THE WAR FOR ETERNITY - INTEL vs. AMD

[Ocean]

Well, without overclocking, core 2 quads don't really draw much power even in heavy benchmarks at full load. Pentium 4 is the least power efficient socket 775 intel cpu.
http://www.behardware.com/articles/651-2/intel-core-2-quad-q6600.html


Core i7's like core i5 can consume quite a lot of power at full load, even over 200W but not 400w.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2832/17


If you make crazy overclocks, maybe you can draw 400w peak. For a typical user without liquid nitrogen? No..

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2404/2

Quote: The first thing we notice is how full load power consumption quickly increases to almost uncontrollable levels when pushing above ~4.25GHz.
In fact, we found achieving true stability any higher nearly impossible with water-cooling alone.

Yes core 2 quad 9650 extreme is a sick processor, it can draw crazy amounts of power under high oc.

[Arpit]

Thank god I don't have P4....or else I have crazy electric bills....

[RDilus]

(07-03-2010, 07:55 AM)NaturalViolence Wrote:

Quote:AMD Pros
OS System boot faster on AMD(tested this alot)
More overclocking
Cheap
Because it use same socket it is easy to find a mobo/cooler for it and don't need 1000 bracets with it lol
Dragon fusion with a ati card you will see much boostups in games(only could if you have a Black Edition CPU)

Intel Pros
Less heat with overclocking
Can take more in some cases
Pure consetated on gaming in the i7 classes

AMD Cons
Getting fast hot in overclocking
Dont have SSSE3 SSE4.1/4.2
Can only take 120c at max

Intel Cons
Use alot of wattage some times 400w (best i7core)
Slow bootup
Expensive

Oh jesus where do I start on this.

I'll start with the amd pros you listed. OS only booted faster because of imc. So if you compare intel to amd in 2004 that would be true but now it's not since all intel cpus since 2009 have used integrated memory controllers. More overclocking? Your actually serious about that? Not even going to comment on that because their would be no point. Fusion doesn't have any benefit for gaming, this is widely proven by thousands of benchmarking and review sites.

Now on to intel pros. Less heat when overclocking? Once again this would have been true back in 2004 but now most high end intel cpus have significantly higher temps when overclocking compared to high end amd cpus. I have no idea what you mean by "can take more in some cases" so I'll skip that. I7 is not concentrated on gaming at all. If your a gamer their is no reason to upgrade from core2 or to spend extra on buying an I7 instead of a phenom II. I7 is only worth the extra cash if you render or encode videos.

Now on to amd cons. Don't have SSE3/4.1? Where have you been? All phenom II cpus have SSE4.1. Can only take 120c at max? Oh jesus. If you get an amd cpu to function at 100c please call me because you have just achieved magic.

Intel cons. No x86 cpu to date has used more than 200 watts at full load. That is fact.

Most of the points in your post would have been true in 2001-2005 but now almost none of them are true. If I tried to make a list of pros/cons like this I would fail, it would inevitable have flaws because no pros/cons are universal across multiple architectures aimed at multiple price points. The closest comparison you could accurately make would be to compare pros/cons of two specific micro architectures.

another idiot SSE3 maybe but not SSSE3 <--- one S more ? and AMD have 4A so not even full and my amd was masx taking 120c yes higest temp i ever reach then it shut

---

Best i i7 i said 400 watt but it use 322 watt little mistake of me but i was close

[naoan]

^ Remember that usually any power measurement graph mean the entire system, there's no way a cpu alone could draw that much power.

[Arpit]

Yeah...He's correct...
That's a overkill for a tiny silicon chip...

[RDilus]

(07-05-2010, 05:34 PM)Arpit Wrote: Yeah...He's correct...
That's a overkill for a tiny silicon chip...

i never said the chip use 400 watt

[Ocean]

(07-05-2010, 02:53 PM)RDilus Wrote:

Yes but as you can see, in the test it was overclocked to 4.26ghz and is the best available consumer cpu on the market.
At stock frequencies system power consumption still doesn't go anywhere near 300 or 400w, nor with any AMD chip

[DacoTaco]

if 322W (overclocked) counts as near 400 then 228 means its near 300W

[naoan]

Looking for 400W-able cpu? (discounting GPU, since it's easily doable with crossx/sli or fermi...) here ya go



This is full system power drawing (as with most power measurement, this is with single 5850 btw) so other component may be taken into consideration but the difference shouldn't be too great in most setup, this is one cpu you should be careful of OC'ing... (though generally people who are able to hit that high should've already know).

[DacoTaco]

naoan, no offence cause its anti amd or anything

but ive never heard of tpucdn.com. and i REALLY doubt a 2x overclock would get that much power... :/