I may step over to AMD.

[Rantis]

any reason why i should stay with intel? I have always been loyal to Intel, but the AMD 64 3200+ 939 looks like a good buy. this is not a troll post. no flames please. i am just wondering where best to spend my money on my new system. (primarily a gaming system) thanks.

 

[pxc]

I buy either AMD or Intel, it makes no difference to me. A better deal is just that. And if you're trying to reuse current parts (memory, video card, etc), that's even better.

 

[LoneWolf]

Your loyalty should be to whoever gives you the best combination of performance, stability, and compatibility at a reasonable price. Currently IMO, AMD does that in pretty much every scenario except for video encoding (where Intel leads due to Hyperthreading and in some cases SSE3 support). I believe this will continue at least until Intel's dual-core CPUs are available, but AMD has dual-core in the works too, so it's anybody's guess at that point.

 

[Jasonx82]

I moved over to AMD, from a P4 3.4 Northwood, (well im still in the process just need to choose a CPU and find a PCIE Videocard for my A8N Sli deluxe) Looking at the benchmarks wise, Games seem to run faster on AMD and thats basically what i do.. I still like my northwood.. it is very fast (I havent oced it yet =X).. I just like to try new things..

And I believe that AMD will have a new stepping with SSE3(minus two instructions which was for Hyperthreading?) support and enhanced memory controller.

Your loyalty should be to whoever gives you the best combination of performance, stability, and compatibility at a reasonable price. Currently IMO, AMD does that in pretty much every scenario except for video encoding (where Intel leads due to Hyperthreading and in some cases SSE3 support). I believe this will continue at least until Intel's dual-core CPUs are available, but AMD has dual-core in the works too, so it's anybody's guess at that point.

 

[LoneWolf]

That's what rumor says, supposedtly between February and April.

 

[pxc]

And I believe that AMD will have a new stepping with SSE3(minus two instructions which was for Hyperthreading?)

The 2 instructions are MONITOR and MWAIT. Those are for thread synchronization according to Intel documentation.

I think if AMD does add SSE3, they will also include those instructions. Why? Because they're also useful for multi-core and multi-processor systems. Both instructions are just hints that a thread is waiting for something to do, allowing the thread to go idle until a condition is met (interrupt, memory access or certain register change).

Sadly, AMD's tech documents are almost always outdated (see their A64 processor thermal data sheet... it's missing the whole mobile chapter). I wouldn't doubt that the A64 programming guide with SSE3 information lags the processor introduction by months, instead of being released in advance like Intel does.

 

[Hornswoggler]

I was a die-hard Intel fan since the days of Cyrix processors and AMD K5's. I always liked Intel because their chips ran cooler, performed better in games, and would occasionally have an overclocking gem (i.e. 300a, 600E, 1.6A, etc.).

Last summer I took the plunge and went AMD 64 with a socket 939 3500+. I will admit, the system was not as "plug and play" friendly as the hundreds of Intel systems I had assembled... I did experience some pains with matching the right motherboard with the right memory, and even some AGP driver problems that interfered with punkbuster (hey, I still play Quake3 daily!)... but once I got all that sorted out, I have been very happy with the working system.

I used to have the impression that AMD systems would blue-screen all the time, or lock-up, or reboot for just no reason, but I think those days are past. Once I got my system figured out, I have not had a single problem since.

Just do plenty of research on the components you plan on buying. Don't just take the reviews word for it, check forums for people with the exact same memory and motherboard combo.

My vote would be for an nforce4 PCI express mobo.

Until Intel gets their act together, I see no reason to stick with them. I have been really disappointed with anything Prescott... hopefully the next core will be more competitive. I am glad they are getting off the clock-speed tirade, and hope to see some of their mobile CPU technology into their next core.

I also find it bothersome that Intel's s775 chipsets have a 10% overclocking lock on them. Sure, some mobo's work around that, but consider the mindset of Intel when they put that lock on there. From an enthusiasts perspective, I see that as a turn-off. They just bit my hand, so now I feed a different animal.

AMD64 not only runs cooler, but consumes less power and performs better in games. The AMD platform has come a long ways and I now consider it mature.

