Computer Procressor, Is there a difference between AMD Athlon and Intel? |
 Dec 27 2007, 01:44 AM
Post
#1
|
|
 ...Oon sro lanh Bong...  Group: Member Posts: 114 Joined: Jul 2004 Member No: 29,944  |
I am searching for a laptop that runs on a faster processor. My laptop right now runs on a 1.44GHz and I find it's a little slow for me. I found two other laptops that have faster processors and at a better price.
Except. One laptop has an AMD Athlon™ 64 X2 TK-55 One other laptop has Intel Core 2 Duo T5250 I was wondering if there was a difference between the two companies, besides the speed. Is there one that is more preferred? I'm confuzzled... Does anyone know?? THANKS! |
|
|
|
 |
Replies
(1 - 9)
|
Dec 27 2007, 01:50 AM
Post
#2
|
|
 Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 123 Joined: Nov 2007 Member No: 593,311 |
Core 2 Duo is better. Hands-down. It's more-preferred, naturally, because it's faster and more energy-efficient. You can't go wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 27 2007, 01:53 AM
Post
#3
|
|
|
...Oon sro lanh Bong... Group: Member Posts: 114 Joined: Jul 2004 Member No: 29,944 |
Ok so even though the athlon runs on a 1.8 GHz and the intel core duo is a 1.5GHz, the Intel is still better?
Would it make much difference on the brand of the computer? Cuz like the AMD Athlon is on a HP i'm looking at while the Intel is on a Sony Vaio I am also interested in. |
|
|
|
|
Dec 27 2007, 01:57 AM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 123 Joined: Nov 2007 Member No: 593,311 |
The brand does not usually make a difference. Minor things are changed, here and there, but usually nothing incredibly substantial. Yes, the Core 2 Duo beats the crap out of the Athlon X2. Clock-for-clock, it's so much better. Even at a 300 MHz loss per core, it's hard for me to believe the Athlon could stand much of a chance.
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_mobile.html |
|
|
|
|
Dec 27 2007, 01:59 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 123 Joined: Nov 2007 Member No: 593,311 |
It is a Core 2 Duo, correct? And not just a Core Duo?
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 27 2007, 02:05 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
...Oon sro lanh Bong... Group: Member Posts: 114 Joined: Jul 2004 Member No: 29,944 |
Yes, it is a Core 2 Duo
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 27 2007, 02:06 AM
Post
#7
|
|
 Sarcastic Mr. Know-It-All Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 2,089 Joined: Dec 2003 Member No: 29 |
I'm an AMD fanboy, but intel has been traditionally better at mobile processors.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 27 2007, 02:09 AM
Post
#8
|
|
|
...Oon sro lanh Bong... Group: Member Posts: 114 Joined: Jul 2004 Member No: 29,944 |
So exactly is there a difference between the two processors?
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 27 2007, 02:12 AM
Post
#9
|
|
|
Senior Member Group: Member Posts: 123 Joined: Nov 2007 Member No: 593,311 |
Yes, there is a difference. AMD uses the K8 architecture, and if, indeed this is a Core 2 Duo, it's using far more-advanced technology than the AMD processor uses. AMD has been nothing of which to speak, mobile and desktop, for the last year and a half, since the introduction of the Core 2 Duo. Get the Intel, and you'll be happy. If you need legitimate reviews for each processor, simply search Google, and you'll invariably find some means of benchmarking the two, in the case you don't feel satisfied with my recommendation.
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 27 2007, 02:13 AM
Post
#10
|
|
 dripping destruction Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 7,282 Joined: Jun 2004 Member No: 21,929 |
as of now, intel mobile chipsets (mainly the core 2 duo) uses less power than their AMD counterparts.
The difference can be seen in the battery life of an intel vs. AMD laptop. intel laptops are more expensive and run longer. of course, you ahve to ask yourself; are you doing heavy rendering? lots of process heavy work? like, say, running complex graphics filters, etc? because if you aren't, the slowness you're seeing in your compture is probably due to your RAM... |
|
|
|
 |
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: