Intel vs AMD

Which CPU for you?

  • AMD

    Votes: 58 43.0%

  • Intel

    Votes: 58 43.0%

  • Doesnt really matter to me

    Votes: 19 14.1%
  • Total voters
    135
killadoob said:
youve got 5-15% of the market buying your cpu's
do you:

A. Charge the same as the next company
B. go in lower to gain market share
C. charge more because your product is better

AMD chose to charge the same if not more
Click to expand...
Not so. For the enthusiast market you have to charge a lot. Thats the top end CPU's. You need to so this to make some profit. The entry level / budget offererings are only good for turnover. People are prepared to pay more for the super CPU's so you charge more for them. If they did not, then the entry level CPU's would be more expensive. AMD is normally across the board better value for money then Intel (excluding the power CPUs) and has always been. The enthusiasts basically help pay for the initial costs of making CPU's (R&D, Fabs ...) which bring the budgets down to a reasonable price. AMD is not ripping everyone off. They have had about 3 profitable quarters in the last 5 years.

Also what has put me off AMD is the changing of sockets very often
Click to expand...
I agree, yhey do do this a little to much. On the other side, I can't remember the last time I upgraded a CPU without getting a new MB. Actually, I can and ended up having a useless CPU sitting in my draw. Point is, a CPU upgrade to me is now a MB upgrade as well.
 
killadoob said:
Word of mouth is by the far the best advertising there is
Click to expand...
Businesses don't listen to word of mouth. They buy brands (IBM, Dell, HP). That is one of the things that got AMD into this pickle in the first place. They have been agressively targeting the business market for both Servers and Desktops. They were given the opportunity to get into that market last year (which is a higher discount market BTW), so they went for it. Intel took that opportuntiy to attack the retail market which has been AMD's stronghold with both price and the C2D. AMD's retail market was hit really badly. Hopefully AMD can hold onto the business market that they worked so hard for and get back their retail market at the same time. Then we will get some good competition.
 
Abe said:
Businesses don't listen to word of mouth. They buy brands (IBM, Dell, HP). That is one of the things that got AMD into this pickle in the first place. They have been agressively targeting the business market for both Servers and Desktops. They were given the opportunity to get into that market last year (which is a higher discount market BTW), so they went for it. Intel took that opportuntiy to attack the retail market which has been AMD's stronghold with both price and the C2D. AMD's retail market was hit really badly. Hopefully AMD can hold onto the business market that they worked so hard for and get back their retail market at the same time. Then we will get some good competition.
Click to expand...

In fact to go a little further and take the company I work for as an example, we signed an agreement to buy only Dell branded products for x number of years. Also surprisingly our standard today for Desktops is a Dual Core AMD, not Intel. Its the Optiplex 740 Dell.

For a business case yes I agree with what was said earlier, price is a major factor. However marketing is highly involved and one can go far as to say superior price equals superior quality and a business may "see" the benefit in this. Marketing can be very cruel.

Goedkoop is Duurkoop :)
 
abe why do they buy ibm dell and hp? because everyone says they are the best

not because they saw some form of advertising

everyone knows that dell hp and imb make expensive kuk and you get raped just businesses dont give a crap

those 3 companies are expensive and you could get a way faster pc for about the same cost

Not so. For the enthusiast market you have to charge a lot. Thats the top end CPU's. You need to so this to make some profit.

if you sold your top end cpu's cheaper more ppl who can only afford a medium cpu like the old 3400+ and 3600+ might spend slightly more on that cpu and you would actually bigger turn over and more profits

take for example if amd had been selling their fx range of cpu for the price of lga 775 3.6ghz ppl way more ppl would have bought those cpu's

thats my thinking but i guess they pay ppl million to research and they dont believe this to be true

With amd any new cpu is a mobo upgrade possibly a ram upgrade because it took them so long to go the ddr 2 route

in the computer world an expensive pc like dell hp etc is not better quality than buying from some guy who owns a computer store, you would actually get better quality and performance from some random computer shop for the same price

my g/f's mother bought an hp about 2 years ago and the shock the horror when i tried to put in agp vga card

THERE WAS NO AGP SLOT
 
Last edited:
Even if the big businesses don't listen to word-of-mouth, the consumers do and that costs them in the end.
 
Interesting to see the poll so even thus far... I'd have thought one of them would have won by a landslide?!
 
Well, I have been using AMD all my life, and I have never had any problems. Also the motherboards for AMD is very nice with all the extras you get. Price isn't such a big issue, but when you can get a good CPU for a relatively cheap price.....Why not?
 
WKJ?:beanie said:
Interesting to see the poll so even thus far... I'd have thought one of them would have won by a landslide?!
Click to expand...

If this poll had been out about a year ago AMD would have won by a landslide. They would have had my vote that's for sure.

