Thread: AMD or INTEL for gaming?

AMD processors are "best" for those who have the technical knowledge and want to overclock their CPU. AMD processors apparently have less of a default CPU frequency (GHz) opposed to the respective Intel processors because the generic idea behind them is that if you get an AMD processor, you'll be overclocking it. This, in turn, spawns the idea that it's better for gaming since overclocking means more CPU power, which means more resources for games, etc.

But, in essence, I don't see that as much of a plus. I have the technical knowledge to overclock but I still don't like doing it. Thus, I have myself a Pentium 4 and would recommend Intel since, well, you get a good, powerful CPU and if you need to overclock it for some game...well, you can do that with an Intel processor too, but I doubt you'll need or want to all together?

Note: It's the graphics card and RAM that needs to be top-of-the-line for modern games. I may be lying here at lack of recent knowledge but I'm gathering you can play any of the latest games with a Pentium 4 3GHz processor. At least that's the impression I got from looking over various system requirements for the latest games around.

It's more a factor of your graphics card, not your CPU.

Exactly. CPU doesn't really matter. You could skimp on the CPU, and as long as you have a good GPU you'll be fine if you want to play games. For example, a C2D4300/8800GT rig performs only like a few frames worse than a C2DExtreme/8800GT on the newest games when played at high resolutions. The former set will cost you about 375$, the latter 1300$.

Though DO get a dual-core. That's pretty much implied nowadays, but even a 3.5 Ghz single core is worse than a 2.0 Ghz dual. Personally, I use a quad-core, but then, I do a LOT of processor intensive work.