I switched to Intel...

D

Dew

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
3,854
From a decent history with AMD.
Last Intel system before this was a Celeron 600@900MHz.

Intel has really really outdone themselves.
I bought a retail P4 2.66B for a barebones Mobo/Case/DDR setup that was given to me(HP 772N, inside its an MSI-6507E i845E). Canabalized some parts from my Dual AMD rig to make this my main gaming rig. CPU was $165 on newegg, so I knew that either way it was a win-win situation.

First thing, installing the HSF. WOW! Intel, I nearly creamed my pants when I installed the HSF. No more of that screwdriver BS, took me less than 30 seconds from opening the cpu package to completed HSF installation. The clip design is brilliant, VERY tight, and very simple.

Second, the cpu runs REALLY cool. In fact, it is cool to the touch after 24hours of run time. This is running on the Intel Retail HSF. My AMD rigs have always been finger-burning hot after just a few minutes.

Third, built in fan regulation. When you first power up, the system is kinda loud. But as soon as Windows starts, the fans slow way down and the system is very quiet. I find this an awesome feature.

Fourth, game performance. Quake3 went from peaking at around 100FPS at default settings on the included timedemo, to over 200FPS. 190FPS at 1280x1024x32xMax settings. I would drop to 70ish FPS on my AMD rig doing that(dunno why, should have been a video card limitation, not CPU). I now run DesertCombat at 1280x1024 instead of 1024x768.

Fifth, bye bye AMD. I think I'm going to end up parting out my AMD system and go all Intel. I am VERY impressed by Intel's attention to details and see no reason to go back to AMD at this point.

This is an older Intel chipset anyways, not even dual channel DDR, yet it still spanks my AMD setup, hard.
 
AMD finally move away from the old clip design with the AMD 64. I still think barton are the worth while chip for AMD though, no longer their 256k athlon.

2.66B is good. Wait to you use the 2.6C line with HT/ 800mhz bus / dual channel (chip set).
 
Originally posted by RQLe
AMD finally move away from the old clip design with the AMD 64. I still think barton are the worth while chip for AMD though, no longer their 256k athlon.

2.66B is good. Wait to you use the 2.6C line with HT/ 800mhz bus / dual channel (chip set).
Click to expand...

Wait till you see Prescott with 1MB L2 cache, improved Hyper-Threading, 800MHz FSB, and a new inscruction set :).

Also dont forget all the new kickass motherboard innovations coming up soon. Intel and Via are both cooking on all four burners to get out some serious badass chipsets that should make AMD's chipsets look like real crap. ATI is suppost to be even working with Intel on a new kind of supreme integrated graphics. PCI Express and DDR2 are going to set some seriously new standards.
 
I like you have been a long time user of AMD (last Intel was P3 450 katmai). I recently switched over on my main system from a beefy Athlon 2500 setup to this 2.6C IS-7E configuration and I must say I love it, it runs smoother than my AMD setup and a bit quicker in most games. Now I wait for the prescott :)
 
imagine if you start OC'ing, if its an MSI does it have OC'ing options?

Up that FSB a little, I would think you should hit 3Ghz+ if its a recent stepping chip.

I could hit it with one of my old 2.53Ghz (old chip)
 
do you guys really see a difference in everyday computing when going from one chip to the other like "smoother" performance with one?
Because I smell bullshit I use both AMD and Intels P4s and for everyday computing(not games...dont give a damn about that) what there is no difference.
I do however use my amd system for 3d studio max but I know for sure intel will be faster there.
 
Yep once you turn you back on the hype that is AMD intel is like a breath of fresh air;)
Better chipsets quiter systems and just alround better goodness:D Dual channel ram(not registered ram lol),Hyperthreading.Just cant wait for intel to realise there new prescott chips then the fun realy begins:p
 
i think it is asinine how some people compare. i have used amd and intel over my 13 years. they both do not hold full advantage over the other. but i would say that intel has the upper hand currently, but not as strong.

after school i am wishing that the commonality of dual athlon 64 rigs will be high (at least introduced). this is when i will go back to amd. the amd64 dual advantage is tremendous and its design is perfect for it. this is amd's upper hand. if they go this route soon it really could sway the market.....
 
Originally posted by shaihulud
i think it is asinine how some people compare. i have used amd and intel over my 13 years. they both do not hold full advantage over the other. but i would say that intel has the upper hand currently, but not as strong.

after school i am wishing that the commonality of dual athlon 64 rigs will be high (at least introduced). this is when i will go back to amd. the amd64 dual advantage is tremendous and its design is perfect for it. this is amd's upper hand. if they go this route soon it really could sway the market.....
Click to expand...

That sure is alot of speculating and opinion based facts.
 
not so, one page can prove it all: http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=55000278

the opteron/athlon 64 is not that great of a competitor. consider cost and end user knowledge factor. most will still stick to the athlonxp or p4 non ee architectures. considering that p4 has the advatage, not as stong, just as stated from the article and as i said not an extreme lead.

my asinine comment is obvious. anyone who goes into a imbecile competitive mode with no understanding of the architectures shows thier age. this is not about sports teams this is about real technical advantages and costs.

so how is that speculative? i think the beginning of this page even proves the point more. if you are talking about the opteron/athlon advantage in multiprocessor configuration...i have no idea where you have been.

of course though dual athlon64 are most unlikely do to the fact of the opteron market. but i do not need a dual opteron system. i think many multiprocessor users would like this....and that is not specualting. lower cost, better performance do to less server business model architecture inclusions.
 
