Hello ! Names, John Anywho my father and I have plans on building a Computer. We are looking to spend roughly 800 US dollars on it. What should we keep in mind when building a computer? Which CPU would be best for the money? From what I hear, INTEL is better, "When building Gaming computers I always go for Intel (Cuz of the speed)," is what I hear my friends say. And that AMD is if you wanna go "Cheap," so if you have the money, go INTEL instead. Any tips or advice? Also what makes a computer fast? Is it a collection of things like the CPU, RAM, and IHD speed? I'm new to computers, only experience is building 2 of them ( which was enjoyable). We currently have two build Intel Computers, one that cost 1G and another that cost roughly 500, Now my father wants a computer for himself, so we are dishing out another ~800 for him. But he has the idea that (He has no computer knowledge/experience) that AMD might be good or better. Yeah haha, I know there are a couple of questions in here, sorry for making them all over the place. Thanks in advance for your comments. -John_Wolf
Out of experience, I would say Intel. I had different AMD's before and was always glad to change to Intel. Far better in performance and speed manipulation. There is so much more available in tweaks etc. for Intel and more logical to understand.
of course it depends on your location.. here in holland, you can order this MINI Intel i5 3550 4x3.3Ghz HD2500 DVDRW 1TB SATA3 HD 8GB DDR PC for 516 euros. and that`s an ivy bridge cpu, not sandy bridge.. and only decent japanese-made condensators in it.. i can`t be bothered to order all that stuff and put it together if i can get it ready to run for that kind of money..
Well depends for what reasons he is going to use the Computer for... I'm an avid Gamer /Photomanipulationist and always went for intel (i7 2.67Ghz atm) and for Nvidia (GTX 470)GPUs But still if the computer you're using is just for Emails/watching films/surfing the net and those basic things, I think you should lean more to the economical side (AMD) rather than Intel. Intel wastes more power output (so does Nvidia GPUs) so you'll need a higher PSU li Calistoga said. Also Intel tends to get more hotter, so does the GPU while the AMD/ATi (ATi merging with AMD now) tend to be cooler but PERSONALLY I would go to Intel and Nvidia) 1) Intel's CPUs are much more consistent and if you go for the i3/i5/i7, their hyperthreading is much better than the AMDs equivalent 2) ATis Drivers were always really buggy, don't know if they still are that much 3) Performance wise it's much better 4) also more flexible in Overclocking and stuff (doubt you'll need it though) Depends on the type of system you are using it if you're just surfing the internet/watching a video/play some games like the pre-2007 ones then go for the economical side, AMD but if some games are planning to be played seriously like 2007 - present or Photoshop/3DSMax usage, then go for Intel I stand to be corrected about the Intel/AMD info, I always was more of an Intel Fan-girl
[FONT="]I have no big experience in that area but [/FONT][FONT="]for the price Intel's cores are far more powerful.[/FONT]
People forget the i3 is literally only half as good as an i5, as it has only 2 cores, not 4! The Intel graphics unit is also rather weak, so you would need a discrete card. Quite honestly, for budget systems the AMD A8's would be preferable over an i3, and they have a better graphics unit. Remember we are are talking budget systems here, for a higher end system I would definitely recommend the i5-3570K. Shortly AMD are releasing the second generation APU's, and the A10-5800K looks quite decent out of these. They have a really good on-chip GPU, and you can crossfire it with a discrete HD7670 if you want a little extra graphics grunt . The Socket FM2 boards also have 8 native SATA 3 ports, and even the current Socket FM1 (released long before Ivy Bridge) has 6 native SATA3 ports. Its shameful of Intel to put only 2 native SATA3 ports on the high end z77 chipset, to the point where it proves competition is vital. It borders on disgusting that Intel knows they can get away with cheaping out on SATA3 due to the lack of competition in the higher end. If you couple this with 8GB (2x4GB) of DDR3-2133 RAM (the CPU supports this, consider the on die GPU), an SSD like the 128GB OCZ Vertex 4 or Samsung 830, and a decent hard drive (the Seagate ST2000DM001 2TB drives are better now than what they were when released, and they have new firmware available), you would end up with a very price conscious but fast setup. Just remember what I said about i3 vs i5, they are NOT the same. The i3 is literally HALF the CPU the i5 is, which, in addition to very average GPU performance, is what makes the AMD APU attractive. Just remember when people recommend things that they may be anti-AMD, anti-Nvidia etc.