And who knows what could happen in the next year or so. I wouldn't mind them winning in the end.
 
youve got 5-15% of the market buying your cpu's
do you:

A. Charge the same as the next company
B. go in lower to gain market share
C. charge more because your product is better

AMD chose to charge the same if not more

At one stage AMD was a bit more expensive than intel

Also what has put me off AMD is the changing of sockets very often

754 939 am2 is this new cpu going to be the different socket again

Intel has lga 775 out for so long now, when core 2 came out it was lga and most boards could use it with a bios update

So being an amd fanboi like i was, was getting a bit expensive

Every time i upgraded my cpu i had to upgrade my mobo
Click to expand...

1. Its 25% or a little more not 5-15%
2. Price does not guarantee market share. People and business have to find value in your product and play that against the cost of owning said product.
3. You charge what you can get away with to make as much money as you can, but without hanging yourself in the process by creating resentment in the market.

AMD charged the same for the X2 as Intel did for their Dual Core Pentium 4 CPU's yet AMDs CPUs were much superior.
AMD charged less for AXP than they were supposed to, and never overcharged for Athlon64 but corrected the pricing to match Intel's offering.
What you must understand is that we as the end users pay for primarily the performance capabilities of the CPU and at a certain level of performance you can expect a certain price for any given time period. That means, for a CPU that performs like a Core2 Duo, you are going to pay similar prices to the Core2 Duo from AMD or anyone else for that matter.This is all because the engineering prowess of both Intel and AMD are very close, so for the same R&D you generally get the same performance index as a result similar pricing.

Its a lot more involved than what we as the end users see on store shelves and its certainly more about oem market than the retail market.

As for the sockets, here is proof that AMd hasn't changed sockets more than Intel. We'll start at Pentium3 and work right up to today...

Intel Pentium3: Slot 1; Socket 370
Intel Pentium4 (Willamatte): Socket 423
Intel Pentium4 (Northwood): Socket 478
Intel Pentium4 ((SocketT 775 ball FC-LGA4)
Core2 (775 ball FC-LGA6) : 775

AMD
======
Athon Classic: Slot A
Athlon Thunderbird Palamino/Thoroughbred A+B/Barton: Socket A (463)
Athlon64 Single Channel: 754
Athlon64 Dual Channel including X2: 939
Athlon64 K8 X2/ K10 Barcelona: AM2

Don't see how AMD has had more socket changes.
 
yes, same board. You'll benefit from AM2+ motherboards because of the increased HT bandwidth (16GB+ as opposed to 6.4GB) and other features. All in all however its compatible with all AM2 boards.
 
I've used 50% AMD and 50% Intel in my PCs (roughly). I don't really see the point of this poll but I'll throw in my experiences that I feel is worth something.

I find both platforms are just as good as the other with some minor differences, AMD's have generally been the gamers choice for years until recently with Intel's C2D range.

My main issue with AMD however, is not AMD's CPU but rather some of the bad chipsets that motherboard vendors have used. My second AMD rig was the the SLOT-A Athlon series (k7) @ 600mhz, some of you might remember that great CPU. The motherboard had an AMD/VIA combination, (AMD southbridge, VIA northbridge) (or something like that) and the board was TERRIBLE.

I've had bad and severe issues with Nvidia chipsets, some of them are well documented, I've had mediocre experiences with SiS, and in the early 2000's, VIA were utterly terrible.

I've always gone with Intel for mission critical things like servers, their IDE controllers work without issue, Linux support is fantastic.

Which leaves me with my current rig: an INtel C2D E66600 with an Intel chipset board, no issies, I refuse to buy another nvidia chipset board again, I know they have more features and generally OC better than Intel but after my last few experiences.. never again, sorry Nvidia but you blew it.
 
n1hilist said:
My main issue with AMD however, is not AMD's CPU but rather some of the bad chipsets that motherboard vendors have used. My second AMD rig was the the SLOT-A Athlon series (k7) @ 600mhz, some of you might remember that great CPU. The motherboard had an AMD/VIA combination, (AMD southbridge, VIA northbridge) (or something like that) and the board was TERRIBLE.
Click to expand...
This along with release times is one of the biggest reasons for AMD buying out ATI.
 
Not really. The best chipset for both AMD and Intel right now is from NVIDIA.
For Pentium4 and earlier sure, NVIDIA didn't really care...

However AMD's success in the retail market picked up dramatically after NVIDIA started making their chipsets.
 
I was thinking

I want to buy intel C2D E6600 is it any good and what mother bord would work well with it especially for over clocking and with sli and 4 ram slots....:cool:
 
ShockG said:
Not really. The best chipset for both AMD and Intel right now is from NVIDIA.
For Pentium4 and earlier sure, NVIDIA didn't really care...

However AMD's success in the retail market picked up dramatically after NVIDIA started making their chipsets.
Click to expand...
Problem is that AMD could not compete properly with Intel until they had chipsets in house and NVidia was too expensive to buy out. ATI was their only choice. I have used NVidia chipset AMD boards for a while now and have never been disapointed.
 
I dont think i will ever by ATI/AMD chipset motherboards unless there is no tother choice, who wants to spend time and bandwidth downloading and installing .NET2 framework for the graphics control panel to work right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X