Originally posted by: mechBgon
Wow, you've graduated from Junior Member to Member already I do hope you'll venture into the Cases & Cooling, General Hardware, and Motherboards forums too, and use your knowledge to help other Forum users when they have questions or need advice. Loafing in CPU/Overclocking and trading insults all night is one thing... actually helping people is quite another.
Point taken, you're right.
Au contrare [sic] Reverend Athlon, I know much about the subject. In fact I speak with a certain amount of authority.
Originally posted by: Duvie
Don't even bother with this thread....
Originally posted by: Yeti101
I like the simile
but... How is a AMD like a ricer ?
Yeti
Originally posted by: Kell
You know, that doesn't make AMD boxen unstable. That just means the forum servers don't handle the load as well as we might like. Athlons were chosen because they roundly trounced Xeons for much less money, so it's not as if Xeons would have given the server more of this mythical "oomph."
This is stability. Having servers maintain this kind of stability under extreme pressure (the same pressure that causes lack of "oomph" you detect) proves their stability even further.
Now, in an attempt to discredit my evidence, you call into question the University of Kentucky itself and what it does? You're obviously grabbing at straws. Here and here are the relevant pages, if you're not too close-minded to check them out.
So let's see...I have three instances of solid proof that Athlons are stable when set up properly (as well as two rather anecdotal accounts, i admit freely). You have some vague anecdotes with no hard evidence supporting your point, where the cause of failure may or may not be AMD or their chipsets. Until you can actually come back with anything better, consider yourself trumped in this debate. I have nothing further to say to you.
Originally posted by: AntiAMD
It's those annoying AMD fanboys that jump into conversations we could do without, I hear ya.
SSXeon is actually pretty cool
Originally posted by: AntiAMD
My ancient T-bird 1.33GHz, running on an early revision Gigabyte GA-7DX motherboard (AMD761+VIA686B), has pretty much proven to be unbreakable, even with four bandwidth-hungry PCI cards, an original-revision SBLive! Value, and the very first BIOS such boards ever had (I've never had the need to upgrade).
Wellen of coursen not, that boxen isn't going to breaken, it's muchen too olden.
Originally posted by: SSXeon5
Originally posted by: Kell
You know, that doesn't make AMD boxen unstable. That just means the forum servers don't handle the load as well as we might like. Athlons were chosen because they roundly trounced Xeons for much less money, so it's not as if Xeons would have given the server more of this mythical "oomph."
This is stability. Having servers maintain this kind of stability under extreme pressure (the same pressure that causes lack of "oomph" you detect) proves their stability even further.
Now, in an attempt to discredit my evidence, you call into question the University of Kentucky itself and what it does? You're obviously grabbing at straws. Here and here are the relevant pages, if you're not too close-minded to check them out.
So let's see...I have three instances of solid proof that Athlons are stable when set up properly (as well as two rather anecdotal accounts, i admit freely). You have some vague anecdotes with no hard evidence supporting your point, where the cause of failure may or may not be AMD or their chipsets. Until you can actually come back with anything better, consider yourself trumped in this debate. I have nothing further to say to you.
Hmm not really
-Athlon MP 1.67GHz 2000+ $185.00
-Athlon MP 1.73GHz 2100+ $206.00
-Xeon (Prestonia) 1.8Ghz $223.00
-Xeon (Prestonia) 2.2Ghz $298.00
$300 for each processor for super stable/reliable/cool setup is worth it. I know alot of people who will only buy intels for there servers, its not like amd is known for stable and reliable as the Xeons have been. And why does the Xeons have 603 pins? Yes to be extra stable. And you cannot find a more feature filled motherboard then the E7500, 2xPCIX slots, duel lan, 8 DC DDR RIMMs for up to 16GB mem. Now that is a server set up And If you are a buisness and are going to buy a server will you go build it? Or go to a OEM like HP/Compaq/Dell, yup OEM. And what do they have? Ultra low voltage P3s and Xeons All you need for stable fast servers.
Originally posted by: Soulkeeper
even tho we all know this guy is wrong on a few points nobody will comment on anything he says
pourquoi?
cause he is mad
Ah, that's why.
he has too much time to make long posts that take you half an hour to read
And you seem to have a lot of time to read...
he's a lost cause
Go ahead, tell me Intel bites, see how much I argue with you. Everyone thinks I'm a
"fanboy", well, if I don't reply, and I'm a fanboy, what does that make you AMD guys?
Go ahead, bait me with some Intel stuff, I dare you. AMD fanboys can't stop themselves
it's a sickenss they have. Fanboyitis. Take an Intel and call me in the morning.
