AMD vs Intel

This is very true.

Your Library PC's are most likey to be running something along the lines of windows 2000 server edition compared to your OS (XP I presume ?).

If it is XP, XP uses up alot more of your PC resources than previous versions of windows.

Also as Grimshít said, you most probably have alot more programs on your PC which are loaded as the PC boots whereas the library PC will have just the bare minimum.

hi i want to buy new PC
i want to 'work' (study) with it and i suppose will no have any money to buy another one i next 5 years (middle europe )
what to buy... ?
ATHLON64 socket 939 512CACHE...
or
P4 lga775 2MB CACHE....
which socket will becompatible with Dual Core CPUs....
which socket 939 motherboard support 1M cache CPU
any your advise will be welcome

PS: sorry for my english :]

All AMD motherboards will support dual core, Intel motherboards on the other hand will have to be the new "NForce 4 Intel SLi" or a "955X chipset."

As already mentioned, AMD really smokes Intel at a lot; plus, due to their generally short pipeline, it's a lot better at things like gaming: a pretty important part of a lot of peoples spare time

I'll be going to college in a few years and the colleges suggest 2.8 GHZ P4's or better. Would an AMD processor be a better buy and still do all of the applications as good as a P4?

Generally :

Apps = Intel
Gaming = AMD

Although on certain processors, both cross over into each others teritory.

Well I personally use AMD and I'm not very excited about it...
One of the reason(s) is that the proccessor in to 'hot' - I changed the cooler 2 times by now and he still has 65 - 70 °C
Another disadvantage is that, if I run many internet applications (that dont require too much data) and I also try play a game, the puter starts to reboot without any reason... even though I have 512 ram, that should be enough to run ""those app"" and that game...
It's true that Intel has some preety big prices, but if you really want quality, pay for it
So I'm really thinking on getting a Intel


Regards tommy

Well. that certainly shouldnt be, few things too check

1: Is the heatsink mounted correctly, flat for an athlon 64, and slanted for the Athlon XP and low end Semprons that use Socket A.

2: Have you used a thermal compound between the CPU and heatsink? If so how much did you use?

Well, I've only had one Intel system and that was the first system I ever owned.

I know better now and it's AMD all the way.............AMD RULES!!!

Dude, thats funny... i usually see people comparing AMD and Intel with AMDs lower clock to Intels high clockage CPUs

If an AMD 2.08Ghz runs slower than a 1.5Ghz Intel, you should check recheck the Clock reading hehe. Its most probably a software or CPU fault, no way an AMD 2.0Ghz be beaten by an Intel "1.5Ghz" OMFG can't believe this... *sigh*

I go for AMD (specifically AMD64)



I kinda like comparing AMD and Intel as "Skyline-'Godzilla' GTR" to "Ford Mustang GT"

both fast... one is cheaper

I really like AMD, but mostly because they are cheaper. Plus, I've had really good luck with them. My processor has suffered heat damage and physical damage (don't ask, I bought a cheap fan...) and it's been running stable for 5+ years.

I really hate Celerons though (even though I own one)