AMD are not that bad to be honest. I prefer them over Intel myself, and have been using an AMD Athlon II 245e (dual core 2.9Ghz) for 2 years now...it is overclocked (to 3.4Ghz), and still works well.
Ebuyer currently has a sale on the FX6100...its cheaper than the 4170. (Intel processor at the same price range is the i3 2120).
Comment has been collapsed.
I have AMD Athlon II 255 and still can play Battlefield 3 and other games (Yes, it needs upgrade to FX series but still cheaper than Intel). Spend less money and you can play the same games with no problems at all. Just stop the rat race ppl!.
Comment has been collapsed.
For games i recommend Intel I series / amd phenom II x4/x6.
The FX series are for video edit/photoshop and stuff like that.
As for video card ,wait until AMD comes with 8000 series.
Take a look:
http://iceimg.com/i/f1/bb/676354d140.png
Comment has been collapsed.
The new FX processors are around the performance of the Phenom II X4/X6 or better. Check this for example. A Phenom II X4 is still better value (due to its lower price) if you can find it, but there's no reason to prefer it to the FX series for gaming.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well...i still prefer the intel i ones.
AMD's stock cooler is damn noisy and small.
Intel's are a lot more efficient.
Example: 965BE low price excellent performance BUT noisy and small cooler.
Intel i3 3220 good price little better than 965BE + very good cooler.
So if you want to buy an AMD you must buy a new cooler.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't have a problem with Intel as a choice, just with bundling that with Phenom II X4/X6 and saying they're better than the FX series. The Phenom II processors suffer from similar drawbacks to the FX processors.
By the way, I won't say that you need a "very good cooler". A sub-$20 one will suffice. I use a Hyper TX3 with my Phenom II X6, and it works very well. So the end price for an X4 is still cheaper than a Core i3 3220.
Comment has been collapsed.
AMD FX 8150 (8 cores) with watercooling user here. It works absolutely fine. I've not had any trouble, and I never felt like i needed more processor. It's my first AMD, before I allways used Intel, but I decided to stop wasting excessive money, and I'm very happy with the results.
Comment has been collapsed.
This will go nowhere.
The world is splitted in:
AMD fans and Intel fans.
Comment has been collapsed.
keep an eye on http://www.scan.co.uk/todayonly/index.aspx
i got a full i5 PC (minus the monitor) for £450 last year, though you do have to build it yourself (if youre not confident, just buy the insurance - it's cheap and lets you make mistakes.)
Comment has been collapsed.
12 Comments - Last post 16 minutes ago by AureasAetas
21 Comments - Last post 17 minutes ago by Gamy7
53 Comments - Last post 46 minutes ago by FranckCastle
546 Comments - Last post 4 hours ago by Deniska77
9 Comments - Last post 6 hours ago by Ajarepeich
298 Comments - Last post 14 hours ago by SebasR
31 Comments - Last post 16 hours ago by WaxWorm
10 Comments - Last post 4 minutes ago by Carlo
39 Comments - Last post 5 minutes ago by Akuburanir
66 Comments - Last post 7 minutes ago by Carlo
107 Comments - Last post 14 minutes ago by xfumblesx
173 Comments - Last post 28 minutes ago by samwise84
512 Comments - Last post 32 minutes ago by Fluffster
33 Comments - Last post 33 minutes ago by Talien
I've read a lot of people saying how Intel processors are superior to AMD processors, however, I'm look to build/buy a gaming computer for about £500/£600 in total.
Therefore, I'm wondering if Intel is outside my price range and how bad can an AMD processor be.
I actually read some article of Tom's Hardware comparing processors which said that an AMD FX 4170 was equivalent to an i5. Is this true or just a mistake?
Cheers
Comment has been collapsed.