When you talk
high-end performance, money shouldn't be talking louder. For gamers
running single-GPU set-ups or mid-range multi-GPU configurations,
AMD chips are they way to go, especially the Phenom II X4 Black
Edition chips. Fast clockspeed with a good number of cores for good
measure.
But those running
high-end multi-GPU set-ups should go for Intel rather than AMD
because AMD chips, with their lower IPC and lack of HTT, can
bottleneck the graphics by a mile. For most people, AMD chips make
more sense. For the select few who require more CPU horsepower
(like animators), Intel should be used. I make AMD-based builds
because I personally prefer AMD. Overclocks better, and doesn't
make much difference in gaming in typical scenarios.
And I never said
Intel was always above. I'm referring to the present, because
there's no use in talking about the past. Back when Intel were
trying to get everyone and their dog to buy their overpriced,
underperforming and hot Pentium 4-series chips, AMD's Athlon series
made a lot more sense, especially in the high-end where it was
Pentium Extreme Edition versus Athlon FX. The Pentium ran hot,
wasn't as fast and was generally inferior. However, people were
already committed to the "Higher clock, faster CPU" advertisements
by Intel and decided to go for Intel only.
My guidelines are
Anything below $1000
- AMD
$1001-$1999 : Buyer
preference
$2000+ - Intel
@Call4jw: AMD does
have their own fabs in Dresden, Germany and Malaysia. Global
Foundries was a general-purpose fab.
Oh ok, thought you're going to insult me with your male superiority
complex and tell me girls should never had commented on computer
technology because it's purely a strong aspects for Men.
So too bad you didn't, but I'm also not impressed. 