"I just like intel better"

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: amdfanboy
I like AMD because Intel kills babies.

You may be right.

 

[Wingznut]

Originally posted by: amdfanboy
I like AMD because Intel kills babies.

Jeez, what a bunch of crap! Why do you guys continue to spread FUD like this?!?! :|

Intel kills baby seals, not babies. :roll:

 

[Falloutboy]

I've been amd for the past 4 years because intel hasn't had a chip thats worth buying under $100 since the p3 cely's

with cpu's I much prefer to overclock a sub 100 dollar chip and have performance 80-90% as good as the top of the line chip and upgrade often (every 8-14mo) compared to buying a 800 dollar chip so I have the fastest chip but not afford to upgrade it till its well behind the curve

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Falloutboy525
I've been amd for the past 4 years because intel hasn't had a chip thats worth buying under $100 since the p3 cely's

with cpu's I much prefer to overclock a sub 100 dollar chip and have performance 80-90% as good as the top of the line chip and upgrade often (every 8-14mo) compared to buying a 800 dollar chip so I have the fastest chip but not afford to upgrade it till its well behind the curve

It is pretty cool every computer compent but video card can be purchased for less than $100. I wish video card makers would adapt to this trend as well. You can buy good mobos/hds/CPU's/ram all for les than $100 while a decent video card will cost as much as all combined.

I Remember spending over $1000 for a celeron 300 barebones just a few years ago. I thik the chip was $300, BX mobo $170, 6gig HD $200, 256MB PC100 $300.

 

[CTho9305]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Ionizer86

Originally posted by: CTho9305

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Overclock the 2500+ to 3200+ speeds, and the 2.8 to 3.5, and the 2.8 will be faster most probably (and NOT $300 more either).

Only an idiot would buy a CPU and thinking he's guaranteed to be able to overclock by 25% (2.8->3.5) or 28% (2500->3200). Most CPUs I've gotten my hands on aren't stable at over 10% above stock speeds. Maybe your random window / game crashes are really the result of hardware issues rather than software problems.

Well, my 1700+ XP mobile (1.47 stock) runs stable up to 2.1. That's a 43% overclock, and if I kept raising the Vcore I'm sure I could get it to 2.2

Since I see that you've decided to use PR ratings on the 2500+ to 3200+, I'm going to redo my calculations:
1700+ --> 2600+ = 53% increase

Oops

Ditto. My 1833mhz 2500+ runs at 2500mhz for a 36% increase. I'm pretty sure my PR is a 3700+ or so, so that would make it 48%. Either that CTHO guy has been very unlucky or he doesn't know what CPUs to buy in order to overclock. Probably a combination of the two. :beer:

First, as you said, luck plays a part... buying something assuming OCing is guaranteed is.... idiotic. Second, we probably have different definitions of stable. I usually don't reboot for weeks, so I notice even a little bit of instability.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I like AMD better. There's a reason for that.

1) If I'm an overclocker I can buy a Mobile Barton for $92 and make it run faster than a $180 AMD processor. Or a $170 Intel Pentium 4 2.4C processor to overclock to the speed of a $260 Intel processor.

2) If I'm on an extremely tight budget, for $50-60 I can get an Athlon XP2000, or a 1.8 Ghz Celeron... tough decision isn't it?

3) If I have a lot of money to spare, I can get an Intel P4EE 3.4 GHz for $1,029 (retail)... or I can get an Athlon64 FX-53 for $811 (retail).

4) If I want something more "middle of the road" I can either get an Athlon64 3000+ for $223 (retail)... or I can get an Pentium 4 3.0C GHz for $220 (reatail).

Now if I look at benchmarks and compare my choices...

In choice $1... if I'm buying mid range CPU's with the intent to overclock, I can either spend $90, or $170 to reach about the same performance level... the $180 one being slightly faster in some things... but I'd have to decide if 10% faster is worth almost 100% more money.
I'd rather spend almost 50% of the money for 90% of the performance.
Mobile XP2500.