In hindsight, AMD won the 64-bit war. HP pulls out of Itanium, Microsoft quits making Windows versions for Itanium... i'm sure there is still a niche market for Itanium, but the prospect of 64-bits on the desktop is all AMD (atleast the technology is theirs, while it IS being adopted by Intel). Similar thing with NX.

I'm pretty sure socket 939 will work OK when dual-core chips come out... what about socket 775?

 

[Dan_D]

I was a die-hard Intel fan since the days of Cyrix processors and AMD K5's. I always liked Intel because their chips ran cooler, performed better in games, and would occasionally have an overclocking gem (i.e. 300a, 600E, 1.6A, etc.).

Last summer I took the plunge and went AMD 64 with a socket 939 3500+. I will admit, the system was not as "plug and play" friendly as the hundreds of Intel systems I had assembled... I did experience some pains with matching the right motherboard with the right memory, and even some AGP driver problems that interfered with punkbuster (hey, I still play Quake3 daily!)... but once I got all that sorted out, I have been very happy with the working system.

I used to have the impression that AMD systems would blue-screen all the time, or lock-up, or reboot for just no reason, but I think those days are past. Once I got my system figured out, I have not had a single problem since.

Just do plenty of research on the components you plan on buying. Don't just take the reviews word for it, check forums for people with the exact same memory and motherboard combo.

My vote would be for an nforce4 PCI express mobo.

Until Intel gets their act together, I see no reason to stick with them. I have been really disappointed with anything Prescott... hopefully the next core will be more competitive. I am glad they are getting off the clock-speed tirade, and hope to see some of their mobile CPU technology into their next core.

I also find it bothersome that Intel's s775 chipsets have a 10% overclocking lock on them. Sure, some mobo's work around that, but consider the mindset of Intel when they put that lock on there. From an enthusiasts perspective, I see that as a turn-off. They just bit my hand, so now I feed a different animal.

AMD64 not only runs cooler, but consumes less power and performs better in games. The AMD platform has come a long ways and I now consider it mature.

In hindsight, AMD won the 64-bit war. HP pulls out of Itanium, Microsoft quits making Windows versions for Itanium... i'm sure there is still a niche market for Itanium, but the prospect of 64-bits on the desktop is all AMD (atleast the technology is theirs, while it IS being adopted by Intel). Similar thing with NX.

I'm pretty sure socket 939 will work OK when dual-core chips come out... what about socket 775?

There will be new motherboard chipsets when dual core processors come out. But they will be socket LGA775. As far as 64bit technology being AMD's that's a crock. 64Bit doesn't "belong" to anyone. Itanium was first between the two. There are also other "64Bit" chips like the G5. AMD hasn't "won" the 64bit war as no commercial OS is available for their processors. How do you win with something you can't use?

NX is a crock. AMD touted it as built in Virus protection. You know what kind of crap that produces? Morons who think they can not buy Anti-Virus software because their processor has it. (I run into these jackasses weekly)

Intel also does win on ease of assembly. A new Intel unit is much easier to get up and going than an AMD based machine generally is. I've had driver problems with them and I understand your pain on memory matching.

The AMD is faster for games, no doubt about it. If that's all you do then the A8N-SLi is where it's at right now. I'd recommend a 3200+ or 3500+ right now. Both are good bang for your buck processors.

But personally I'll wait until there is a good board for OC'ing P4's with SLi support. Gigabyte has released two boards that fit that description in theory but I am not a fan of Gigabyte so I will wait for another brand to come out.

 

[Absentee]

AMDs have give me the EASIEST set ups ive ever had. ive never never even had a BSOD on them other then when my refurbished rosewell memory didnt work. new memory solved that problem. my friends p4 BSODs almost twice a week and weve checked all the parts.

well if you wanted uber cheap with good performance go with a DFI lanparty UT nf3 250GB and either a s754 3000+ or the s754 2800+(what im getting)

if you want great performance and money isnt really a problem then id go with an A8N-SLI or a DFI Lanparty UT NF4 Ultra-SLI (i think thats what its called) when there released, and then go for a s939 3200-3500+

 

[GoldenTiger]

I have built many, many, many systems, both Intel and AMD... truth is, both are just as easy to build and set up for the most part nowadays. I would recommend making the switch... and of course, if Intel becomes better later on, make the switch back in a few years .

