AMD 64 or Intel 64 processor???
-
QuantumGravity
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2004 7:31 pm
- Contact:
okok. back to d topic. i heard that both company is moving to DUAL Core Processor. any1 try any of the company's dual core procressor?? i wonder if it'll make any difference when using 4 astronomy usage. anyway review states that AMD dural core processor has an edge over INTEL. hm...i wonder y APPLE choose Intel over AMD 4 their new notebook.
-
Airconvent
- Super Moderator
- Posts: 5804
- Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:49 pm
- Location: United Federation of the Planets
the amd dual core has an edge because they were designed to be a dual core processor from scratch. intel on the other hand, put 2 cores ona die and made them work together. the result is amd is more optimised being purpose built instead of improvised.Jingguo wrote:okok. back to d topic. i heard that both company is moving to DUAL Core Processor. any1 try any of the company's dual core procressor?? i wonder if it'll make any difference when using 4 astronomy usage. anyway review states that AMD dural core processor has an edge over INTEL. hm...i wonder y APPLE choose Intel over AMD 4 their new notebook.
apple chose intel for obvious reasons...intel is still bigger than amd and still hold the bulk of the market share..plus apple is not out to beat PCs...they just need to beat their own outgoing products. a 5-10% difference in speed between the intel and amd chips is not going to translate to much on paper...
I mean, steve jobs will say "the XXX is 2.5 times faster" instead of 2.6 times...
that kind of margin is not enough to pull apple towards amd...
and although amd is cheaper than intel, I'm sure that for the sake of market share and reputation, they will willingly sell the chips at amd prices to apple...
The Boldly Go Where No Meade Has Gone Before
Captain, RSS Enterprise NCC1701R
United Federation of the Planets
Captain, RSS Enterprise NCC1701R
United Federation of the Planets
-
zong
- Administrator
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 9:41 pm
- Favourite scope: 1x7 binoculars (my eyes)
- Location: Toa Payoh
- Contact:
Erm, reason why apple's still using intel is because they're still using SINGLE processors in laptops.. 
In single chip processor market for laptops, Intel's Pentium M still wins, especially in the area of battery life.
Just read from this Tuesday's Digital Life that both AMD and Intel will come out with QUAD-processors for PC's by 2007. Interesting to note that they haven't even established ground for dual core processing and they're already going on to quad-ing it. Perhaps they wanna "stick" to Moore's Law still?
Anyway, I can't fathom buying a 64-core processor in the next 10 years to come. (The price.. ouch!)
In single chip processor market for laptops, Intel's Pentium M still wins, especially in the area of battery life.Just read from this Tuesday's Digital Life that both AMD and Intel will come out with QUAD-processors for PC's by 2007. Interesting to note that they haven't even established ground for dual core processing and they're already going on to quad-ing it. Perhaps they wanna "stick" to Moore's Law still?
Anyway, I can't fathom buying a 64-core processor in the next 10 years to come. (The price.. ouch!)
-
Airconvent
- Super Moderator
- Posts: 5804
- Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:49 pm
- Location: United Federation of the Planets
hi zong,zong wrote:Erm, reason why apple's still using intel is because they're still using SINGLE processors in laptops..
Just read from this Tuesday's Digital Life that both AMD and Intel will come out with QUAD-processors for PC's by 2007. Interesting to note that they haven't even established ground for dual core processing and they're already going on to quad-ing it. Perhaps they wanna "stick" to Moore's Law still?
Anyway, I can't fathom buying a 64-core processor in the next 10 years to come. (The price.. ouch!)
looks like you have not seen the clips from macworld. go to www.apple.com and view it. the entire range of apple's notebooks and desktops are now based on a custom made intel dual core processor. apple was previously using the power pc from ibm...
The Boldly Go Where No Meade Has Gone Before
Captain, RSS Enterprise NCC1701R
United Federation of the Planets
Captain, RSS Enterprise NCC1701R
United Federation of the Planets
-
zong
- Administrator
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2003 9:41 pm
- Favourite scope: 1x7 binoculars (my eyes)
- Location: Toa Payoh
- Contact:
hehe, kinda, sorry man this is what happens when you're too long in camp.. can't catch up with proper news, esp not in the IT sector. i only realised they using custom processor after posting and reading my tech forum ytd. 
I think laptop wise i'll still recommend Intel though. Not sure why, prolly gut instinct. But AMD definitely tops my choice if i were to recommend buying PCs. But next year quad-processing come out already then dual core processor price would dip like mad again, so i think i'd rather tell them to wait if they can wait!
I think laptop wise i'll still recommend Intel though. Not sure why, prolly gut instinct. But AMD definitely tops my choice if i were to recommend buying PCs. But next year quad-processing come out already then dual core processor price would dip like mad again, so i think i'd rather tell them to wait if they can wait!
I have build my own PC since 1997, and have experience plenty of trouble shooting and frustration myself.
I don't know if this is still the case but a couple of year ago a shop owner in Sim Lim (he is not young punk - I am referring to the hairstyle - working part-time there and he seems he know his stuff pretty well) told me that AMD system is less compatible in terms of video encoding/decoding. The problem is NOT at the processor itself but it lies at the chipset on the motherboard. Motherboard manufacturers for AMD compatible boards often choose chipset that is cheap (read: compatible by reverse-engineering rather than via proper licensing). That brings the cost of the whole thing down, but problems may come later.
However if you are not a kind of burning DVD or VCD, then it is OK to stick with cheaper system. Just stick to longer existing brand for things like motherboard. The difference in price will not make up the difference in service level if you have a problem. I have a bad one with Chaintech motherboard. Now I will only go as low as Gigabyte or MSI. If you got the money, paying extra for Asus/Asustek will be great. Their motherboard is solidly engineered.
