on the Intel side.

For some more opinions see this link:

https://www.techrepublic.com/forumqa/thread_detail.jhtml?thread_id=81465

>> REMOVE SPACES from the pasted URL <<

It's to a question I posted about the very same subject.

Good luck,

Maxwell

As Maxwell stated, you will get a variety of opinions.

I have had more problems with Intel systems than with AMD systems.
However, my AMD systems have had name brand motherboards, and the Intel systems that I had the most trouble with were low end "no-name" motherboards.

Intel seems to be more popular with business users.
AMD systems are very popular with the gaming community. In part, because you can over-clock them.

From a cost/performance standpoint, AMD wins hands down.
In benchmark tests, Intel had to get the P4 up to 2GHz in order to match the numbers of a 1.2GHz AMD Athlon.

The key to your choice depends on your application.
For CADD, digital video, and high end graphics arts, I would gravitate towards a P4 system.These programs tend to be written on Pentium systems, and often use undocumented, or proprietary features to maximize performance.

For high end gaming, I would definetly go with an AMD.

For a general purpose home or small office system, I myself, would still go with AMD.

For a networked system in a corporate environment, I would spend more time comparing the systems compatability with the other hardware and application software.

Either way, the quality of the motherboard is at leastas important to your decision.

I prefer the AMD chips. I have not had a problem with one yet, in fact I have yet to see a blue screen of death appear on a computer running an AMD. As for the price, the AMD is cheaper but Intel has really brought the price of theirs down to a competitive level. My major concern which Maxwell touched upon is the heat issue. When an Intel chip overheats, it compensates by slowing down its clock cycle while an AMD if left unattended will simply fry. One thing I do not skimp on for my customers is the processor fan. You can look at it this way then, save some money on the processor and spend it on additional fan capacity. To get back to the question...no BSOD on AMD:))
Good luck!

Mike

Okay thanks guys, lets put it this way,
im a 16 year old guy doing the aries A+ course, and looking at building my own comp. this comp is to be dedicated to games, and net surfing, and Lan multi-playing, and im looking at getting a 1.4 or a 1.6 CPU,
i have modified the points because id also like to know what motherboard you would recomend
i refuse to have integrated anything, other than sound.
other than that, i need some more info on motherboards
cheers

Point value changed by question poster.

I too am on the AMD bandwagon. You can get more speed for fewer dollars than with Intel. My motherboard of preference is the ECS K7S5A. It accepts ALL AMD processors from the Duron to the newest XP. It has integrated sound and LAN, and it is inexpensive. It uses the SIS 735 chipset and has received excellent reviews.
It is available at www.newegg.com for $52 US

Count one more on the AMD side. I have had only AMD's since my first computer, and never had a problem with them. As far as motherboards, I've built a few systems using Epox motherboards, I think they are a good combination of brand name/reliability/price. Asus boards are usually popular, but they seem a little pricier. The ECS board mentioned above has good reviews and the price is fantastic if your on a budget, but if you are after ultimate performance you might want to check out this article... http://www.tech-report.com/reviews/2002q1/via-kt333/index.x?pg=1
Sounds like that would do the trick, though, since you are not going for a top-end processor. I would probably go with the ECS then spend an extra $20-$30 to get a little faster processor.

One other thing to consider is what is actually different about the two. Basicall they carry different multimedia handlers known as MMX and SSE etc. In general, time generally sides with intel and software becomes optimized for the more common processor, so intel wins in the long run. AMD make a lower cost processor which can test better than intel and may have more potential but small market share means less programmers bother to optimize code for them. Here you'll have to color me intel as well as I believe AMD has constantly been plagued with stability issues. Some are due to heat as in the duron and some are due to low compatibility (remeber, intel makes it's own mobo chipsets), some may be manufacturing and quality control issues. Now I get personal, I think AMDs less than honest approach to naming it's chips reflects the type of company it has become. Why would you name a 1.53Mhx chip XP1800 unless you were trying to indicate that it works great with winXP and is an 1800Mhz chip. Well, nuf sed, pay more attention to the first part than the last part and also know that I have as many T-bird systems an intel systema in my office.

