THE WAR FOR ETERNITY - INTEL vs. AMD

[obscured]

Even on full load there is no way it does 400watts. Max TDP is 130w.

[DacoTaco]

(07-03-2010, 05:18 AM)obscured Wrote: Even on full load there is no way it does 400watts. Max TDP is 130w.

agreed

eventho its more around the 161 when an i7 is not overclocked and is at full power load

[NaturalViolence]

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.

[Arpit]

He is true man, but seriously, Phenom don't use SSE 4.1. They use SSE 4A ......Here's a CPU-Z pic of thuban.

[NaturalViolence]

True. SSE4 and 4a are a little different. SSE4a actually has some instructions that are in 4.2. But it still does the same things just with slightly different instructions.

[Ocean]

Quote:Pure consetated on gaming in the i7 classes

No, no, no. i7 is not a 'purely gaming processor'. It is anything but that.
It's used for rendering and encoding, and together with xeon is one of the most common server processors.

Quote:Can only take 120c at max

No current processor can take 120c max. You are breaking the processor if you run it even near 105c regardless of being phenom II or core i7, it will downthrottle, shut down or bluescreen.
[/quote]

Quote:Intel Cons
Slow bootup

This point doesn't even make sense. Bootup is first and foremost dependent on HDD speed, not the processor.
Just a single 40gb SSD drive with a pentium 4 or amd athlon processor will boot many times faster than a typical 7200rpm drive with i7 and any operating system.

Quote:Use alot of wattage some times 400w (best i7core)

lol. no.

You cant possibly draw 400w on an i7 even if you clocked it beyond 6ghz on liquid helium. Do you realize the insane voltage it would require? That would destroy the chip in a split second.
Anything past 1.9V you would already play russian roulette with an expensive processor (I would never attempt such voltage with any processor)

All core i7 from 920 to 980x start to downthrottle core frequency if the power consumption goes beyond a certain limit. Yes you can maybe push system peak power past 300w with extreme overclocks running prime95/processor benchmarks but not the cpu power consumption itself. And on stock frequency it will draw only 130W at full load regardless of model.

Sorry but it seems you use a lot of ridiculous arguments. I had to post so nobody takes them as fact.

[Arpit]

Yeah....That's why they are selling expensive SSDs. They make the PC real fast, as it has better Read/write timings than a traditional 7200rpm HDD....

Any P.D. around 2 V can really destroy the processor. That is too much for a 'nm' die...That is so, so small.

And 400 W, that is extreme overkill...any processor would hardly draw up 100 W on extreme overclocking....You are planning to use 50 Ampere current....that generates a lotta heat for a miser CPU...it will be a barbeque or I say TANDOOR for it.....

[DacoTaco]

(07-04-2010, 03:41 PM)Arpit Wrote: And 400 W, that is extreme overkill...any processor would hardly draw up 100 W on extreme overclocking....You are planning to use 50 Ampere current....that generates a lotta heat for a miser CPU...it will be a barbeque or I say TANDOOR for it.....

100 is again false

a non overclocked , 100% load i7 uses 161W

[Arpit]

i7 is not a processor, its a monster..... (THAT SHOULD BE CORRECT.....)

[DacoTaco]

(07-04-2010, 06:01 PM)Arpit Wrote: i7 is not a processor, its a monster..... (THAT SHOULD BE CORRECT.....)

ok then,
C2Q Q9650 @ peak load is 183W