As for memory...
Airconvent, the problem of the system you setup for your mother may not be related to the processor, but more on the minimum memory for the OS. 64 MB ram is a bit low by today's OS. Are you running hers using Windows ME? I dont think you will be able to squeeze XP on 64 MB. 256 MB is the minimum for XP and 512 is a sweet spot.
If you run a lot of computation, for example running mercury's loadrunner (a load/performance test suite) then you will feel the difference between 512 and 1 GB memory. Other than that you will not feel much, may be.. only when you play Civ IV.
Also for those people with on-board graphic chip (rather than videocard based), do note that the system will take some cut off the system memory, ranging from 16-128MB (which you can setup in BIOS). So if you have just the bare minimum, it will be slow... very slow.
On top of that, system memory is not as fast as videocard memory. Me and my friend experimented with our own test (that was running his cheapo system against my not-as-cheapo system) using Starcraft. Yeah, not as intensive as doom/unreal frame-count test, but good enough since that time Starcraft is our game of choice. The on-board video chip lose, but when we mess around with the BIOS setup we can squeeze a bit more performance by increasing its share of system memory.
OK nuff said.
I don't know if this is still the case but a couple of year ago a shop owner in Sim Lim (he is not young punk - I am referring to the hairstyle - working part-time there and he seems he know his stuff pretty well) told me that AMD system is less compatible in terms of video encoding/decoding. The problem is NOT at the processor itself but it lies at the chipset on the motherboard. Motherboard manufacturers for AMD compatible boards often choose chipset that is cheap (read: compatible by reverse-engineering rather than via proper licensing). That brings the cost of the whole thing down, but problems may come later.
However if you are not a kind of burning DVD or VCD, then it is OK to stick with cheaper system. Just stick to longer existing brand for things like motherboard. The difference in price will not make up the difference in service level if you have a problem. I have a bad one with Chaintech motherboard. Now I will only go as low as Gigabyte or MSI. If you got the money, paying extra for Asus/Asustek will be great. Their motherboard is solidly engineered.
As for memory...
Airconvent, the problem of the system you setup for your mother may not be related to the processor, but more on the minimum memory for the OS. 64 MB ram is a bit low by today's OS. Are you running hers using Windows ME? I dont think you will be able to squeeze XP on 64 MB. 256 MB is the minimum for XP and 512 is a sweet spot.
If you run a lot of computation, for example running mercury's loadrunner (a load/performance test suite) then you will feel the difference between 512 and 1 GB memory. Other than that you will not feel much, may be.. only when you play Civ IV.
Also for those people with on-board graphic chip (rather than videocard based), do note that the system will take some cut off the system memory, ranging from 16-128MB (which you can setup in BIOS). So if you have just the bare minimum, it will be slow... very slow.
On top of that, system memory is not as fast as videocard memory. Me and my friend experimented with our own test (that was running his cheapo system against my not-as-cheapo system) using Starcraft. Yeah, not as intensive as doom/unreal frame-count test, but good enough since that time Starcraft is our game of choice. The on-board video chip lose, but when we mess around with the BIOS setup we can squeeze a bit more performance by increasing its share of system memory.
OK nuff said.
-
Airconvent
- Super Moderator
- Posts: 5804
- Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:49 pm
- Location: United Federation of the Planets
I've bought my very first XT PC in 1988 and have been buidling pcs since then. but stopped about 2 years ago when the performance of my system far exceeds what I needed it to do.....amd64 means nothing to me! heh heh
most of this talk about encoding performance is a rehash from old prejudices.
amd did not perform well in the early days but today, their product is usually better than intel and while there were alot of chip set makers back then, nowdays only the big players like VIA and SIS remains and the technology has matured somewhat.
by the way, the pc i was talking about was running on 64MB initially but I have since upgraded it to 256MB and last week , I replaced the 750mhz chip with a 1.2 ghz...
most of this talk about encoding performance is a rehash from old prejudices.
amd did not perform well in the early days but today, their product is usually better than intel and while there were alot of chip set makers back then, nowdays only the big players like VIA and SIS remains and the technology has matured somewhat.
by the way, the pc i was talking about was running on 64MB initially but I have since upgraded it to 256MB and last week , I replaced the 750mhz chip with a 1.2 ghz...
The Boldly Go Where No Meade Has Gone Before
Captain, RSS Enterprise NCC1701R
United Federation of the Planets
Captain, RSS Enterprise NCC1701R
United Federation of the Planets
Yah same here... I did not assemble for quite some time already when my system at home is good enough.
I am a bit ichy to disassamble my laptop and repaint it yellow though, with "WH40K Imperial Fist Space Marine Chapter" logo.
hahaha. That will sure shock my colleagues in office when I smuggle it in office.
And I find myself collecting working used parts (videocard, soundcard, network card, even memory) from PCs thrown by my neighbours. Found a good use of them to test failing components (found out that my video card went bust - for some reason I have yet to know) rather than having to speculate and go to simlim and later found out it is another problem... (wasting money & time)
Now I think I am a part-time PC KG-man
I am a bit ichy to disassamble my laptop and repaint it yellow though, with "WH40K Imperial Fist Space Marine Chapter" logo.
hahaha. That will sure shock my colleagues in office when I smuggle it in office.
And I find myself collecting working used parts (videocard, soundcard, network card, even memory) from PCs thrown by my neighbours. Found a good use of them to test failing components (found out that my video card went bust - for some reason I have yet to know) rather than having to speculate and go to simlim and later found out it is another problem... (wasting money & time)
Now I think I am a part-time PC KG-man