Intel vs. AMD (School Report involved)

[JAW959]

I have chosen the most dry, boring, utterly meaningless topic ever to write a compare-contrast essay for my handicap class, comparing AMD processors to their Intel counterparts.
So I need feedback from people who have had both and prefer one, or had one and liked/hated it.

Start posting brahs.

[Ad Bot]

[TehZeno]

AMD is better, It last longer and its good for the price.

Intel is Horrible and they suck and its extreme money for a good one

EDIT: I have an AMD is my Gaming computer right now :o

[_Rave_]

I prefer Intel over AMD, because of a few reasons that I can't think of.  One that I can think of, though, is that AMD seemed to get much hotter much quicker.  That laptop used to overheat often, while my other one has never overheated once, even with extended use.

[TehZeno]

I prefer Intel over AMD, because of a few reasons that I can't think of.  One that I can think of, though, is that AMD seemed to get much hotter much quicker.  That laptop used to overheat often, while my other one has never overheated once, even with extended use.

I have an Intel in my laptop and it overheats after about 45 Minute of it just sitting on a desk it will just overheat.

[Sheath]

Intel is Horrible and they suck and its extreme money for a good one

Nonsense. Intel's processors are far better, I've had an equal share of AMD and Intel computers in my time and Intel is more advance. As for price, far more people use Intel's low-end CPUs for budget computers so I'd like to think otherwise.

If you compare the best of the best from both AMD and Intel, Intel wins by far. Thats not just a sloppy bias, I'd love to say AMD is better but its not-- go look at some benchmark results over the Internet between AMD and Intel.

[Nickelob Ultra]

AMD is better, It last longer and its good for the price.

Intel is Horrible and they suck and its extreme money for a good one

EDIT: I have an AMD is my Gaming computer right now :o

You've never heard of the phrase, "quality costs", have you?

I prefer Intel by a longshot.  I don't like AMD much.

[steve5451]

I like both, but I think Intel makes processors just slightly better, but I prefer AMD for multiple different reasons.
I think that Intel has overpriced processors, while AMD is reasonable.

[Azzurolix]

Intel has expensive parts, I say AMD.

[Nickelob Ultra]

I don't know if you guys know this, but just throwing this on the table for information purposes (just so you can be edumacated);

Whenever Intel has defective processors, they scrap them, melt them down and re-use the material over to make a brand new one.  By defective processors, I mean like a quad-core with one faulty core that won't work properly, or some other internal problem.

Whenever AMD has a defective processor, what they do with it is determined by how bad the problem is.  Faulty core in a quad core?  Lock the broken core and sell it as a triple-core (why Intel doesn't even make triple cores like AMD).  Two cores broken in quad core?  Lock them both and sell as dual core.  If something else is faulty within the processor, though, they usually will also melt it down and re-use the materials.

[steve5451]

Sounds good to me.

[Azzurolix]

I don't see what's the problem with the core-locking, Nick.

[_Rave_]

I don't see what's the problem with the core-locking, Nick.

That makes me think that they, as a company, care less.

[steve5451]

That makes me think that they, as a company, care less.

Save monies to sell it for less monies. :D

[Nickelob Ultra]

I don't see what's the problem with the core-locking, Nick.

I don't have a problem with it, I'm just explaining why Intel costs more.  They don't make a profit off of locked-core-processors like AMD.

[Azzurolix]

I don't have a problem with it, I'm just explaining why Intel costs more.  They don't make a profit off of locked-core-processors like AMD.

Well, they should stop being strict like that. A locked core can't hurt anybody and it brings profits even though it's a defective processor.