AMD Vs INTEL Oc
AMD Vs INTEL Oc
What's better between these options? The AMD Athlon II X4 640 OC'd at 3.3ghz-3.6ghz or the Intel i3 540 OC'd at 4ghz? I've heard that dual-core will perform better in some cases, so which one would be more suitable? For instance, running a PS2 emulator? Both systems have similar RAM and graphics cards, so it really comes down to the CPU. Which one do you think is better?
Xtergo :
jaslion :
Thekio1984 :
Comparing AMD athlon ii x4 640 OC`d and Intel i3 540 OC`d is tricky. Both have similar specs like RAM and graphics, so the choice really comes down to the CPU. The dual-core model seems to perform better in some scenarios, especially with older emulators like PS2. I think the i3 would be the better pick here. But since PS2 emulators demand a lot of CPU power, upgrading that system might not be a bad idea—LGA1156 chips are affordable on eBay. It’s also possible to find used first-gen i5s there.
Thekio1984 :
Which is better between the AMD athlon ii x4 640 OC and the Intel i3 540 OC? I've heard dual-core will perform better in some cases, so which one should I choose? For instance, running a PS2 emulator? Both have similar RAM and graphics cards, so it really comes down to the CPU. Which one would you prefer?
Jaslion responded to Thekio1984's question about CPU performance. The discussion compared AMD Athlon II X4 640 OC at 3.3ghz to Intel i3 540 OC at 4ghz, noting dual-core advantages and considering PS2 emulator demands. The conclusion was that the i3 would win, though upgrading for emulation might be worthwhile due to its price and availability.
Xtergo :
jaslion :
Thekio1984 :
Comparing AMD athlon ii x4 640 OC`d at 3.3ghz-3.6ghz versus Intel i3 540 OC`d at 4ghz... I’ve heard dual-core can outperform quad-core in certain scenarios, so which one is better? For instance, running a PS2 emulator? Both systems share similar RAM and graphics cards, so the decision comes down to the CPU. Which would be preferable?
The i3 seems to win this comparison. But since PS2 emulators require significant CPU power, upgrading the i3 system might not be a bad idea—LGA1156 chips are inexpensive on eBay, after all.
PS2 emulators generally prefer fewer faster cores, but I’m not sure if they’ve been updated to support more cores. It’s possible that a budget i5 from eBay could work fine (first generation), so don’t settle for anything less than an i5.
Pcsx2 now supports four cores: core 1 and 2 handle game rendering, core 3 manages the game core while handling other tasks, and core 4 deals with audio. This setup is according to the update notes I received.
if you play a lot, i3 will be more suitable for you. 4 threads are sufficient for 99% of games today. Intel's cores consistently outperform AMD's.
if you're working on video rendering or similar tasks, amd offers better performance with more cores at the same cost.
so multi-threaded performance is indeed faster
Sure, sweet guys thanks again for the info. I went through it on both systems and didn’t notice any difference. I really like the idea of an i5, but I guess you get what you pay for. I had my AMD in a combo with a motherboard, and the hardware was about £15 more than if I’d bought it separately. I also needed a new board since I was running an old Acer T180 with an AMD 6000+ on air—it was getting warm. I got a Gigabyte H33 board and wasn’t sure if it would work, so I ordered extra RAM for it and the new motherboard together. Both came at the same time, and the freeboard worked perfectly. Now I’m thinking, did I just waste money on AMD when I could have just grabbed the freeboard and bought the i5 and RAM right away? From what you say, it seems the AMD options are good, but Intel still edges out in performance.