 

[Hornswoggler]

There will be new motherboard chipsets when dual core processors come out. But they will be socket LGA775.

That is very disappointing. While it might be too early to tell, I have heard rumors that current s939 boards will support AMD's dual-core procesors.

While we are on the topic, anybody else ever get a headache from following all of the Intel chipset versions? I mean, how many variations were there of the i845? I count atleast eight. Is the same thing going to happen to the 925? Seems like the 925X came out just a little bit ago, and NOW we have a 925XE? Better run out and buy another motherboard as your five month old "brand new" chipset is now obsolete. Why couldn't Intel just skipped the 925X and gone straight to 925XE? Even when the 925X was just released, reviews would mention the 1066 fsb chipset just around the corner. I don't know about you, but I don't like to buy into platforms that will become almost immediately obsolete. I mean, sure, everything in this industry becomes obsolete sooner or later, but the longer the lifespan, the better IMO.

As far as 64bit technology being AMD's that's a crock. 64Bit doesn't "belong" to anyone. Itanium was first between the two. There are also other "64Bit" chips like the G5. AMD hasn't "won" the 64bit war as no commercial OS is available for their processors. How do you win with something you can't use?

Ok, I will get specific with you.

In the x86-64 vs IA64 race, x86-64 has proven to be MUCH better accepted. Does that mean it is technically superior? Probably not. Was BetaMax better than VHS? Probably so. Did VHS "win" and become the standard? Hell yeah. Did x86-64 "win" over IA64? You betcha. For Intel to include x86-64 (or whatever they call it these days, EMT64... makes me think of Emergency Medical Technicians having to put the shock paddles of life on the P4... Clear!... zZzZ... beep, beep, beep) makes them the follower, not the leader.

For desktop 64-bit computing, I would say AMD's technology "won". This conversation was never about enterprise computing, so I didn't think I would have to elaborate to that level.

NX is a crock. AMD touted it as built in Virus protection. You know what kind of crap that produces? Morons who think they can not buy Anti-Virus software because their processor has it. (I run into these jackasses weekly)

You are going to encounter morons in life no matter what products they buy or use. If some idiot thinks he doesn't need antivirus anymore, thats his mistake to make.

If NX is such a crock, then why is Intel incorporating the same thing into their "J" stepping processors? Call it NX, call it XD, call it EDB... either way, Intel was not the leader behind this technology, only the followers.

Is NX/XD/EBD a perfect solution? I'm sure it's not... but hey, atleast its a step, right? Any protection against viruses and exploits is better than nothing.

But personally I'll wait until there is a good board for OC'ing P4's with SLi support. Gigabyte has released two boards that fit that description in theory but I am not a fan of Gigabyte so I will wait for another brand to come out.

I have a feeling that "good" P4 SLI is a long ways away. If I understand it correctly, the Gigabyte solution doesn't have full support from nvidia, so drivers might be a sore spot.

I am not against SLI on either platform. If anything, I welcome it. I just think its more reality for AMD systems today than it is on Intel. Will Intel catch-up with SLI? I'm sure they will someday. My theory on why it hasn't happened already is the difficulty that chipset vendors have in getting licensed to create chipsets for Intel processors.

Bottom line: I don't think Intel is nearly as competitive as they once were. I don't think they are as innovative, and I don't see them being as much of a leader as they once were... more of a follower in many examples.

- Processor ratings/names instead of clock frequency? Check
- x86-64 instruction set? Check
- NX/XD/EDB? Check

What has Intel been doing right these days that AMD is following? Exactly.

 

[Hornswoggler]

well if you wanted uber cheap with good performance go with a DFI lanparty UT nf3 250GB and either a s754 3000+ or the s754 2800+(what im getting)

There is absolutely NO reason for an enthusiast to go with a s754 solution these days. With s939 2800+ available, it is a no-brainer.

The fastest s754 CPU to ever be made is the 3700+. Not a slow processor by any means, but a year down the road, and you will be stuck with an badly outdated, and non-upgradable motherboard.

