Which is better, AMD 3000 or Intel3 06?

The so-called AMD 3000+ means that AMD believes that this processor is equivalent to the Inter processor but in the dual-core era, it is not such a meaning, but simply indicates the level of the product. For example, 5200+ is definitely not the equivalent of a processor. There is practically no processor with such a high frequency.

Although AMD is popular, based on my experience of using AMD 3200+ and 5200+ in the past two years, the technical gap between AMD and Inter does exist. AMD's success in the past few years has been more of a victory in market strategy.

AMD's products are processors, graphics chipsets, and their core competitiveness is still the best, not the performance.

In addition, in the P4 era, AMD 3000+ is indeed worse than not P4, but in the dual-core era, AMD is obviously lagging behind in technology.

The black box series is actually a reflection of how technically AMD has struggled to keep up with Inter.

AMD prides itself on having a native quad-core processor, and how good is its quad-core, but I see that Inter's high-end dual-core performance is stronger than AMD's triple-core. The non-native Inter quad-core is better than AMD's native quad-core.

That's the technology gap.

As for the graphics card, ATI has been completely thrown off by NVIDIA, but there are many problems with NVIDIA's market strategy, and this market is not everything that is decided by technology in the first place.

You get what you pay for.

I've decided to talk to AMD about Byebye.

The biggest significance of AMD's existence is to let Inter reduce prices as soon as possible.

Generally intel good. The quality depends on the old direct small super spike amd.

AMD3000+ is incomparable, I think the current AMD N000+ is no longer equivalent to Intel's N GHz CPU.

However, this should not underestimate AMD in the game application, the difference between AMD3000+ and Intel's 3GHz should not be very obvious.

3000+ is the specific processing speed, look at their main frequency gap is too big, the main frequency is equivalent to AMD's main frequency.

AMD Athlon: 3000+, right?

However, AMD uses a lot of processors with this value of 3000+, from K7's 462 to K8's AM2 interface, and there are also a lot of differences in performance, and Intel's P4 version is also quite a lot, and the two of them are generally at the same level.

But in general, when the two companies are focusing on the market with these two processors, AMD's processors are definitely ahead of their opponents in terms of performance and heat, and they are a product worth choosing.

1. Under silent frequency, the multi-core performance of 3600 is 25% stronger, and the single-core performance is basically the same.

2. If your main purpose is a game that focuses on single-core performance, the actual effect of the two should be similar; If you focus on multitasking, then 3600 has an advantage.