Is Intel really worth the extra buck for a bigger bang?

[Ashimema]

I've been in the AMD camp for years and it's coming up time for me to buy a new system. I'm wondering whether to go the Sandy Bridge route or the Phenom II route?

I don't subscribe to the camp where computer has to cost the earth. Generally spending around the £500 mark and aiming to make that system last around 5 years.

However, being in the IT industry now I was looking at a top end price of around £800 this time and wanted a machine that could handle multiple virtual box vm's. (that price includes only the box.. I tend to upgrade ancillaries randomly so have pretty nice screens and keyboard/mice already).

So.. is Intel mainly Hype or are they really worth the extra money for the performance increase seen?

PS: Gaming power isn't needed. I wan't something to crunch through my code, play HD Video and run multiple OS's in VM's simultaneously. That might be the same as a gaming rig minus the multiple high end graphics card?

 

[IrishTech]

While intel sandy is better it depends on your needs I aint a intel fan boy or AMD but going by bench mark and reviews Sandy is atm better. Also Sandy is at a decent price which helps even more I mean the latest sandy not k version compared to latest AMD is £20 diffrence. Saying that If you wanted to go intel i would advice waiting a few months as there is a design flaw with the Sandy bridge motherboard and with this being a work computer I wouldnt take the chance on a faulty mobo.

 

[Gorman]

For your described use, Intel is the better make. A 1st or 2nd gen I7 with hyperthreading would be my choice.

As far as gaming goes, Intel and AMD are much the same, Intel really pull into the lead when it comes to number crunching and VM's.

 

[Ashimema]

Cheers Guys,

I had already noted the need to wait for a while if I choose the Sandy Bridge route, but thanks for the reminder IrishTech. The insight you've given me Gorman is exactly what I was looking for.. Thanks!

 

[pengipete]

I don't know if this helps but I've only been using PC clones at home for about five years having cursed them (I was totally in love with my Aimgas and any mention of Intel or Microsoft was banned in my house). When it got to the stage where I really couldn't avoid buying a PC (capital letters), I completely ignored the fact that there were two choices of CPU and just bought the best computer I could afford that did what I wanted.

A year later, I ordered my first PCS custom computer which meant I had a choice of motherboard and CPU - I concentrated on the motherboard's features - connectivity, expansion capability etc - and that dictated my choice of CPU. The same applied when ordering my latest PCS computer - I chose the motherboard first and then decided which CPU I could afford. As it turned out, I've chosen Asus motherboard that supported Intel CPUs both times and I've been more than happy with the performance but I didn't deliberately set out to buy either. I just want a PC that does what I need and want it to do for a the foreseeable future and is within my budget.

Ultimately, if you want a PC to perform a certain function, I'd recommend chosing the motherboard as the best starting point. Look at things like the number, location and type of drive connections and expansion slots - a fair few people have bought the latest, greatest motherboard only to find that they no longer support IDE or have a single PCI slot which means that their existing hardware can't be installed. If you see a "new" feature like SataIII or USB3, decide if you are likely to make use of them during the lifetime of the PC and - if not - decide if they are increasing your costs for no benefit. Once you've decided on a motherboard, the choice of Intel or AMD is made for you and all you need to do is decide which CPU from that manufacturer's range is best for you and falls within your budget. For someone like yourself who has a very clear idea of what they need, you'd probably be better off focusing on memory, storage and connectivity than CPUs.

The main thing is that neither Intel nor AMD produce any "bad" CPUs at present - in fact, both are producing awesomely powerful, reliable processors that are likely to keep up with other technologies for the lifetime of most PCs. There are much wider variations in the quality and potential longevity of motherboards and graphics cards -those are the areas where you need to be careful. The significant changes in recent years - HD and 3D video, Blu-ray, SataIII, USB3, DDR3 memory, wireless "n" and solid-state drives - have, for once, all come pretty-well at once so any reasonably well spec'd PC bought today is probably more future-proof than they have been for years. In contrast, any CPU you chose will be out-of-date about ten minutes after you buy it.