I would rather see steps taken forward than steps taken back. s939 is the better socket.

 

[Hornswoggler]

Intel also does win on ease of assembly. A new Intel unit is much easier to get up and going than an AMD based machine generally is. I've had driver problems with them and I understand your pain on memory matching.

I don't blame the processors themselves on this one.

I do think that Intel has a QC advantage by making their own chipsets. I will hand it to them on that point. They also seem more strict on validating certain memories for their chipsets and trying to enforce standards or waiting until those standards are finalized. I personally am against vendors using "unofficial" speeds unless the technology really is rock-solid.

I blame the problems I had on the Gigabyte motherboard. Model was GA-K8NSNXP-939. Many other people had the same problems I encountered.

Out-of-the-box simplicity and reliability is probably the best thing going for Intel right now. However, this may not apply to cheap non-Intel p4 chipsets and off-brand or cheap motherboards. I bet they have just as many problems.

 

[LoneWolf]

I used to have the impression that AMD systems would blue-screen all the time, or lock-up, or reboot for just no reason, but I think those days are past. Once I got my system figured out, I have not had a single problem since.

Those days were never here. I've been building AMD CPU-based systems since the 386 and 486 days, and if you cooled them properly the way you're supposed to do with any CPU, didn't use Krazy Eddie's bargain bin RAM or substandard components, you were fine. I've had AMD 486, K6, Athlon XP, and Athlon 64 CPU's in my own systems. The only time I've heard of any lockups were based on Microsoft bugs in the Windows OS, which was pretty rare, MS came up with patches and all was good.

Now Cyrix on the other hand...

 

[Hornswoggler]

Those days were never here. I've been building AMD CPU-based systems since the 386 and 486 days, and if you cooled them properly the way you're supposed to do with any CPU, didn't use Krazy Eddie's bargain bin RAM or substandard components, you were fine. I've had AMD 486, K6, Athlon XP, and Athlon 64 CPU's in my own systems. The only time I've heard of any lockups were based on Microsoft bugs in the Windows OS, which was pretty rare, MS came up with patches and all was good.

Now Cyrix on the other hand...

Maybe it was the chipsets, maybe it was users trying to overclock, maybe users were not installing the chipset drivers, and maybe the "budget" CPU was inevitably going to be paired with a "budget" motherboard and "budget" RAM?

Almost every time I went to a LAN party, sure enough, somebody would have constant reboots and/or lockups. 100% of the time I was correct in suspecting they must have had an AMD system (I was an Intel fan back then, hehe).

I do think the platform has matured A LOT (especially with the introduction of the nforce2 and beyond). AMD has moved upscale for sure. No longer is it just for "bargain" systems, and mobo/chipset manufacturers are taking the platform more seriously.

Things are better today. AMD (not necessarily the CPU itself, which was always good since K7, but the surrounding "platform") has gotten better and maybe Intel a little worse.

 

[Absentee]

There is absolutely NO reason for an enthusiast to go with a s754 solution these days. With s939 2800+ available, it is a no-brainer.

The fastest s754 CPU to ever be made is the 3700+. Not a slow processor by any means, but a year down the road, and you will be stuck with an badly outdated, and non-upgradable motherboard.

I would rather see steps taken forward than steps taken back. s939 is the better socket.

i know theres no reason. except if that enthusiast is poor like me.

it costs $225 to get a brand new 2800+ and DFI board to OC the hell out of it and it costs around $260 to get a s939 board with less OCing abilities with a 3000+. so the s754 would be the better choice on a budget, but you are right, s939 is much better. i just cant afford it which is why i won't be getting it this time around.

and 754 will not become obsolete. like you said. 3700+ was the highest s754 made. im getting a 2800+. plenty of headroom if i do say so myself.



AGP card will be around for the next generation or 2, or 3 even if its not dead then.

 

[DanK]

Maybe it was the chipsets, maybe it was users trying to overclock, maybe users were not installing the chipset drivers, and maybe the "budget" CPU was inevitably going to be paired with a "budget" motherboard and "budget" RAM?

...

