AMD vs. Intel

[fire_storm]

But the question is when will they do it? Few months or years or some time in the near futchure?

[oralpain]

I hope nobody has mentioned this already but i read the first 18 pages of this post and then decided that it was going to take me far too long to read all 52 pages. 

 

I think that Intel chips are better as they are much easier to build with, AMD's are cheaper but the Intels are better quality.  A friend of mine actually snapped his motherboard in half becuase the clips on the heatsink for the AMD are so tight that when he finally clipped them on, goodbye motherboard. 

 

Another of my friends also built an AMD machine without breaking his motherboard and for the same reason the processor keeps being unseated from the socket so sometimes the PC just won't boot or it might give out half way through a session.

Your friends must be idiots.

 

Quality wise Intel and AMD are very similar (and have been since the first athlons). If you know what you are doing it is very unlikely you will have problems with either.

Edited November 20, 2004 by oralpain

[spectrascope]

my 2 cents

intel=video

amd=games

[TTfanatiC]

my 2 cents

intel=video

amd=games

I Agree.....

[GregP24]

That does seem to be the general cosensus. I can honestly state that my A64 3200+ at stock speeds is much faster than my P4 [email protected] in 3dmark03 and 3dmark05.

[p8baller07]

intel=video

and making cakes, cookies and muffins

[Silverfox]

 

lol, mine was kinda "warm" on stock HSF...but, they have been good to me. i will try AMD next, give them a go, and see what we get. if they are crappy (which i sincerely doubt) then i will try another intel. the price of AMD's are so competitive...........

[r_target]

Yeah, it looks like A64 is in my future too. I do love this P4 however, and it takes a 2.5+Ghz Barton-M (like p8baller's or Exeter's) to beat the mighty 275 fsb P4 in benches or games, but it gets soundly thrashed by just about any 64 bit Athlon. I can't deny that, and I definitely can't see sinking any more money into the P4 when the A64 is so competitive on performance and price.

[fire_storm]

QUOTE (mantonr @ Nov 1 2004, 05:27 PM)

I hope nobody has mentioned this already but i read the first 18 pages of this post and then decided that it was going to take me far too long to read all 52 pages.

 

I think that Intel chips are better as they are much easier to build with, AMD's are cheaper but the Intels are better quality. A friend of mine actually snapped his motherboard in half becuase the clips on the heatsink for the AMD are so tight that when he finally clipped them on, goodbye motherboard.

 

Another of my friends also built an AMD machine without breaking his motherboard and for the same reason the processor keeps being unseated from the socket so sometimes the PC just won't boot or it might give out half way through a session.

 

Your friends must be idiots

 

Quality wise Intel and AMD are very similar (and have been since the first athlons). If you know what you are doing it is very unlikely you will have problems with either.

 

Here that all the time I hear things like (amd is better then intel) I ask why they say its just better. Also I hear (intel does not run at there reccomend speeds. Shows some people have 1 way thinking.

[sYstEmATiC]

well, i see where mantonr is coming from as far as breaking stuff, but since the heatspreaders came out, it has been much easier to install, amd's require more presicion but with the A64's they look just like the P4's now. But i have never seen someone break a socket off the mb before, i have a dead mb/cpu with a volcano9+ hsf on it and i can pick the whole thing up by the HSF.

 

I hope that Intel doesnt release any 64bit CPU's before most major OEM companies contract expires because then some of them will get a contract with amd for their CPU's.

 

but then again, i do hope they come out with something to compete more closely to amd because i dont want to see AMD's prices flipfloped with Intel. (can u imagine paying $100 for a 3.2Ghz P4 and $200-400 for AMD's equivilant?)

[LoArmistead]

QUOTE (mantonr @ Nov 1 2004, 05:27 PM)

I hope nobody has mentioned this already but i read the first 18 pages of this post and then decided that it was going to take me far too long to read all 52 pages.

 

I think that Intel chips are better as they are much easier to build with, AMD's are cheaper but the Intels are better quality. A friend of mine actually snapped his motherboard in half becuase the clips on the heatsink for the AMD are so tight that when he finally clipped them on, goodbye motherboard.

 

Another of my friends also built an AMD machine without breaking his motherboard and for the same reason the processor keeps being unseated from the socket so sometimes the PC just won't boot or it might give out half way through a session.

 

Your friends must be idiots

 

Quality wise Intel and AMD are very similar (and have been since the first athlons). If you know what you are doing it is very unlikely you will have problems with either.

 

Here that all the time I hear things like (amd is better then intel) I ask why they say its just better. Also I hear (intel does not run at there reccomend speeds. Shows some people have 1 way thinking.

frikkin w0rd G. I have an AMD64 3200+ and it Pwns any other processor I have ever played with. Of course its harder to tell a difference between a 64 3200+ and a 3.06 P4 HT until you start doing things like playing the latest memory-sucking whore games like MOH:PA and Far Cry. Then I am happy to have the 3200+. I do work at school on a 1.8 P4 (its also an IBM so that probably has a something to do with why it sucks) and it ran about the same as an old 1.3 AMD Duron I used to use. I then had a 2600+ which did everything I ever asked of it until.... well we wont get into that.... but the bottom line is, as I'm sure you have seen for the last 52 pages. AMD= Gaming, Intel= business

[fire_storm]

That is true.