AMD vs. Intel

[tazwegion]

Personally, I kinda liked the old Cyrixes.  They were a high quality chip, and were intercompatible with AMD's.

558580[/snapback]

 

LMAO yeah they had their day in the sun... June 1996 the Cyrix 6x86-200 was king of the hill whooping both Intel and AMD (formative years),

 

 

I've currently got it's bigger brother the PR233 powering my (FIC VA-502) firewall box, and doing a fine job I must say

 

 

Viva La Retro!

[aaronamd]

I have an original made in cyrix's own fabrication lab

[SunDiego]

AMD is pretty much a better all round processor than intel, at this time. A the same price point, intel is having trouble even things it's traditionally dominated AMD in, esp when it comes to the dual cores.

 

http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-10442_7-6389077-1.html?tag=lnav

 

Yonah, and the the other next generation intel chips do look like they will be more competative though.

 

Funny thing is, by the time most people finnaly realise than AMD has had a very firm performance lead for the the last 2.5-3 years, intel may be making a comeback. So, the ignorant fanyboys will aways be a step behind...

587640[/snapback]

 

 

This is because you can only make chips so Powerful before they get way to hot and it becomes difficult. This is why Intel has been slow to advane their chips compared to AMD. AMD has more room to expand now, their chips are not as powerful but more efficent, than Intel.

 

Intel is now pushing for DDR2, DDR3 etc because they know that other than the X2s. and better ones in the future, there is little they can do to make their chips better.

[ClayMeow]

This is because you can only make chips so Powerful before they get way to hot and it becomes difficult. This is why Intel has been slow to advane their chips compared to AMD. AMD has more room to expand now, their chips are not as powerful but more efficent, than Intel.

 

Intel is now pushing for DDR2, DDR3 etc because they know that other than the X2s. and better ones in the future, there is little they can do to make their chips better.

602443[/snapback]

what makes you think intel chips are more powerful than amd ones? the ghz rating? you do realize that they're measured differently, right? If AMD has more room to expand, it's only because their design is more efficient, not because they're less powerful.

[romeo55]

what makes you think intel chips are more powerful than amd ones?  the ghz rating?  you do realize that they're measured differently, right?  If AMD has more room to expand, it's only because their design is more efficient, not because they're less powerful.

602452[/snapback]

 

thank you, some more stuff to add in

 

Intel has been sticking to there P4/Netburst archtecture for so long that they had to reduce performance to get anywhere (IE: The prescott and legnthing the already long pipeline to a 31 stage) This is exactly why they're ditching netburst and going back the archtecture used in the Pentuim-M series (also based on the PIII cores)

[oblivescence]

i just read the past 689 posts in this thread. all i can say is. . . .

 

what the crap. . . . . im going to bed now.

 

and i cant belive i just added more spam to this thread.

[martymcfly]

I am proud to announce that I now have my first AMD system (as my main rig). It feels a bit "snappier" than my intel, but that may be either self-fulfilling prophesy or the fact that I am on a new install. Now I just need to await the arrival of my 7800gtx.

[ady1989]

i have an intel right now but from what ive seen amds are way better overall. next rig will be a high end amd

[UkJenT]

Compaq's have had AMD chips for years.  Hell, when my family and I was naive and stupid, we got a Compaq that had an AMD K6-2 like 7 years ago.  Dell is the one you need to be watching...they've been stubborn, or rather manipulated by Intel, into not carrying any AMD products.

558164[/snapback]

 

 

Hey, the great thing is that now Dell is carrying AMD Processors. Who knows, maybe Dell will make the switch to AMD seeing as AMD owned Intel in Desktop sales in Sept and Oct.

[ClayMeow]

Hey, the great thing is that now Dell is carrying AMD Processors. Who knows, maybe Dell will make the switch to AMD seeing as AMD owned Intel in Desktop sales in Sept and Oct.

607826[/snapback]

Yes, well rumor has it that they will start selling AMD desktop solutions, but at the time I posted what you quoted, that rumor hadn't been circulating yet. However, we've still yet to see it actually happen...right now it's merely speculation.

[tazwegion]

Compaq's have had AMD chips for years.  Hell, when my family and I was naive and stupid, we got a Compaq that had an AMD K6-2 like 7 years ago.  Dell is the one you need to be watching...they've been stubborn, or rather manipulated by Intel, into not carrying any AMD products.

 

And what an awesome system that would've been too 12 months prior to your purchase (remember the K62 (CXT core) was released in late '98)... IBM were doing something similar with their Aptiva range of desktops

 

It irks me a little when large corporations take last season's technology, package/bundle it... then sell it off as current leading edge gear, misrepresentation or what?

[ClayMeow]

And what an awesome system that would've been too 12 months prior to your purchase (remember the K62 (CXT core) was released in late '98)... IBM were doing something similar  with their Aptiva range of desktops

 

It irks me a little when large corporations take last season's technology, package/bundle it... then sell it off as current leading edge gear, misrepresentation or what?

615328[/snapback]

I think I bought it in the summer of 99, so it wasn't really that long after it came out. It was alright at the time, but then I got addicted to gaming and had to get a videocard (instead of the onboard crap).