Things are better today. AMD (not necessarily the CPU itself, which was always good since K7, but the surrounding "platform") has gotten better and maybe Intel a little worse.

From personal experience, it was definitely the surrounding platform. The first computer I made myself used a 188mhz Cyrix MII on an Asus Super Socket 7 motherboard; I never had stability problems with it (and it overclocked decently, too; I used to have a funny screenshot of the motherboard utility, saying something like "Maximum processor speed: 233mhz. Current processor speed: 250mhz." ) I later swapped out the Cyrix for a 500mhz K6-2, which was equally stable and a whole lot faster.

You can still find people who have stability problems, on both platforms. I'd be willing to bet that there's an ECS or PC Chips motherboard inside their case, and possibly some no-name RAM to go with it.

 

[(cf)Eclipse]

There is absolutely NO reason for an enthusiast to go with a s754 solution these days. With s939 2800+ available, it is a no-brainer.

just to be a nit-pick, the slowest s939 chip is actually the 3000+
and yeah, further advances for s754 will be for "mainstream" aka sempr0n.. it has outlived it's usefulness as an enthusiast chipset except for those who don't upgrade often and want something cheap now that still performs very well

 

[deathBOB]

I may step over to AMD.

And i care why?

 

[rayman2k2]

have fun!

 

[ShepsCrook]

You can still find people who have stability problems, on both platforms. I'd be willing to bet that there's an ECS or PC Chips motherboard inside their case, and possibly some no-name RAM to go with it.

Oh boy and here we go on the "Cheap" Motherboards. lol

I had a PC-Chips 585LMR Socket 7 Motherboard and had 3 different K6-2 processors in there. The 400 the 500 and lastly the 550. The motherboard was flawless. Rock solid. The longest run it was on for was 1year 3 months and 24 days straight. I shut it down to move.
It would still be running today if it wasn't decommissioned and replaced with a P4 3.4ghz 550 system as a server.

Either way. I have both an AMD64 3200 90nm (939) system and a P4 3.4hz 550 system as my 2 main computers. Both are VERY fast and great computers. The AMD is great for gaming, and the P4 is outstanding for my everyday tasks. I also use the P4 for everyday tasks. Chat, Email, Surfing, downloading, encoding, extracting, whatever. Whereas my AMD is just my gaming machine and primary graphics design machine.

As of right now, AMD holds the popularity title. But who knows. Intel might pull back in the lead with their new focus on improving the architecture. It will always be back and forth with these two, until someone else steps into the picture. (Maybe the new multi company venture of Cell Processors) Personally, I go for the "Bang for your buck" route and save a few $$$. Then I overclock the hell out of the machine.

 

[r00k]

And i care why?

you may only care enough to be a jerk and comment like that. however everyone else cares because of an obvious divide between intel and amd supporters, and thus they care because they are interested in why this particular intel supporter is making the switch to AMD ( which i definitely agree with ). nuff said on that.

coincidentially, Cornelius0_0 ( i think thats the user's name here on the forums) is making the switch from intel to amd (he's an enthusiast overclocker), and just posted about it. It seems to me that more people seem to be moving to AMD these days. Has anyone else noticed that?

 

[DanK]

Oh boy and here we go on the "Cheap" Motherboards. lol

I had a PC-Chips 585LMR Socket 7 Motherboard and had 3 different K6-2 processors in there. The 400 the 500 and lastly the 550. The motherboard was flawless. Rock solid. The longest run it was on for was 1year 3 months and 24 days straight. I shut it down to move.
It would still be running today if it wasn't decommissioned and replaced with a P4 3.4ghz 550 system as a server.

So you may have been lucky. Good for you. The majority of unstable boards I've come across have been PC Chips, though. At one time, PC Chips also manufactured boards that were purposely mislabeled; they put a non-existant brand name (one I remember was Elpina) on the board to disguise that it was actually a PC Chips motherboard. There's even a PC Chips Lottery webpage to help people get information on their motherboards, because they otherwise can't get support or updates. If others want to roll the dice, possibly sacrificing stability and definitely sacrificing support, to save a few dollars, they are welcome to do so. But I won't buy from such a duplicitous company.