Originally posted by: CrazySaint
Hey AntiAMD, when are actually going to make an argument support your claim that AMD is unstable? I've been watching closely, and the closest thing to a supporting argument I've seen from you is repeatedly saying that "AMD/VIA is unstable"
About the same time you support your arguement with something that doesn't sound like "My brothers sister-in-law's boyfriends uncle's neice's step- father" kind of anecdote.
and while continually flaming those who have actually at least made arguments to support their claims that AMD is, in fact, stable, so even if their arguments are incorrect
I take it you know how to read, so in what way are they backing up their claims? Anecdote? I can
give you anecdote, if this is proof. Web Sites? I went to the web sites, explained what i saw, and the
"proof" didn't exist. There is no proof Anandtech forums run on Athlon's, only some page that shows
uptime of sparc and g4. Kentucky U? Again, go to their homepage, the whole site has no mention of AMD
on it. KLAT2? A bunch of hillbillies built themselves a multi-amd setup, based on price, no mention
of stability or uptime. If this is all proof that AMD kicks butt, you guys need work. I thought you all
could have come up with better examples than that, I'm disappointed.
(which I don't think they are), they are still ahead of you in this debate. Actually, this debate has been pretty one-sided...its been kind of like trying to reason with a flamethrower so far.
Yeah, AMD fanboys sure have their facts in order, I'm realing under the onslaught of FACT (not).
And Crazysaint, if you're going to pretend something, don't pretend you guys are ahead of me
in this debate, pretend you're as wealthy as Bill Gates and you want to pass out free P4's to all the AMD owners out there as a show of benevolence.
So I'm quite certain you are capable of making an intelligent supporting argument for your claim, and I'd love to hear it.
You first, I dare you.
Originally posted by: shathalRe: On stability ...
If a system dies - what's the cause? Is it OS-based (bad GFX-drivers that are at the kernel layer in MS OS's after all), chipset problems
or something else (corruption in memory)?
All OS's are like this, not just MS
99.999% an "unstable" system has hardly anything to do with the CPU.
SOME of the cases have got to do with hardware - be that general chipset, the one particular motherboard, BIOS, or some PCI-card.
MOST instability issues are down to the OS.
Actually it has a lot to do with how well the cpu can handle the illegal calls. AMD could do
some work to make their cpu's more tolerant of this. Point taken, software (not just the OS)
causes a lot of crashes, but it's how well the cpu and chipset handle the software, and I guess
this is where AMD/Via need a boost.
Re: Chipsets - I know for a fact that Intel do a fair chunk of R&D on trying to get them as solid as possible, and I think they're doing an OK job at it. Certainly, I myself haven't had a problems with what I would identify as their chipsets. And they also do spend quite a few $$'s in validation and testing. As far as I know, AMD doesn't do that (which is a shame, but then they've not got Intel's bank balance). I am not certain about whether VIA/SIS do that, though I would assume that they do - anyone care to enlighten me?
This is true, has anyone looked at AMD's books lately? They are bleeding red ink badly. In fact
if the "hammer" cpu's aren't as good as what Intel is offering, and they only barely beat the
current P4's, AMD is likely going to go into receivership. Red ink only lasts so long before
it gets turned into a red stamp (Chapter 11). I really hope AMD gets it together and releases a killer cpu.
Thought it'd be time for a neutral post, pointing out the "problems" with perceived instability. Most people have got neither the skill OR the resources required to identify what exactly is causing instability in a system. That's a simple fact. In most cases it *IS* software. NOT hardware.
Actually it would be the hardware not being able to handle the software, be it the software on disk, software on eeprom, or software in flash.
Originally posted by: 7757524
Don't feed the troll.
7757524, you seem angry at the world. You need to work on your people skills. You call yourself by a number, your self-esteem must be taking a beating. I want to help you 7757524. Break out of that shell that holds you back from being a kind and considerate person! Vanquish the demons within yourself! I know there is a wonderful personality hiding behind that number! So come on 7757524, TURN THAT FROWN UPSIDEDOWN! Let's work together on this 7757524, can't we all just get along?
7757524 is just a little shy, 7757524 will come around, I know it.
Originally posted by: SSXeon5
Originally posted by: Kell
You know, that doesn't make AMD boxen unstable. That just means the forum servers don't handle the load as well as we might like. Athlons were chosen because they roundly trounced Xeons for much less money, so it's not as if Xeons would have given the server more of this mythical "oomph."
This is stability. Having servers maintain this kind of stability under extreme pressure (the same pressure that causes lack of "oomph" you detect) proves their stability even further.
Now, in an attempt to discredit my evidence, you call into question the University of Kentucky itself and what it does? You're obviously grabbing at straws. Here and here are the relevant pages, if you're not too close-minded to check them out.
