On 21.04.2012 02:06, Adam Vande More wrote: > I'm not sure where the power/performance/price ratio is at currently, but > it wasn't that long ago purchasing an intel was a much better deal long > term. It was something like it took a year and half of an AMD and intel > cpu idling to draw even in total price all the while having a much greater > performance potential with Intel. I say this as someone who hopes AMD will > succeed. There is much more to it than just raw upfront cost.
I know that I will probably get a lot more "bang" from an Intel CPU (in terms of raw power, especially per CPU-core). However, this computer will be used in a way where more CPU-cores will actually help more than fewer cores with more raw power per core. This is partly because full disc encryption is in place. I also know that the cost of power is something to consider in the longrun. This is however a personal computer, the one I use in my spare time. If I were to worry too much about power, I shouldn't get a graphics board like the one I am considering. :-) They outweigh the CPU threefold - even if not constantly. This is a machine that will not run 24/7. Besides, the cost upfront is my main concern at the moment, because my budget is very limited. ;-) Regards, Chris _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