 

[Hornswoggler]

Cheap motherboards stink, and they plague both platforms.

(ok, so some expensive Gigabyte boards stink too... but thats a different topic)

 

[CastleBravo]

Choose the processor that gives the best performance for the job. That's the bottom line.

The most stable system I've ever owned is my current AMD Athlon 64, and I stress it more than any system I've owned before. And setup was total cinch. It is great for what *I* do, but if I was doing multimedia/audio/video encoding type stuff, I'd buy Intel.

 

[Dan_D]

Cheap motherboards stink, and they plague both platforms.

(ok, so some expensive Gigabyte boards stink too... but thats a different topic)

Yeah they do. You get what you pay for and computer parts are no different.

 

[r00k]

i had a pc chips m805LR that worked great for the most part. i don't recall having any serious issues with it, although maybe a few lockups in its lifetime. however, recent power supply blew out on the guy i sold it to, and it took the mobo with it. but the proc that was in it (1ghz tbird, 800mhz tbird before that) is still alive and kickin.

on the other hand, i absolutely love my gigabyte ga-7nnxp. i think its their highest end axp mobo. dual power (6 phase voltage regulation), solid as a rock so far. i've had it almost exactly a year.

 

[Hornswoggler]

I read a few sad things on Anandtech today:

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2317&p=2

Bring up of Intel's dual core seems to be pretty strong and everything is on track for a release at the end of 2005. We did get confirmation that the dual core CPUs would not work on existing 925X and 915 based motherboards, not without changes to their design. While we would normally be disappointed, the fact of the matter is that very few people bought 925X and 915 based motherboards so it's not too big of a deal.

We also asked Intel if they had any tricks up their sleeve for regaining the definitive performance crown this year - unfortunately their answer was no. It appears that a lot of upper management at Intel is a bit astounded by the success of Centrino, noting that it is a full blown success achieved on features and a full platform and not purely performance. There's also this idea that performance right now is good enough for most desktop users, and fighting over a handful of percentage points that won't be appreciated is a silly battle to win. So for the near future at least, it seems like what we've published in previous Intel roadmaps is all we're going to see from them. What remains to be seen is if AMD will be able to continue to convert Intel's lack of focus on absolute performance leadership into marketshare for AMD.

It's almost like Intel is giving up the fight (or they are just banking on surprises)

 

[MaMMa]

AMD > Intel

 

[Shane]

If your primary is gameing performance go with AMD if you do rendering, encodeing, and use your computer for multiple functions at once go with intel. They are both good cpu's... I for one like intel platform better becuase I use my computer for more than gameing but thats up to the user. Simple fact is even in gameing the amd is only about 10% faster on average and about 35% slower on applications vs intel

 

[Rantis]

ty for all the great replies!
and the thread did not break down into a flame either

i went with:
3200+ s939 winchester
MSI K8N NEO2 PLATINUM
CORSAIR TWINX1024-3200XL

hope this thing overclocks well.

 

[Hornswoggler]

ty for all the great replies!
and the thread did not break down into a flame either

i went with:
3200+ s939 winchester
MSI K8N NEO2 PLATINUM
CORSAIR TWINX1024-3200XL

hope this thing overclocks well.

rutroe... that's the same memory that gave me hella problems.

Good luck, hope you did some research.

(my recommendation is Crucial Ballistix)

Be sure and run prime95 torture test and maybe memtest86+

 

[deathBOB]

you may only care enough to be a jerk and comment like that. however everyone else cares because of an obvious divide between intel and amd supporters, and thus they care because they are interested in why this particular intel supporter is making the switch to AMD ( which i definitely agree with ). nuff said on that.

coincidentially, Cornelius0_0 ( i think thats the user's name here on the forums) is making the switch from intel to amd (he's an enthusiast overclocker), and just posted about it. It seems to me that more people seem to be moving to AMD these days. Has anyone else noticed that?

I am not try to be a jerk... but i see a lot of these threads and thye seem stupid... Why do you all feel the need to sway him one way or the other? Why does he feel the need to be swayed by you? Its a phenomenon that I just dont get.