First thing you will need to choose which motherboard you want to use then get the cpu, ram graphics card and psu that will be compatible with that motherboard.
That's true pick a good stable board first on whatever platform and then choose the Processor then get a good power supply and stable memory, everything after are secondary choices. Intel is the best platform as of now in terms of performance and power efficiency. However because AMD had their bulldozer flop they had to reduce prices to compete, so you can get some pretty good deals on some mid range processors.
I have always been Pro AMD HOWEVER when I built a gaming system using the AM3+ platform and the AMD FX 8150 I noticed some issues with a few of my games Mass Effect ( going to peak 15 black pixles for characters ) as well as Deux Ex being very choppy. Upon further googling I noticed that those same issues were determined on other message boards to be common to both CPU's FX and the A series offerings. I have 16 Gigs of DDR 3 1600 CL 7 MSI 6970 Video card Gigabyte FXA - UD7 Board and just recently purchased the 960T quad core Phenom II that unloclks to a hexa core and removed the 8150 replaced it with the 960 T allowed the Bios to work its magic and with 6 cores instantly play all games play flawlessly. Its hard to obtain AMD Phenom II x 6 CPUs through the usual channels at least from what I have seen. I will continue to tinker and build new systems for myself and others BUT IF you play high end type games NOTE the core temp gadgets I have used will not work when using the bios to unlock cores... As far as Intel goes I feel its hard to beat the new Ivy Bridge platforms at least until AMD resolves the issues I mentioned earlier. If I desired to swap platforms the only things I would be required to change would be my CPU and board everything else will transfer easily. Hardware prices change almost daily the older socket 1366 chips are around as well as the 155 and 1156 socket cpu's the 2011 are a great choice if you have the budget and crave ultimate levels of performance BUT when you choose a Socket type based on what you want to do.. also look at what the motherboards that use them cost. If you can acquire a triple or even a quad core Phenom II and use a motherboard with the 990 chip sets you will have a great starting point that will allow you to upgrade to the AM3 + CPUs at any time should AMD resolve those new CPU platform issues. IF ANYONE KNOWS HOW TO RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES YOU WOULD BE A HERO...
I would go Asus over Intel, but remember, for low end/budget systems AMD are better, for high end Intel is better. As I pointed out in my previous post the i3 is NOT as good as what people with i5's etc think it is, your best option is to go with an AMD APU for budget systems. Also, you cannot compare the first gen Bulldozer which was very disappointing with the APU's because its not the same tech - and the new APU's coming out are based on the yet to be released second gen Bulldozer cores. As I said earlier, if you can afford it, go the i5-3570K, otherwise get an A8 or the future A10 AMD APU. Funny thing with Intel cheaping out on SATA3, since motherboard providers had to provide a third party SATA3 chip, the cost to the consumer is actually greater than what it would have been if Intel had all SATA3 ports , something the mainstream and higher end (z77 chipset) should have!
cpu are different , intel is a bit ahead in most applications but we live in the over-powered era , it means that any cpu are almost too powerful . testing some amd and intel of nearly same power with a game server with bots is interesting and some change in behaviors of bots or monsters are sometimes visible
One answer - Personal preference. Intel, I must admit, I've found are better than AMD for multi-tasking performance and would always recommend Intel over AMD. And yes most CPU sockets are different, for more information look into LGA(Land Grid Array) sockets, this is the CPU bed with very a high density of contacts.
Again, personal preference, there is really no telling as every day better motherboards are released. I've ALWAYS been a Gigabyte buyer as they are very robust and built with solid performance parts.