Jump to content
4 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Well, an intel chipset based board would likely have more of a support success rate for an install of osx, so in regards to hackintosh, that would be the best route to take...unless you investigate thouroughly what amd chipsets/boards etc will give you necessary compatibility.

 

In regards to the differences in amd and intel though, it really comes down to the chips/generations you're talking about. For instance, PIIIs were far better for overclocking and stability when they were out, but then the athlon XPs came around and kicked some noggins.

 

The small amount of PIVs that really rocked were the northwood based cores, but then came the Prescotts, which have some seriously poor design flaws...excessive heat dissapation and power consumtion for one. You can hit em real hard though if you have one with Hyperthreading, I mean REALLY hard. I have a 530 (3ghz 32bit with HT), and I can redline the CPU to 100% usage on both threads running audio and video apps and it dosnt even budge or glitch hardly (occasionally). Comparitively, I also have an Athlon 64 3200+ Venice. Overall it performs faster, likely due to the 939 chips entire motherboard architecture. BUT, when I slam it tothe wall it tends to choke more easily (but not as much as my Prescott with HT turned off). It also consumes far less energy, and on average it runs a good 20 degrees Celsius cooler than the Prescott...even on a full load!

 

The biggest difference besides the heat and power differences though, is the way the newer amd boards are layed out to communicate with the CPU. In essence, they have no front side bus anymore...every chipset and bus on the motherboard has direct access to the CPU via the HyperTransport, which runs at up to 22+ GBPS...very fast, much more efficient.

 

Me, I like owning both, keep a hand in each pie kinda thing :)

Link to comment
https://www.insanelymac.com/forum/topic/12176-intel-and-amd/#findComment-76627
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...