AMD or Intel

It depends on which information source you trust more and what the rest of the rig holds in it's belly.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/18/would_you_buy_core_2_duo_today/
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/08/02/thg_tuning_test/page8.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/14/core2_duo_knocks_out_athlon_64/page15.html


Keep in mind...I have an old P4 2.4 gig Intel processor in my 4 year old store bought Sony VAIO. I only backup the main movie of my DVDs omitting the menus and special features, remove all audio except AC3 5.1 and the subtitles I don't need. This will usually get my compression ratio to around 85-99% for most DVD's. I can encode those DVD as fast as 5 minutes and a few seconds on the ones with little compression needed. For the heavy lifting of 85%, I can usually get it done in about 6 and a half minutes. For the price of a new processor with all the bells and whistles and what I can do with what I have...saving seconds to a minute or two in encode time doesn't seem worth it to me. Of coarse it would be nice to have a nice shiny new core2duo to brag about, but I just don't have a use for it personally.

 

yep, http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/344865

closed.