Ok freinds,
As I am an imparcial one, I decided to use a middle end procesor to compite the best of AMD, I think an Itanium or Itanium 2 is out of discussion as they are real IA64 CPU and have more than 15 years on 64bits.
BUT, talkin on 64 bits EXTENSIONS as these two, wich one is better?

AMD have the MTU on CPU, Hyper Transport and other stuff.
8xx have Speed Step, SSE3, Enhanced Net brust and others..
I forgot 8xx is DUAL CORE, but not hyper threading (only extreme).

THE FINAL FIGHT IS NOW!!.

WICH ONE IS BETTER?, PROVE IT!.

Athlon64 cpu's do have SSE3 extensions.
I'm not shure about this, but isn't the Net Burst architecture rather slow because of it's longer pipes???

Next thing, compare DualCore vs. Dual Core, so you should compare the 8xx series to the AthlonX2 series.

Next thing, A64 cpu's consume less power and create less heat.

For me it's clear, AMD wins

I agree, less heat and power is consumed, that's a lot of help for me when I play stuff. Though I'm an advent gamer, I think the A64 suits me well. I'll get the DualCore once I h ave the money, I hope it's as fast as people have been saying, which I'm sure of XD

Also, has AMD tried dual videocards yet? I think only the other two series can do that right? I hope that AMD catches up on it soon if they haven't already. That's some amazing gaming graphics there >_<

intel just plain sucks in my mind. first of all intel over heats pretty fast. which sucks for a overclocker like me.
On some CPUs, such as the Intel processors since 1998, the multiplier is locked and cannot be changed. On others, such as the AMD Athlon 64 processors, the multiplier is "top locked", which means that you can change the multiplier to a lower number but cannot raise it higher than it was originally. On other CPUs, the multiplier is completely unlocked, meaning you can change it to any number that you wish. This type of CPU is an overclockers dream, since you can overclock the CPU simply by raising the multiplier, but is very uncommon nowadays. so i perfer AMD for a faster speed you are actuall getting for a processors u are buying. for example. AMD 3200+ is a 2.0Ghz.FSB (in MHz) x Multiplier=Speed in MHz while your computer is run on 10x 200mb= 2.0Ghz. but on the other hand, im sure your ram is not 200mb... they rarely make those anymore... a simple chart can be found here.
100/200 MHz => DDR200 or PC1600
133/266 MHz => DDR266 or PC2100
166/333 MHz => DDR333 or PC2700
185/370 MHz => DDR370 or PC3000
200/400 MHz => DDR400 or PC3200
217/433 MHz => DDR433 or PC3500
233/466 MHz => DDR466 or PC3700
250/500 MHz => DDR500 or PC4000
267/533 MHz => DDR533 or PC4200
283/566 MHz => DDR566 or PC4500

and use my RAM as a example. i have a DDR500 which means my RAM is 250mb. thus is better if u use 8x 250mb = 2.0Ghz, even you computer is not over clocked yet. your are fully using your RAM, thus the computer is FASTER. and im going to cut this short. if any one have questions PM me or something. AMD is just simply FASTER.

OMG Mesmer, Your like a Junior me. I'm so happy. I agree with mesmer. Intel is horrible and for me allways scrues up.

Mermer how did you make that anime thing? It looks awsome.

I dont think Mesmer is a junior you I think your are a junior mesmer, anyway back on topic AMD has always been the one to inspire overclockers because, it's not that intel chips are not overclockable mesmer it when you use it with another intel board the board will check with the cpu what it's true speed is at and say HEY! your faster/slower then your suppose to be CHANGE IT NOW! OR I WONT START UP is basically what will happen so in theory you could overclock it but from reports I've heard from freinds it max's out at 4% oh gee what a boost, also I heard that when the moved to the 800 on the FSB it's causing some slight bottlenecking which ultimatly slows down the system and tends to creat the FSB to overheat, although Intel boy I dont know where you got the idea that the Intel 800 series were dual core the only processors that are dual core that they make are the Xeon's although they now have 800 FSB so I guess you could be talking about those but they are made for servers not for normal cpu use, and just for the people that dont know AMD created dual core to creat less heat according to Moore's Law that having 2 processors doing the "number crunching" will conduct less heat then one stressing on all the "numbers" BUT do not thing OOO DUAL CORE double the proccessing speed/power no benchmarks and research shows that it's only about 1.5 not a complete double the main reason is for heat not power which is bad for intel because that WAS one of their strenths and what kept them in the games...now what do they got?

Photo shop, quite simple actually,

and yes intel have their mult locked already thus increasing your FSP, CAN over clock your computer but that just abusive to the system.

Intel Pentium D or 800 Series IS ACTUALLY DUAL CORE, this is because intel can produce a volume to provide desktop segment, as AMD cant they just produce for servers segment.
http://www.intel.com/products/processor/pentium_D/index.htm

But, as far a here AMD Wins 6 to 0..
People prefeer AMD and it means AMD is BETTER.. that simple.

For overclockers i have to say, YES u can overclock an intel, and for ur notice the extreme edicion has the multipier UNLOCKED.
Intel has a software called, Desktop Control Center wich is a kind of overclock for dummies, it works on 9xx series and on some 865.

The fight is over?.

the only thing that is currently holding the speed of the X2 to 1.5 times normal single core chips is the fact that act this point in time they are using the old FSB arcitecture from the single core chips to run the dual cores...when they get to the point where they are running dual FSBs to the D/X2 chips then we will see the massive speed boosts that we all want.

At least thats how I've heard it and it seems true...but I could be wrong...

As far as who makes the better chip...IMHO AMD has had the best chips since the T-Birds came out and they solved the inital over-heating issues they had. Since they learned from that mistake they have had the best, and most stable chips on the market as far as I'm concerened.

And as for being able to overclock an Intel chip...take off the heat sink, if one is already on yours and cut/bridge the correct tracks and your good to go...just don't ask me which ones look it up for yourself...I don't want to be held responsible for creating a dead chip do to user error....

I must say, Intel did make some advantages considering heat, because their Dual Cores run as host as their Single Cores. They are also working on fast chips that consume very few power.

About the 1.5x thingy, that's because most applications are made (yet) for Dual Core use, they can't take advantage of the second core (altough nVidia drivers optimize games a bit for dual core rendering).

Other thing to point out, Intel is using the old FSB, AMD not. Even better, AMD's HTT bus is made for multicore, it supported it from the beginning.

Other advantage for overclockers, AMD S939 Opterons overclock like hell (but AMD doesn't offer them anymore, a shame, not ).