Computer Forums - View Single Post

guyladouche · #4 (**permalink**) 03-10-2007, 08:12 PM

Well, the point of my post wasn't that Intel makes dual-core CPU's now where as AMD does not--they've both been making dual-core CPU's since Intel's Pentium-D CPU's and AMD's Opterons, and Intel even has a quad-core CPU out. However, the point was that the technology Intel released with the newest line of CPU's--their Core 2 Duo CPU's--puts any AMD technology to shame right now. I believe the only AMD CPU to even match the performace of the C2D in some benchmarks is the fx-72. Other than that, nothing really comes close on stock speeds (or even overclocked in most cases). The architecture of the C2D is much more advanced than Intel chips used to be--I think that until the C2D was released, in one clock cycle and AMD chip could perform 9 calculations whereas the most efficient Intel chip could only perform 6--that's why AMD was on top for so long. But no longer. I think that the current estimates are that AMD chips can do about 10 calculations in one clock cycle while the C2D's can do 15 or 20 (perhaps I'm a bit off, but that's the gist). So that's why I'd lean towards Intel right now--they make the better CPU. They're a bit on the expensive side right now, but things will probably change when AMD releases their new CPU technology late this year.