which CPU is good for multi-tasking, intel or amd?
By vladmire
@vladmire (28)
Philippines
February 13, 2007 10:16am CST
disregard your AGP card or PCI-E graphics card and RAM.
specs:amd 2400+ and P4 2.4GHz
128mb standard graphic card w/ 512Mb ram.
for multi-tasking, which is better? like openning multiple applications.
norton is scanning on the background, creating/editing an office document and listenning music from winamp...
3 applications at the same time.
2 people like this
6 responses
@merkava (1225)
• Philippines
22 Feb 07
A lot of people say AMD is better than Intel and vice versa but what are they really trying to say when they say "faster" or "better"???
I personally prefer Intel, why? Ok, as a techie I look for these important factors because these will directly affect the performance of the pc.
1)Overclockability
2)multiplier
3)Cache memory
4)fsb
5)Cpu Core or number of cores
6)cpu stepping
I've seen the new Intel processors surpass these requirements against the new AMD procs. I'll gladly show you my benchmarks if you message me for it.
1 person likes this
@lesterdsa (1638)
• India
17 Feb 07
MD outperforms Intel and it happens the other way around also, but not too often anymore. The simple fact is AMD has been extremely honest about the performance of their CPU's. Pricing them appropriately compared to the intel counterparts and to their own. Intel blows smoke and uses the media hype to drive their processor prices up(actually to release them with high prices). AMD doesn't need any of that just honest performance that proves itself. Intel might have money but it doesn't help them catch up to AMD in terms of 64-bit processing and dual core. Most people in this world just want a low cost pc to use for the 3-5 years they last on average. AMD offers low-budget and high-performance in the same package. Right now only 64 bit processors are gonna last long enough for the avg pc user. AMD has a 64 bit processor for $100 with 939 CPU's starting at $130. Intel EMT64 starts at $180. I bet if AMD didn't release the Athlon64 then EMT64 wouldnt be out for another year and would be priced terribly high. I for one am so greatful for AMD CPU's ever since my first AMD 386 system. Then my k6-2+ then my Duron, Athlon, Athlon XP and now 64. By the way i have also bought the pentium, PII, PIII, and P4 at one point in time. Now all my intel systems have been sold. I still have 3 XP systems in my house and they all work perfectly for what i use them for. Gaming machines and media centers/home theatre pcs. I play the newest games like BF2 on my older Athlon XP systems great. Besides lacking ram, 1 gig isn't enough anymore even on my amd64! any other game ram isnt an issue.
@Serjas (2328)
• India
28 Feb 07
i prefer AMD since i am using one.I use AMD because
--comparatively cheap
--high performance
--high stabilty
--greater support for gaming
i recommned AMD FX 64 bit computing.It has many advantage over intel pentium 4 processors.but i heard that intel pentium duo core2 is much better than other precedures and a like performance with AMD 64.so i f you are going to buy a new computer either you go for AMD FX 64 or Pentium 4 Duo core 2.
@hellhunter (273)
• United States
16 Feb 07
I recommend AMD 2400+ for multi-tasking.
AMD 2400+ = Intel 3.2GHz (not 2.4)
I strongly recommend AMD. It is the best processor.
Intel is not for Pro's it's for amateur's. AMD is specially designed for multi tasking not only 3 but but many.