Originally posted by Big Worm
After a64, seems intel is gonna try to light a real fire under AMD's ass:D
Click to expand...
I hope the Prescott doesn't totally crush the A64... I want to be able to afford upgrading to the latest intel chipset/proc every 6-9 months.;)
 
Originally posted by joemama
I hope the Prescott doesn't totally crush the A64... I want to be able to afford upgrading to the latest intel chipset/proc every 6-9 months.;)
Click to expand...


Agreed.
 
It's been my opinion for awhile is that both Intel and AMD make great chips. I don't think anybody could really deny that at this point in the game. However, Intel's overall PC solution (motherboard chipsets, retail CPU + HSF, etc) is better. They go to great lengths to ensure that their stuff works together (AMD doesn't even make chipsets anymore, really), is quiet, and stable (not that AMD's stuff isn't stable). It seems like AMD is always playing catch-up to Intel in areas of than performance: noise and durability come to mind when recalling stories of crushed Athlon cores. Intel does cost more, but it's worth it in my opinion.

I love my Xeons ...
 
I guess I have to throw my .02 in this also. Usually I pass threads like these by without a second look, but this one seems a bit more objective than most.

I'm work for a 2nd tier PC manufacturer, and work daily with the newest and fastest CPUs, both AMD and Intel. I use and like both. However AMD CPUs seriously lag behind Intel in certain applications which are dependant on raw MHz. A couple of such applications are used in our manufacturing process.

This is not to take away from AMD, these type of applications are not the norm. And who is not impressed by the Athlon64 and Opteron CPUs? AMD is also great for the industry, pushing higher speeds and lower prices on all CPUs overall.

I just happen to like the raw power of an Intel. Like my favorite at the moment, 3400MHz of pure Prescott goodness (confidential of course)
 
Originally posted by Infidel
(confidential of course)
Click to expand...


So Uhh... without mentioning said CPU (for now we will call it Scotts Press) from a certain leader in the PC industry, Will we be pleasantly suprised when the said CPU hits the market??

:eek: :cool:
 
The only real problems we've had so far have been getting them to work on Intel brand boards. We would never be ready for the launch if we had to depend solely on Intel mainboards. At first all indication was that pretty much any 875/865 board would be a BIOS flash away from full support of Prescott. However we had to wait for new samples of each of our 875/865 based Intel boards, only to find out the day we receive them that these too aren't the correct revision. They all see the Prescott no matter what speed, (2.8GHz, 3.2GHz, or 3.4GHz) as a 2.8GHz with 1MB cache. I had no problems with the 3.4GHz Northwood.

Luckily we have a couple other boards in production (different manufacturer) that truly are a BIOS flash away from Prescott. I'm no (Intel) Fanboy by any means, but I definitely love this CPU. It's true, that our thermals (true thermals) are running about 10 to 13 degrees (Celsius) hotter than a production 3.2GHz Northwood. Sorry I can't give the actual temps. But I can say that I had no problem keeping the temperature at the low end of the specs, by using a Prescott approved HSF, and a chassis that passed Intel thermal testing.

I don't have any benchmark data, because that's not what I do. However I'm really impressed with the Prescott. I was not expecting much of a difference, since I just finished qualification on a 3.4GHz Northwood. I was pleasantly surprised!

It's never going to live up to the hype that some have bestowed upon it, but I think it'll impress more than it disappoints.

Also by "confidential" I meant it’s an engineering sample. Intel marks their engineering samples "confidential" and the only way to identify them is with Intel’s decoder ring.
Sorry about that.
 
Originally posted by Infidel
The only real problems we've had so far have been getting them to work on Intel brand boards. We would never be ready for the launch if we had to depend solely on Intel mainboards. At first all indication was that pretty much any 875/865 board would be a BIOS flash away from full support of Prescott. However we had to wait for new samples of each of our 875/865 based Intel boards, only to find out the day we receive them that these too aren't the correct revision. They all see the Prescott no matter what speed, (2.8GHz, 3.2GHz, or 3.4GHz) as a 2.8GHz with 1MB cache. I had no problems with the 3.4GHz Northwood.

Luckily we have a couple other boards in production (different manufacturer) that truly are a BIOS flash away from Prescott. I'm no (Intel) Fanboy by any means, but I definitely love this CPU. It's true, that our thermals (true thermals) are running about 10 to 13 degrees (Celsius) hotter than a production 3.2GHz Northwood. Sorry I can't give the actual temps. But I can say that I had no problem keeping the temperature at the low end of the specs, by using a Prescott approved HSF, and a chassis that passed Intel thermal testing.

I don't have any benchmark data, because that's not what I do. However I'm really impressed with the Prescott. I was not expecting much of a difference, since I just finished qualification on a 3.4GHz Northwood. I was pleasantly surprised!

It's never going to live up to the hype that some have bestowed upon it, but I think it'll impress more than it disappoints.

Also by "confidential" I meant it’s an engineering sample. Intel marks their engineering samples "confidential" and the only way to identify them is with Intel’s decoder ring.
Sorry about that.
Click to expand...

Cool, thanks for the info;)

Alot of people have been hyping it up plenty. I would be more antisipating the ramping up of the chip and future improvements. As long as its a bit faster clock for clock then northwood, I will be happy. Also it will be nice to actually see a wide variety of benchmarks, The improvements in the prescott might show up more in specific benchmarks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top