So let's see...I have three instances of solid proof that Athlons are stable when set up properly (as well as two rather anecdotal accounts, i admit freely). You have some vague anecdotes with no hard evidence supporting your point, where the cause of failure may or may not be AMD or their chipsets. Until you can actually come back with anything better, consider yourself trumped in this debate. I have nothing further to say to you.
Hmm not really
-Athlon MP 1.67GHz 2000+ $185.00
-Athlon MP 1.73GHz 2100+ $206.00
-Xeon (Prestonia) 1.8Ghz $223.00
-Xeon (Prestonia) 2.2Ghz $298.00
$300 for each processor for super stable/reliable/cool setup is worth it. I know alot of people who will only buy intels for there servers, its not like amd is known for stable and reliable as the Xeons have been. And why does the Xeons have 603 pins? Yes to be extra stable. And you cannot find a more feature filled motherboard then the E7500, 2xPCIX slots, duel lan, 8 DC DDR RIMMs for up to 16GB mem. Now that is a server set up And If you are a buisness and are going to buy a server will you go build it? Or go to a OEM like HP/Compaq/Dell, yup OEM. And what do they have? Ultra low voltage P3s and Xeons All you need for stable fast servers.
Originally posted by: AntiAMD
and while continually flaming those who have actually at least made arguments to support their claims that AMD is, in fact, stable, so even if their arguments are incorrect
I take it you know how to read, so in what way are they backing up their claims? Anecdote? I can
give you anecdote, if this is proof. Web Sites? I went to the web sites, explained what i saw, and the
"proof" didn't exist. There is no proof Anandtech forums run on Athlon's, only some page that shows
uptime of sparc and g4. Kentucky U? Again, go to their homepage, the whole site has no mention of AMD
on it. KLAT2? A bunch of hillbillies built themselves a multi-amd setup, based on price, no mention
of stability or uptime. If this is all proof that AMD kicks butt, you guys need work. I thought you all
could have come up with better examples than that, I'm disappointed.
AMD users have grown accustomed to blue screens with memory dumps, they confuse this for their screen saver.
Originally posted by: CubicZirconia
AMD users have grown accustomed to blue screens with memory dumps, they confuse this for their screen saver.
Stunning. Is he actually serious here?
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Try Here. As you can see, Anandtech does indeed run AMD based servers.
Thank you for providing us with this link, the pictures were very nice.
In fact, they moved to AMD away from Intel.
Let's not stretch it, from all the information available, Intel has never powered a single appliance on this site. Don't forget what brought about the very birth of this site Rainsford...
Anandtech relies 100% on their servers for their business
From what I read, AnandTech had about 8 months of stability problems with their new Athlon setup. I guess this is where I make my point, and you do for me as well, thank you.
that should tell you something about their confidence in AMD servers.
As well they should. But the point you're missing/concealing in your arguement is that very (with a capital V) few people in these forums run Tyan Thunderbird K7's with an AMD 760 chipset. And even fewer run this setup with any kind of graphics card in them. Now, what are you trying to prove to us here? That AMD MP cpus run in conjunction with Tyan Thunder MB's with no graphics cards (or PCI cards)
in them is somewhat stable? I will agree then. But the systems are not being taxed like a home user taxes their systems. Yes the AMD 760 chipset can communicate reliably with the ram and the cpu, this is hardly taxing the chipset is it? Throw in a graphics card. Throw in a USB chipset. Throw in a sound card. Now we are starting to tax even the 760. Make it run more than a couple pieces of software. You see, the communication between the graphics, cpu, sound, and ram to the 760 makes it work. It also develops more chances of looping something along the way (and if you know computers like I think you do, you will have to agree with me). Now, I mentioned specifically Via chipsets. AMD in conjunction with Via is not stable enough to want to run AnandTech on (even without graphics and sound). Sorry Rainsford, but AMD/Via has stability problems, and the examples you and Kell have handed out are proof of what? That I can compare apples to apples and you can throw in an orange and think it's "trump"? You guys need to do better, you couldn't trump a 2 with an ace and you got a full house to boot (AMD Fanboys).
Originally posted by the good Reverend: Rainsford
I missed that little gem.
You AMD guys miss a lot, open your minds, it's a whole new world out there.
The ignorance...it burns.
That's your cpu, they run a little hot.
Originally posted by: Duvie
AntiAMD, stop this line by line BS....Getting old....
I find it funny you should take the time to write this Duvie. It's funny and perplexing at the same time, I mean if you don't like it, why are you glued the screen reading it? Do I make demands of you on the way you post? If I don't like one of your threads, I don't read it, why waste my time with it.
I'll save you a step, you are either going to reply back with "I don't read your posts, blah blah blah" or you are going to reply back with "I'm not going to waste my time anymore, blah blah blah" You know you want to read this thread, and if I stopped posting in it, it would get kinda boring quickly (no offense to anyone else posting in this thread).