In choice #2... I'd have to be stupid, retarded, or blind to chose the Celeron over the XP2000 since the XP2000 cost less and performs better in EVERY situation.
I'd rather spend less money for more performance.
XP2000

In choice #3... there would be a few areas where the $1000 processor would beat the $800 processor... but I'd have to ask myself if the difference in performance is worth $200. And what if I decide to overclock these after a year or two when they're no longer the fastest thing available... can I overclock the $800 processor more than the $1000 processor so that the $800 processor would now outperform the $1000 processor in ALL areas? Also... what if I want to upgrade my processor in 2 years, will I be able to buy a new CPU for my motherboard that I got with the $1000 processor? How bout the $800 processor?
I'd rather spend $200 less for similar performance with a viable upgrade path.
FX-53

In choice #4... the decision is a little less apparent. I'd have to look at what I intend to do with it. The most CPU intense thing I do on a daily (or even weekly basis) is gaming. I probably encode 1-2 movies per month. If I was doing more encoding, I'd go for the Intel CPU... but since I don't do much encoding, the AMD CPU would be faster in the things I do.
I'd rather spend a few dollars more for a product with similar overall performance, and better performance in the things I intend to do with it.
If I'm a media encoder, Pentium 4... if I'm a gamer, Athlon64 3000+




Oh yeah... and... I have a belly button! hehe... just thought I'd show you all my thought process that keeps putting AMD processors in my Antec Performance 2 Workstation Tower

Damn I missed this good work Jeff. I think you represent the thoughts of every AMD fan someplace in your post. The intel guys never seem to explain thier preference, I wish they would as you just did.

 

[lMlHuxley]

I just buy amd because it is cheaper and seems to perform just as good. I guess you could say that intel is the monster cable of the processor market....damn that line was hot I should market it to AMD...billboards etc etc "INTEL, THE MONSTER CABLE OF THE PROCESSOR MARKET"

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I like AMD better. There's a reason for that.

1) If I'm an overclocker I can buy a Mobile Barton for $92 and make it run faster than a $180 AMD processor. Or a $170 Intel Pentium 4 2.4C processor to overclock to the speed of a $260 Intel processor.

2) If I'm on an extremely tight budget, for $50-60 I can get an Athlon XP2000, or a 1.8 Ghz Celeron... tough decision isn't it?

3) If I have a lot of money to spare, I can get an Intel P4EE 3.4 GHz for $1,029 (retail)... or I can get an Athlon64 FX-53 for $811 (retail).

4) If I want something more "middle of the road" I can either get an Athlon64 3000+ for $223 (retail)... or I can get an Pentium 4 3.0C GHz for $220 (reatail).

Now if I look at benchmarks and compare my choices...

In choice $1... if I'm buying mid range CPU's with the intent to overclock, I can either spend $90, or $170 to reach about the same performance level... the $180 one being slightly faster in some things... but I'd have to decide if 10% faster is worth almost 100% more money.
I'd rather spend almost 50% of the money for 90% of the performance.
Mobile XP2500.

In choice #2... I'd have to be stupid, retarded, or blind to chose the Celeron over the XP2000 since the XP2000 cost less and performs better in EVERY situation.
I'd rather spend less money for more performance.
XP2000

In choice #3... there would be a few areas where the $1000 processor would beat the $800 processor... but I'd have to ask myself if the difference in performance is worth $200. And what if I decide to overclock these after a year or two when they're no longer the fastest thing available... can I overclock the $800 processor more than the $1000 processor so that the $800 processor would now outperform the $1000 processor in ALL areas? Also... what if I want to upgrade my processor in 2 years, will I be able to buy a new CPU for my motherboard that I got with the $1000 processor? How bout the $800 processor?
I'd rather spend $200 less for similar performance with a viable upgrade path.
FX-53

In choice #4... the decision is a little less apparent. I'd have to look at what I intend to do with it. The most CPU intense thing I do on a daily (or even weekly basis) is gaming. I probably encode 1-2 movies per month. If I was doing more encoding, I'd go for the Intel CPU... but since I don't do much encoding, the AMD CPU would be faster in the things I do.
I'd rather spend a few dollars more for a product with similar overall performance, and better performance in the things I intend to do with it.
If I'm a media encoder, Pentium 4... if I'm a gamer, Athlon64 3000+




Oh yeah... and... I have a belly button! hehe... just thought I'd show you all my thought process that keeps putting AMD processors in my Antec Performance 2 Workstation Tower

Damn I missed this good work Jeff. I think you represent the thoughts of every AMD fan someplace in your post. The intel guys never seem to explain thier preference, I wish they would as you just did.

Ditto again ! Thanks for the well explained thoughts....

 

[Runner20]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Well Shady, if you haven't seen it in over 16,000 posts then I'm convinced it does not exist. So much for being proven wrong, huh dudeman? I somehow doubt you're either a dude or a man. Surely not a man, you're too childish.

There are more AMD fanboys than Intel, thats just a fact. And, from what I've seen in these forums is a lot of Intel bashing coming from those AMD fanboys.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: amdfanboy
I like AMD because Intel kills babies.

Jeez, what a bunch of crap! Why do you guys continue to spread FUD like this?!?! :|

Intel kills baby seals, not babies. :roll:

Is Intel a sponsor of Pets or Food?