Ok buddy, go make an AMD system and have fun doing it, i feel no need to make you do otherwise

 

[Rantis]

Ok buddy, go make an AMD system and have fun doing it, i feel no need to make you do otherwise

thanks buddy. i will.

 

[r00k]

any reason why i should stay with intel? ... i am just wondering where best to spend my money on my new system. (primarily a gaming system) thanks.

Nobody PM'ed him or posted calling out to him out of the blue in an attempt to sway him to buy AMD or anything. Rather, he asked if there were any reason to stay with intel. that's just what happens when you ask opinions. why does he feel the need to do this? probably because he, like most (lol) everybody else, like to think and be sure that they are getting the absolute most out of each dollar they have to spend.

 

[Dillusion]

you may only care enough to be a jerk and comment like that. however everyone else cares because of an obvious divide between intel and amd supporters, and thus they care because they are interested in why this particular intel supporter is making the switch to AMD ( which i definitely agree with ). nuff said on that.

coincidentially, Cornelius0_0 ( i think thats the user's name here on the forums) is making the switch from intel to amd (he's an enthusiast overclocker), and just posted about it. It seems to me that more people seem to be moving to AMD these days. Has anyone else noticed that?

I had 4 Athlon 64 Rigs including an engineering sample, they never did it for me. Now i have an LGA775 rig, and i like it. Its personal preference.

 

[Hornswoggler]

Let's not get all sensitive and shit.

Buying the right CPU should not be taken personally. Why put such an emotional tie to it? Just get what's best for what you value. Easy as that.

 

[Donnie27]

I read a few sad things on Anandtech today:

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2317&p=2

It's almost like Intel is giving up the fight (or they are just banking on surprises)

http://www.overclockers.com/tips00698/

That means Intel sold over 1,000,000 x86-64 Xeons in six months, while AMD sold maybe 350,000 Opterons in eighteen months. Since AMD did sell some Opterons those first twelve months, the real head-on-head count the last six months is probably Intel's 1,000,000+ vs AMD's 200-250,000.

These numbers mean that not only that AMD is not conquering Intel in the overall x86 server market; it isn't even getting close in the x86-64 server market.

Of course, even losing 4:1 or 5:1 to Intel in x86-64 server sales is still quite an improvement for AMD, where the ratio a few years ago was more like 30:1.

My first comment in this section maybe he should have posted something like this in the AMD section? Just a thought. AMD will rejoice and jump for joy when they pass 2 million Hammers of all kinds built. By then, Intel will have sold about 2 million 64bit Xeons and no tellin' how many 64bit 600 series P4 processors. Won?

Me? I'll easily use both AMD and Intel because I like Games, Doing Multi-Media and Multi-Tasking, no one Architecture is better with all apps. I normally don't post here but have been reading the Forums since Kyle's work with the 1133MHz P3 Cumine back in Y2K.

Donnie

 

[ScHpAnKy]

you may only care enough to be a jerk and comment like that. however everyone else cares because of an obvious divide between intel and amd supporters, and thus they care because they are interested in why this particular intel supporter is making the switch to AMD ( which i definitely agree with ). nuff said on that.

coincidentially, Cornelius0_0 ( i think thats the user's name here on the forums) is making the switch from intel to amd (he's an enthusiast overclocker), and just posted about it. It seems to me that more people seem to be moving to AMD these days. Has anyone else noticed that?

That's given, this summer I was in the market for a new system, I've always run intel setups (except a 1700+ AXP). And you know what intel was offering? Prescott. That's all they had.
What did prescott give me? An overheating processor, lack of performance, and an inflated price. What was AMD offering? FX-53 just came out, nForce 3 250/Ultra just came out, and what did it give me? The fastest single air-cooled CPU known to man, a great overclocking platform, and on top of it, I saved $100 at the time. It was a no-brainer, and it still is. I use my pc primarily for student tasks (papers and games) and I still have a P4-M backup system. I'm glad I made this choice, and I can only forsee intel getting worse until they wisen up and develop more chips like the dothan core.

 

[Dillusion]

Lets rename this thread to "Yell and Scream to Defend your purchase and justify how much you spent on it by making fun of the opposing processor company"

k