AMD FX 60 VS INTEL PENTIUM 4 HT EMT64 EXTEREME edition?

Question

AMD FX 60 VS INTEL PENTIUM 4 HT EMT64 EXTEREME edition?

Answer 1

I believe the FX 60 is the fastest stock chip on the market at this time in every single catagory.(I personally like the opteron 165, which is a third of the price and can OC almost as high as the FX60 at stock volts on air) If you want to go intel, wait a few months and go with conroe, which is supposed to put up some really impressive numbers and unseat AMD from its current throne(I'll be amd still wins price\performance though)

Answer 2

I prefer intel, what you may want to do is wait as new 4 core processors should be out soon, the extreme edition is a very expensive processor my advice would be build your computer with an Intel approved case TAC, an intel motherboard with the 975 chipset, dont buy the latest processor cause in 6 months it will be half the price, use a western digital raptor HDD, 2 gb of DDR2 memory, if you have an older computer with the lga 775 socket USE that for a while and wait for the price decrease

Answer 3

It's simple. Athlons are more efficant.



When the both companies releasted there Dual Core chips, the Athlon X2 (X2 = dualcore) ran cooler and with less wattage then the single core P4!



The AthlonFX 60 is an awesome chip, and it has a faster/efficant FSB compaired to Intel.

Answer 4

Better for what, office work, surfing, games ?, I will expand, if you want to game if your motherboard will support go AMD- best you can afford with a decent Graphics card, or if you want to indulge in a lot of photo work, letters etc go fore Intel dual core, i have found that surfing there's not much in it whatever CPU you have, one of my systems is a socket 478 Intel 2.40GHz no good for games but this is my fastest on web pages, so decide what you want to do with your PC before you start to buy the parts, good luck Cybercat.

Answer 5

Athlon64's are more efficient; data has a wider, shorter path through the processor. Why do you think Intel has plans on copying AMD? They've already done, as a matter of fact, it's the new chip you've been hearing about, the Conroe.



By the way, an FX-60 wipes the floor with the P4 EE, which is based on the slowest Pentium core in history (speedwise with the current Athlon, that is), the Pentium D. I'll look for the link from the site where I saw the two tested head-to-head.

Answer 6

Did someone fail to mention the 4core AMD compadibility Nforce that can only be achived with its great performance and reliability?



AMD all the way dude.

It's more reliable and effecient.



Intel is slow and has processing burps when processing

large ammounts of data.

Answer 7

I think INTEL PENTIUM 4 HT EMT64 EXTEREME edition is better than AMD. Besides, I'd always spend on the good ol' intel rather than the younger-AMD. And also, since Intel has tied up with Apple recently, you can expect to run Macintosh on Intels from mid-next year. I'd always go for Intel !

Answer 8

Did someone forget to mention the Intel Dual Core ?



Maybe so but software that is made for pcs are more designed more towards the intel chips then AMD just as an example people who do photo editing with adobe have issues with AMD chips because of software being more designed for intel chips then AMD :)



It would of been great if AMD could of supplied apple with cpu's but they just didnt have the ability to make the amount of cpu's that apple required but those dual cores look good :)

Answer 9

amd for the same price always beats intel. mike

Answer 10

that's the test report Pentium Extreme Edition 955 versus Athlon 64 FX-60

The conclusion in one phrase: the test results make it clear, however, that Intel probably won't be able to catch up with AMD using processors based on the Netburst microarchitecture.



http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q1/fx60-vs-955xe/index.x?pg=1

Answer 11

Donny N surely summed it up. %80 the overall performance @ %60 the cost of what Intel promises. i ought to also want to operate that I actually have owned both Intel and AMD. yet when i ought to purchase a processor like the FX 6300, and OC it from 3.5Ghz to 4.6ghz, and spend as low as $one hundred thirty. Then i'm bought on AMD. I now have a CPU that i paid a reliable cost for and it performs equivalent if no extra useful than a extra extreme priced intel processor. the folk regrettably decrease than are biased because they own Intel or AMD, on the top of the day information are information. overall performance is each thing.