 

[SilentZero]

Gaaaaatorade!!!!....H2O!!!!!

 

[caz67]

Both offer great options, to different people.

Both excel in certain areas, buy what you need to do the job.


If we combine all the speed of the AMD, with the features of Intel.

Now that would be sweet.

 

[crazycarl]

Originally posted by: lMlHuxley
I just buy amd because it is cheaper and seems to perform just as good. I guess you could say that intel is the monster cable of the processor market....damn that line was hot I should market it to AMD...billboards etc etc "INTEL, THE MONSTER CABLE OF THE PROCESSOR MARKET"

OMG!!! tooooo funnny

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

I use both AMD and Intel, and I must say that each has it's strength. On my workhorse computer, I use multi-threaded apps and I do a bunch of media encoding so in this case a P4 is a better choice; also I hardly ever game, and the games I do play are usually RTS'. My brother on the other hand, uses his computer for mostly Office and gaming, so an Athlon XP works well for him. The best platform is really dependent on your budget and uses.

 

[MattO]

I don't have a problem with AMD processors, but I must admit that I have never purchased one; I have always been an Intel buyer. Now, my current system is still one of the old P4 1.6A @2.1 machines from 2 years ago. I am starting to look around for a new system, and this arguement comes up in my mind, making my decision harder.

While I would be ready to ditch Intel for AMD on a primarily gaming PC, I love the Intel chipsets and their stability. I have been wronged before in the past by VIA chipsets, and I will not be again. Not so sure about the Nforce3 chipsets this time around either....So what is there?

So it isn't the CPU that I have a problem with, it is the chipset....

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: MattO
I don't have a problem with AMD processors, but I must admit that I have never purchased one; I have always been an Intel buyer. Now, my current system is still one of the old P4 1.6A @2.1 machines from 2 years ago. I am starting to look around for a new system, and this arguement comes up in my mind, making my decision harder.

While I would be ready to ditch Intel for AMD on a primarily gaming PC, I love the Intel chipsets and their stability. I have been wronged before in the past by VIA chipsets, and I will not be again. Not so sure about the Nforce3 chipsets this time around either....So what is there?

So it isn't the CPU that I have a problem with, it is the chipset....

I'd say that any chipset worries you have are unnecessary given that the memory controller is now on the CPU with K8 and the fact that chipsets and drivers are much more mature and compatible with various hardware than years past. For instance, The AMD 8000series chipset is excellent for K8. The nF3 150 single chip solution on my AN50R is indestructable thus far, and the performance excellent despite it's technical failings on paper. That's running a 3000+@2.4ghz too while crunching SETI 24/7 in the backround. The nF3 250GB is even better from what I've read and has the functioning pci lock my board lacks, not to mention if you use a nV FX or nv40 based card there are optimizations in the forceware drivers that can provide performance gains that won't appear with any other chipset. The Via K8T800 and SiS 755 series chipsets are actually getting a lot of love from users too so I'd say the chances of encountering a stability problem with hardware that isn't defective are almost zero. Provided of course that you do the necessary reasearch on the hardware you intend to use for the build and avoid any known issues that may exist.

 

[IEC]

*Sigh* - This war will never end... AMD VS. INTEL...

Here's my take on the issue, being a poor high school student...

FANBOY of the processor that offers the best PRICE/PERFORMANCE ratio!

Enough said...

 

[earthling30]

Originally posted by: ariafrost*Sigh* - This war will never end... AMD VS. INTEL...

Good point!

Coke......................................Pepsi
Tastes Great....................Less Filling
Ford...................Chevy..........Dodge
ATI............................................NV
Jeff Gordon......................Dale E. Jr.
Goodyear............................Michelin
Stratos.................................Javelin
American Muscle Cars.............Ricers
Wheaty Side.................Frosted Side
Converse.................................Nike
ETC

Can't foreget the everlasting
AMD........................................Intel
AHHHHHHHHH all the different flame battles of life. That's what it is just LIFE. A little suggestion though, if someone has a different opinion, just let it be and don't act like someone killed your best friend or pi$$ed in your corn flakes. It's just their opion and not yours! As for me, I own both P42.0/AMD XP2200+ and I prfer my AMD over the P4 in every task because it simply performs better! BTW, my AMD is sitting on a VIA chipset and my P4 is on an Intel Chipset.

BTW, I have an inner belly button!

iz the r0xx0r pwrl33t ololololo n u r dum if u dont luv dem bcuz dey r so kewlz0rz!!!111!1111uno!!1!1oneonetwo'

What in the world is this nonsense, quoted from page one?