intel or amd

timmywex

am going to get a new dell laptop, inspiron 5101 or 6400 i think, will just be used for school mainly, and will be set up for wifi for internet, no games really, maybe a few online ones is all, would i be best to go with the intel processor or amd?? what are the amd ones like??

would this laptop be powerful enough??i would want it for college next starting sep 2008 aswell?

mathias

As long as its the new Core2duo or solo processors then at the moment Intel is the best. That would be the way to go , they use less power than the current AMD crop and that should give you more battery life.

red_ice

i've been an amd head for as long as i can remember. I hate intel and their processors, but i cant deny the core duos are the best out there atm

AlmightyCushion

Yeah the core 2 duo's are brilliant processors. Hopefully amd's barcelona performs and kicks the c2d's ass. Keep Intel on their toes.

Tom Dunne

red_ice wrote:

I hate intel and their processors,

If you don't mind me asking, why do you hate Intel processors?

I can't say that I specifically hate any piece of hardware.

Tar.Aldarion

Well some people do, I hate macs.
Core duo are great, go with that.

mathias

As far as hardware goes , you should buy the best you can afford , Intel is currently the best , only on the core processors and up though , any pentium processor is weaker than the AMD processors.

As regards to hating Intel , thats easy to understand , Intel has a huge share of the Market , and Like Microsoft , they werent too moralistic about how they got it , to the point of screwing the little guy any way they could , they have a string of well reported " Dirty tricks " they pulled on their competitors.

This brings some people to the point of not supporting Intel no matter what , and you cant blame them. This would be the number one reason that people say they hate the likes of Intel.

The same goes for Microsoft , in a much bigger way. Microsoft badly needs competition , it has such a monopoly at the moment it even treats its customers like sh*t because theyve got no one else. ( linux is for experts still) , and the mac is just as proprietary.

Microsoft are currently adopting the policy that all their customers are thieves unless you can prove otherwise , advancing the policy that unless you let them invade your privacy ,so that they can satisfy themselves that you didnt steal your copy of XP/Vista , then you get no updates.

A bad policy , and if there was a decent alternative that was user friendly , a policy I am sure would put them out of business.

Intel attempted something similar once with the serial numbers of Pentiums , unlike Microsoft however , they had competition , and the outcry was such that this feature was disabled promptly.

Tom Dunne

mathias wrote:

Intel attempted something similar once with the serial numbers of Pentiums , unlike Microsoft however , they had competition , and the outcry was such that this feature was disabled promptly.

Complete and utter nonsense.

I don't want to drag this thread even further off topic, but I feel I have to reply, not to defend Intel, but to put it into perspective.

Intel introduced the processor serial numbers as the ultimate digital certificate for identity on the Internet. Whether you believe that or not, is irrelevant, but the whole hoopla over the unique identifier and the invasion of privacy was over-blown hogwash. What people fail to realise was that any computer connected to a network already has a unique identifier - the MAC address of the network card. Granted, these can be spoofed, hence the attempt by Intel to introduce a new unique identifier.

The serial numbers are still there on all Intel processors.

And Intel, while not squeaky clean, certainly did not stoop to the level of Microsoft's bully-boy tactics.

mathias

Nonsense eh ? I beg to differ ...

How you would equate this ,

http://www.cdt.org/privacy/issues/pentium3/

http://www.junkbusters.com/intel.html

http://news.com.com/2100-1040-239833.html

With Nonsense is beyond me ,

Also Mac addresses can be changed , so they are not in the same league when it comes to the " permanent identifier" that Intel once proposed ,
From the Wiki ,

In computer networking a Media Access Control address (MAC address) or hardware address or adapter address is a quasi-unique identifier attached to most network adapters (NICs). It is a number that acts like a name for a particular network adapter, so, for example, the network cards (or built-in network adapters) in two different computers will have different names, or MAC addresses, as would an Ethernet adapter and a wireless adapter in the same computer, and as would multiple network cards in a router. However, it is possible to change the MAC address on most of today's hardware.

And of course if privacy is a concern , you can use multiple 20 euro wireless dongles to prevent any Mac address tracking !

In any case one would assume that the filers knew what they were doing.

Tom Dunne

mathias wrote:

Nonsense eh ? I beg to differ ...

I'm not debating the fact that they implemented the serial number. I am pointing out that they hysteria surrounding it was completely and utterly out of proportion, that the implication that Intel used this serial number to invader people's privacy is complete nonsense.

As I said, the same thing can be achieved with a MAC address.

mathias

Hardly out of proportion , a very real concern at the time , much like Microsoft now as a matter of fact!
Anyway! 7 year old news at this point , so lets leave it at that !

The main point , large multi nationals are not to be trusted!

timmywex

one more questions, do people think vista or xp is a better choice(with 1gig ram)

Tar.Aldarion

I would choose xp.

jimmycrackcorm

I have a new 1.66ghz core2duo work laptop and one of my own, a year old amd turion X64. My own appears to be generally much faster than the intel. However the intel one has far greater battery life.

Unless you need to be many hours away from a power socket then I reckon a cheaper AMD is better value.

maxitwist

Heres what I've learned from snooping around different forums for the past week;
Intel Core duo and amd turion 64 x2 are around equal in performance, but with amd winning on price. However Intel's Core 2 duo are around 15% faster than core duo or amd's turionx2.
also amd tends to be better at playing games as the chief manufactures are ati and navidia who specailize in graphic cards anyway

^^
if thats right then I've learnt something, if its wrong then god dam it I still Don't know what I'm talking about