Necrotic Obsession

well?


I'm an intel slut, but only cos the model ratings on athlons haven't been accurate in like a year... they've totally inflated how fast they are compared to P4 cores on REALLY outdated tests


i'm a fan of transmeta and via processors too, but for other reasons... it's hella cool that their heat dissipation is only like 14 watts at 1.4 GHZ.. compared to 80-odd on top intel and AMD cores...

Motorola.

motorola haven't made mac chips in years... IBM does that now

if you are on a budget, AMD is the way to go. not nearly as power as an intel but consideribly cheaper. if have the extra cash to burn intel is my preference.. much more power.

Yeah i like intel because i know i can overclock it, its always been reliable, and to has better performance. I will probably always have an intel

well I am AMD all the way just because I really really don't feel like paying out of my ass for a p4...

AMD, as they are less expensive and they have a little less power to some extent, but still the better deal

Yeah, AMD are the better deal in my book, and overclocked, they are great. Intel better for the micro stream processing though.

wow, almost made it to a year without a post in this thread......

and now..

Intel < AMD

the athlon 64s beat the P4s in every way except for how much heat they generate

the 90nm 3000+ a64's on an nforce3 board can OC to 2.6GHZ now considering it's a 1.8 normally thats massive. Also at 2.6 it outperforms the fx-53 and intels 3.8ghz chip. Not bad considering it's ~ $180 Canadain :D

I personnally prefer intel since it is reliable and performant, also because my amd athlon XP 1600+ sucks more than my personnal computer which is a PIII SLOT 1, intel are easily overcloackable and reliable even the older stuff. Also easy to find older inter cpu on the market and motherboard.

The last comment i have is, intel Xeon and Italium are absolutly great, even if expensive, they are worth the price

maybe you need to get out more??

you compare very very old CPUs and base your opinion on that

then you start talking about Server CPUs, which by all means have very few things in common with the CPUs in normal PCs.

Fact of the matter is that right now, AMDs are every bit as reliable as any intel out there, faster and cheaper too.

Now maybe if you expect to keep your CPU for say, 5-6 years the Intel might be better down the road, but seriously who keeps PCs that old anymore? Try running Windows XP on a machine thats 6 years old now and see how well that performs.

Now back to reality please AMD> Intel on Price/performance/reliability

I have to follow my budget, so at this time it's AMD (used to be Intel though).

I still like the Zilog Z-80
Has anyone seen my 6502? I think it might still be in my Commodore 64...

Pariah wrote:


It is not everybody who got the budget to change cpu or pc often, most of the people i know still have and run their very old computers because they lack money to buy a new one. You dont need the latest computer to do all the aplication, except for certain games (this could still be discuss).

About running Win XP, i was running it on my intel celeron 266mhz 66FSB overcloacked to 400mhz 100FSB with 512 mb of pc133 and it was going well as long as i didnt run kazaa.

It is also possible to use a computer for a very good amount of time with operating systems that does not require the latest hardware sur as linux brand or BSD, even a older windows can be usefull sometime

Most people uses computers for text editing and going on the web, personnaly i don't think we need a 3ghz computer to accomplish such task.