Price difference between Intel & AMD systems
 

Franklin wrote:

Is there a rough rule of thumb which indicates the price difference between
an AMD system and an Intel system of the same power?

Same power for what? In Doom 3 for example, an Athlon 64 3500+ beats
anything that Intel makes, even chips at almost 3x the price.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2149&p=7



I am thinking of just the processor and mobo.
(I don't think memory depends on processor type)

Is it something like ... "Intel systems cost 25 to 30 percent more than an
equivalent AMD system"?

No. How do you determine which chips are equivalent? By benchmarks?
If so, then you need to figure out what applications you run , and how often
you run each, then come up with a weighted average performance level
for each chip based on your usage patterns. Then you can make a
comparison.

JK wrote:

Franklin wrote:

Is there a rough rule of thumb which indicates the price difference between
an AMD system and an Intel system of the same power?

Same power for what? In Doom 3 for example, an Athlon 64 3500+ beats
anything that Intel makes, even chips at almost 3x the price.

But nobody in their right mind would spend money on the Intel Extreme
Edition version. It was made for a particular purpose at a particular
time, and I understand that it is now discontinued. Hence it's ludicrous
to keep referring to "AMD beats Intel at 3x the price", but that's the
sort of arguments being used by AMD fanatics.

Johannes H Andersen wrote:

JK wrote:

Franklin wrote:

Is there a rough rule of thumb which indicates the price difference between
an AMD system and an Intel system of the same power?

Same power for what? In Doom 3 for example, an Athlon 64 3500+ beats
anything that Intel makes, even chips at almost 3x the price.

But nobody in their right mind would spend money on the Intel Extreme
Edition version. It was made for a particular purpose at a particular
time

To compete against the Athlon 64 FX-53. It didn't do a good job at that though.
However since it is the best gaming chip Intel sells, a number of them
probably sold anyway.

, and I understand that it is now discontinued.

It is? I heard that the 3.2 ghz was discontinued. I doubt Intel would discontinue
the 3.4 ghz one unless they came out with a replacement for it(perhaps a
3.6 ghz one?).

Hence it's ludicrous
to keep referring to "AMD beats Intel at 3x the price"

Not really. For those who love playing Doom 3 it is important.

, but that's the
sort of arguments being used by AMD fanatics.

Fanatics? LOL!

"JK" wrote in message
...


Johannes H Andersen wrote:

JK wrote:

Franklin wrote:

Is there a rough rule of thumb which indicates the price difference
between
an AMD system and an Intel system of the same power?

Same power for what? In Doom 3 for example, an Athlon 64 3500+ beats
anything that Intel makes, even chips at almost 3x the price.

But nobody in their right mind would spend money on the Intel Extreme
Edition version. It was made for a particular purpose at a particular
time

To compete against the Athlon 64 FX-53. It didn't do a good job at that
though.
However since it is the best gaming chip Intel sells, a number of them
probably sold anyway.

, and I understand that it is now discontinued.

It is? I heard that the 3.2 ghz was discontinued. I doubt Intel would
discontinue
the 3.4 ghz one unless they came out with a replacement for it(perhaps a
3.6 ghz one?).

They are changing the Extreme range to the LGA775 processors and moving the
FSB to 1066. nd to the prescott core I assume. They will be expensive
still tho.......

"Franklin" wrote in message
...
JK wrote:

Franklin wrote:

Is there a rough rule of thumb which indicates the price
difference between an AMD system and an Intel system of the
same power?

-- snip --

I am thinking of just the processor and mobo.
(I don't think memory depends on processor type)

Is it something like ... "Intel systems cost 25 to 30 percent
more than an equivalent AMD system"?

No. How do you determine which chips are equivalent? By
benchmarks? If so, then you need to figure out what
applications you run , and how often you run each, then come up
with a weighted average performance level for each chip based
on your usage patterns. Then you can make a comparison.

I use my PC for home and "small office" use.
No games. No video or sound editing. No movie playing. No power use.

That is the sort of thing I would like to compare between AMD and Intel.

The final system may be something like a AMD Barton 2500+ with 1GB memory,
sound integrated on mobo and a very modest VIA-based graphics and 80 GN
HDD.

But all I want to get anidea of is the relative cost on an AMD mobo &
porceesor compared to Intel.

Hope that helps.


AMD will be a cheaper version and will do everything you need.

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 17:20:36 +0100, Franklin wrote:

I use my PC for home and "small office" use.
No games. No video or sound editing. No movie playing. No power use.

Then you really don't need much power.

That is the sort of thing I would like to compare between AMD and
Intel.