One other thing to consider is what is actually different about the two. Basicall they carry different multimedia handlers known as MMX and SSE etc. In general, time generally sides with intel and software becomes optimized for the more common processor, so intel wins in the long run. AMD make a lower cost processor which can test better than intel and may have more potential but small market share means less programmers bother to optimize code for them. Here you'll have to color me intel as well as I believe AMD has constantly been plagued with stability issues. Some are due to heat as in the duron and some are due to low compatibility (remeber, intel makes it's own mobo chipsets), some may be manufacturing and quality control issues. Now I get personal, I think AMDs less than honest approach to naming it's chips reflects the type of company it has become. Why would you name a 1.53Ghz chip XP1800 unless you were trying to indicate that it works great with winXP and is an 1800Mhz chip. Well, nuf sed, pay more attention to the first part than the last part and also know that I have as many T-bird systems an intel systema in my office.

AMD Makes Any CPU's PISS
Intel Pentium And Celeron Get Hammered By AMD
AMD's 1.4 Bets A 1.8Mhz Intel Pentium Or Celeron
Celeron Is A Business Processer And AMD Opens Business Apps Faster Then Celeron By 8%
AMD Is Also A Graphics Processor HEHEHEHE :-P Now Thats Fucking Awes!
Also the new 1.9 AMD Can Make The New 2.2 Intel Pentium PISS

Intel Thinks That Its The Processer Speed Incorrect Its Actually The CLOCK Speed That Matters

The Clock Is Faster In AMD But The Processer Speed IsThe Same
HEHEHEHEHEHE
I Prefer AMD
Just Like I Prefer FORDS THEN HOLDENS
The reason i prefer something more then one thing is only if i know its ability or its calable of more then another

i put the best into my computer AMD And get the best out of it

Performance,Robust,Realiblitly,

People Say AMD Overheats Well My Pc Has A 1.4 AMD Athlon T/B And Its at 33 Right Now And Its Hot Today Basicly What i Am Feeling My COmputer Is Feeling And i can deal with it
Some AMD chips get up to 60 C but the board can handle 70 before it starts to even frie

I Think Intel Has Made Too Much Money And Is Staging The habbit where they cant be stuffed because there making too much cash

AMD is cheaper is price then intel and faster and more realible

I PREFER AMD!

Thanx

First of all i own a computer shop and second i love my games. I know exactly what you need for the value for money to the performance scale. this is the spec.
1/40 gig 7200rpm no bigger swap file on D:/
2/soltek sl-75drv/-x Motherboard
3/2 sticks of pc2100 memory DDR total 512mb
4/AMD 1800+ XP
5/NVIDIA Geforce 2 Ti 64mb ddr Graphics card
The motherboard has the best rating of all boards for the amd chip by far the 1800+ has just fell of the expensive shelf and with this board using the redstorm overclocking utility which comes built in to the bios it runs happily at a true 1700Mhz rather than 1533Mhz
This system is spot on for even the latest games turned up full res and effects for the best value for your hard earned cash Mail meif you need more details i cound point you in the right direction on where to get the bits

I recommend AMD simply for "bang for your buck". You don't list any apps that work better on Intel. I have built many computers over the years. I have used both brands over the years and neither has been completely trouble-free. All of my current home computers and all of the ones I have built for my kids and grandkids are AMD except one(it is a Pentium 233 for a 5yr old grandkid). The motherboard in my current machine(and a couple of others I've built recently) is an MSI KT266 PRO2 RU. Some ofthe features I like about it are raid(I pack a lot of drives into machines for me), USB 2.0 support, 8 USB connectors, diagnostic LEDs on the mobo and an externally visable bracket, etc.. The board is stable and everything I've hung on it worked w/oa problem. I'm running: XP1900+, copper base heat sink w/7000rpm fan, 512mb Mushkin PC2100, 400w Antec p/s, Radeon 8500, SB Audigy, 2 WD 40gb 7200, misc. pci cards, 3 optical drives, extra fans, etc..

This question was auto closed due to inactivity