Windows 7 Forums
Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Intel/AMD and nVidia/ATI


View Poll Results: What are you using?
AMD/ATI 26 15.03%
Intel/nVidia 75 43.35%
AMD/nVidia 30 17.34%
Intel/ATI 31 17.92%
AMD/Other (OnBoard) 0 0%
Intel/Other (OnBoard) 11 6.36%
Voters: 173. You may not vote on this poll

19 Jul 2009   #1

Win7 64bit Ultimate
 
 
Intel/AMD and nVidia/ATI

I am curious about what people are using and what they think about what they are using.

I would like to hear what kind of processor and graphics you are running and why you chose to go with each.

I do not want to see people start arguing over why which one is better.

I would like to hear why you think one is better than the other but without arguments.

I am using an AMD Phenom II x4 940 processor with a Sapphire X1950 GT 512Mb Graphics card.

I chose the AMD processor for the performance and price and I have overclocked it as high as 3.6Ghz so far stable without adjusting the northbridge.

I chose the Sapphire X1950 GT because it was cheap but originally I had a pair of them installed with a crossfire setup. I did not like crossfire at all because it was a waste of time, effort, money, and one graphics card. I found out quickly that crossfire will only work with a single display. I run dual monitors so that was a killer for me right away. Without being able to use crossfire I was effectively wasting an entire card so I sold one. Other problems included not having any video until windows was loaded and I was sitting on the desktop. Again another killer because if you have a problem and cannot access the bios you just sit there wondering when your machine is ever going to start or if it ever will. You end up pulling a card to troubleshoot the problem and that sucks.

I ended up clocking the card up to the speed of an X1950 Pro because the GT was underpowered.

My processor was an excellent choice. My graphics card was a poor choice. Not because it was ATI but because it was a crappy model. If I had gone with a 1950 Pro I would have been much happier.

My next processor and graphics card will be the AMD Phenom II X4 955 and the Sapphire HD 4890 Atomic.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

19 Jul 2009   #2

Windows 7 Home Premium x64 - Mac OS X 10.6.4 x64
 
 

For me it is nVidia/Intel because of their offerings on a laptop...I have a T9300 Processor and an 8600M GT in my laptop...while the graphics card is aging a bit...this is still a very powerful notebook that can pretty much run anything reasonable you throw at it...Intel and nVidia have gained my business because of my experience with them
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jul 2009   #3

 

I chose the Intel E6700 for it's price point and native clock. I upgraded to the E6750 when my mobo BIOS was upgraded to support 1333 FSB. The upgrade cost me half a day's labor reprogramming LCR tables on a breadbox switch. I chose ATI HD3850 512MD3 because it was $25.

Intel is better than AMD because I don't like bell peppers. ATI is better than nVidia because I do like adobo.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.


19 Jul 2009   #4

Windows 7 32bit RTM
 
 

Intel and Nvidia = Best Combo
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jul 2009   #5

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Intel for my CPU (Q9550), because it had the best bang for the buck at the time of purchase. Nvidia for my GPU because Nvidia has been far better in terms of driver support under Linux than ATI.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jul 2009   #6

Windows 7 Home Premium x64 - Mac OS X 10.6.4 x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Antman View Post
I chose the Intel E6700 for it's price point and native clock. I upgraded to the E6750 when my mobo BIOS was upgraded to support 1333 FSB. The upgrade cost me half a day's labor reprogramming LCR tables on a breadbox switch. I chose ATI HD3850 512MD3 because it was $25.

Intel is better than AMD because I don't like bell peppers. ATI is better than nVidia because I do like adobo.
Alright Antman...I need a good professional reconmendation...I am looking for a processor for a board a friend gave me...the socket on the board is LGA775...I am looking to not spend much but I want to have some power behind it...thoughts?

Anyone can jump in here (didn't want to start a whole thread for this...seeing how it ties in here)
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jul 2009   #7

Windows 7 Ultimate, OS X 10.7, Ubuntu 11.04
 
 

Intel/Intel for me? Intel Core 2 Duo T6400 @ 2.0Ghz Intel GMA 4500MHD Onboard (I hate this onboard gfx).
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jul 2009   #8

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Zidane2424 View Post
Alright Antman...I need a good professional reconmendation...I am looking for a processor for a board a friend gave me...the socket on the board is LGA775...I am looking to not spend much but I want to have some power behind it...thoughts?
I think you have a ton of options still with the LGA775 boards. Heck, I just bought one a few weeks back to use as a primary Windows 7 machine and also run as a "hackintosh" machine. I really needed to stay non i7 to ensure "hackintosh" friendliness, so I opted for the 9000 series quads with as much L2 cache as was available (12mb).

I went with a Q9550 quad core CPU. Was about $210 from NewEgg. This might be more than you want to spend. It's a 2.83Ghz chip, but happily overclocking to 3.2Ghz on my Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3R board on stock cooling with low 30's idle temps and 55-60's under load.

For a lower cost chip....maybe the E6300 Wolfdale 2.8Ghz 65W chip. It's under $90 at NewEgg for a dual core with the stock cooler and heatsink.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jul 2009   #9

Windows 7 Home Premium x64 - Mac OS X 10.6.4 x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by pparks1 View Post
I think you have a ton of options still with the LGA775 boards. Heck, I just bought one a few weeks back to use as a primary Windows 7 machine and also run as a "hackintosh" machine.

I went with a Q9550 quad core CPU. Was about $210 from NewEgg. This might be more than you want to spend. It's a 2.83Ghz chip, but happily overclocking to 3.2Ghz on my Gigabyte GA-EP45-UD3R board on stock cooling with low 30's idle temps and 55-60's under load.

For a lower cost chip....maybe the E6300 Wolfdale 2.8Ghz 65W chip. It's under $90 at NewEgg for a dual core with the stock cooler and heatsink.
Yeah I just seen that one...its the FSB that gets me...was hoping for 1333 for a reasonable price...
My System SpecsSystem Spec
19 Jul 2009   #10

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by Zidane2424 View Post
Yeah I just seen that one...its the FSB that gets me...was hoping for 1333 for a reasonable price...
To get into a 1333FSB (which I assume the board supports), you are going to move up into a E8200 range...which is a quad-core at $159 approximately. It's a 95w CPU...so it will consume a bit more power, but nothing to get too alarmed over.

I'm not entirely sure if you are going to see an $80 price difference between 1066 and 1333 on the FSB. And you might end up overclocking that 1066 anyway and bringing it up some. On a less than $90 CPU, it's a little easier to risk it and see what happens.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Intel/AMD and nVidia/ATI




Thread Tools




Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find Us

Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

Designer Media Ltd

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:33 AM.
Twitter Facebook Google+



Windows 7 Forums

Seven Forums Android App Seven Forums IOS App
  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33