The final system may be something like a AMD Barton 2500+ with 1GB
memory, sound integrated on mobo and a very modest VIA-based graphics
and 80 GN HDD.

But all I want to get anidea of is the relative cost on an AMD mobo &
porceesor compared to Intel.

Then compare an AMD 2500+ MB combo to a P4 2.6GHz MB combo. A quick
comparison on pricewatch puts the cheapest AMD 2500+combo at $93 and the
cheapest 2.6GHz P4 combo at $190, or $171 for a 2.53GHz P4 combo.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

On 18/09/2004 Wes Newell wrote:

On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 17:20:36 +0100, Franklin wrote:


[snipped]

Then compare an AMD 2500+ MB combo to a P4 2.6GHz MB combo. A quick
comparison on pricewatch puts the cheapest AMD 2500+combo at $93 and
the cheapest 2.6GHz P4 combo at $190, or $171 for a 2.53GHz P4 combo.

Where do you find items in the UK priced in USD - or is your pound sign
broken?

--
Jeff Gaines - Damerham Hampshire UK
Posted with XanaNews 1.16.4.6
http://www.wilsonc.demon.co.uk/d7xananews.htm

Franklin wrote:

JK wrote:

Franklin wrote:

Is there a rough rule of thumb which indicates the price
difference between an AMD system and an Intel system of the
same power?

-- snip --

I am thinking of just the processor and mobo.
(I don't think memory depends on processor type)

Is it something like ... "Intel systems cost 25 to 30 percent
more than an equivalent AMD system"?

No. How do you determine which chips are equivalent? By
benchmarks? If so, then you need to figure out what
applications you run , and how often you run each, then come up
with a weighted average performance level for each chip based
on your usage patterns. Then you can make a comparison.

I use my PC for home and "small office" use.

In that case an Athlon XP system would give you the best value.
An Athlon XP3000+ at around $100 beats a $220 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz
in Business Winstone 2004.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2065&p=6


No games. No video or sound editing. No movie playing. No power use.

That is the sort of thing I would like to compare between AMD and Intel.

The final system may be something like a AMD Barton 2500+ with 1GB memory,
sound integrated on mobo and a very modest VIA-based graphics and 80 GN HDD.

But all I want to get anidea of is the relative cost on an AMD mobo &
porceesor compared to Intel.

A good basic motherboard for an Athlon XP is cheap. Only around $50-60.



Hope that helps.

JK wrote:

Franklin wrote:

JK wrote:

Franklin wrote:

Is there a rough rule of thumb which indicates the price
difference between an AMD system and an Intel system of the
same power?

-- snip --

I am thinking of just the processor and mobo.
(I don't think memory depends on processor type)

Is it something like ... "Intel systems cost 25 to 30 percent
more than an equivalent AMD system"?

No. How do you determine which chips are equivalent? By
benchmarks? If so, then you need to figure out what
applications you run , and how often you run each, then come up
with a weighted average performance level for each chip based
on your usage patterns. Then you can make a comparison.

I use my PC for home and "small office" use.

In that case an Athlon XP system would give you the best value.
An Athlon XP3000+ at around $100 beats a $220 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz
in Business Winstone 2004.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2065&p=6

And on the same link, the Pentium 4 3.0 GHz Northwood beats the
Athlon XP3000+ in Content Creation Winstone 2004. Where do you get
those prices from? The Athlon XP are being replaced by less performing
Semprons for same PR numbers.

Johannes H Andersen wrote:

JK wrote:

Franklin wrote:

JK wrote:

Franklin wrote:

Is there a rough rule of thumb which indicates the price
difference between an AMD system and an Intel system of the
same power?

-- snip --

I am thinking of just the processor and mobo.
(I don't think memory depends on processor type)

Is it something like ... "Intel systems cost 25 to 30 percent
more than an equivalent AMD system"?

No. How do you determine which chips are equivalent? By
benchmarks? If so, then you need to figure out what
applications you run , and how often you run each, then come up
with a weighted average performance level for each chip based
on your usage patterns. Then you can make a comparison.

I use my PC for home and "small office" use.

In that case an Athlon XP system would give you the best value.
An Athlon XP3000+ at around $100 beats a $220 Pentium 4 3.2 ghz
in Business Winstone 2004.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2065&p=6

And on the same link, the Pentium 4 3.0 GHz Northwood beats the
Athlon XP3000+ in Content Creation Winstone 2004. Where do you get

those prices from?

www.pricewatch.com

The Athlon XP are being replaced by less performing
Semprons for same PR numbers.

The Sempron model number are meant to compare it to the Celeron.
Athlon XP chips are still available. It is not certain how much longer
they will still be available.