It's arrived

[InorganicMatter]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116213
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116212
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116214

Price gouging like crazy, but what did you expect from a new product at newegg?

 

[Tygerwoody]

too bad they don't perform.... i wish intel would get on the ball. I always thought it was stupid to be a fan of a certain company, but i have to admit that for some reason i can't see myself buying an AMD, even though i know they are better. Whats wrong with me?

 

[Dan_D]

too bad they don't perform.... i wish intel would get on the ball. I always thought it was stupid to be a fan of a certain company, but i have to admit that for some reason i can't see myself buying an AMD, even though i know they are better. Whats wrong with me?

I used to be like that. You should really try switching. I did because SLi wasn't available on the Intel platofrm for quite awhile unless you went with the Xeon. I checked out several benchmarks, and when the Athlon 64 3000+ is capable of hanging with and dominating Intel's best processors at a fifth of the cost, its a compelling argument to switch.

I miss my multi-tasking. My Pentium 4 550 rig @ 3.9GHz was far superior in that respect. In games, there is no contest The AMD is FAR better. With dual core A64's I can get my multi-tasking back and have the best of all worlds. Now the Intel processors can barely win against AMD even at the things the P4 is usually stronger at.

Theres some data out there on Opteron scalability, the memory subsystem of the Opteron and Athlon 64 memory controller, is FAR superior to the way Intel does things in a multi-processor enviroment. I only mentioned the A64 as its controller is very similar to the Opterons. Although since they don't support SMP, they obviously don't scale at all.

Anyway, I am far from hardcore AMD, and I was so nervous about switching. I worked with AMD 486's which were crap, I worked with early K5's and K6's. They were junk. I worked with the early Athlon, while it was fast, they had some motherboard reliability problems. While not the processors fault, the reliability of the overall platform wasn't too good. Plus I owned a Athlon 1.0GHz which I upgraded a couple times, however until I installed the third motherboard, it never did work worth a damn. It was horribly unstable. I had the Abit KT7-RAID and KT7A-RAID. Which were crap. When I finally installed an Asus A7V-133A the problems were gone as far as stability was concerned. I did get a DOA 1.2GHz T-Bird which sucked. I returned it and got a 1.3GHz T-Bird later. All was well. The weeks and weeks of fighting and driver installations and memory and other parts swaps made me furious. I hated it. I just wanted a system that worked and played games. I felt I should have spent the extra money on the Pentium 4. Which at the time was actually terrible. Which was why I switched at that time. Finally though I decided reliability was a primary concern.

After that I decided never to go AMD again. I finally had a compelling reason with the game performance, and SLi. Plus AMD's defect rate is no where near where it used to be. Their quality is much better than it once was.

Now I own three AMD mobo/CPU combos.

A8N-SLi Deluxe w/3800+@2.67GHz
A8N-E w/3200+
Tyan S2882-D w/Opteron 246's (x2) (Board to be replaced later with a K8WE)

The A8N-E and Tyan combos are due to arrive the 21st. But I have no problems with AMD anymore. I've been really impressed with the quality and stability of the A64/O64 processors. The only piece of advice I have to give if your thinking about switching is to really choose the motherboard carefully. The quality of the board is very important. More so than it is with Intel based systems. The memory choice is also another factor, as is teh choice of motherboard chipset. The AMD platform is not as forgiving as the Intel based machines are where the above is concerned.

 

[SirKenin]

Seeing as how this is just another Intel bashing fest...

*Sir Kenin moves along*

 

[Dan_D]

Seeing as how this is just another Intel bashing fest...

*Sir Kenin moves along*

I never bashed Intel. I still own an Intel rig and its great. Its difficult to ignore hard data concerning performance.

 

[Mabrito]

I never bashed Intel. I still own an Intel rig and its great. Its difficult to ignore hard data concerning performance.

From all the posts Sir-Fragalot posted I read, he hardly bashes threads. He actually right in alot of them, and always provide very good reponses.

Anyways, I hate people who choose AMD over Intel, because they perform better and what not. Each processor has the pros and cons about them. We all know AMD performs better in games, that is a fact almost. Intel has the hyper-threading going for them, and perform better in day to day applications. But now since the X2 series will be coming out soon, everyone is saying its the end of Intel, and AMD is taking over. That is far off from being true. The last I heard, Intel's Pentium M is doing really good. From all the benchmarks out there, they perform better than AMD and can compare with the FX series. Now this might change with the X2's series and the lack of them having Hyper-threading in them. Im sure Intel is working on ways to improve the Pentium M or should I say the Pentium 3 Archatecture, and working on dual core or hyper-threading solutions for it. Time will only tell. The day will come when Intel has some kickass processor coming out, and all the die-hard AMD fan boys, wont buy it because they are royal to Intel, and fall way behind the game. And now since Intel is partners will Mac, who knows what those results can yield.

Its a chain out there. Each company will come out with a processor that is better than the other company. Then the other company will do the same. Then one day a new company will come out with a processor that wipes the floor with the other two companies processors

 

[Dan_D]

From all the posts Sir-Fragalot posted I read, he hardly bashes threads. He actually right in alot of them, and always provide very good reponses.

Anyways, I hate people who choose AMD over Intel, because they perform better and what not. Each processor has the pros and cons about them. We all know AMD performs better in games, that is a fact almost. Intel has the hyper-threading going for them, and perform better in day to day applications. But now since the X2 series will be coming out soon, everyone is saying its the end of Intel, and AMD is taking over. That is far off from being true. The last I heard, Intel's Pentium M is doing really good. From all the benchmarks out there, they perform better than AMD and can compare with the FX series. Now this might change with the X2's series and the lack of them having Hyper-threading in them. Im sure Intel is working on ways to improve the Pentium M or should I say the Pentium 3 Archatecture, and working on dual core or hyper-threading solutions for it. Time will only tell. The day will come when Intel has some kickass processor coming out, and all the die-hard AMD fan boys, wont buy it because they are royal to Intel, and fall way behind the game. And now since Intel is partners will Mac, who knows what those results can yield.

Its a chain out there. Each company will come out with a processor that is better than the other company. Then the other company will do the same. Then one day a new company will come out with a processor that wipes the floor with the other two companies processors

Thanks

On another note, when I talk about performance I was talking about the application I use my main rig for. which is gaming. Plain and simple, the A64 was the right choice. For me anyway. I still have an Intel rig, which my girlfriend uses primarily. My new Opteron rig should serve all my needs.

Its best to evaluate the technology on all sides of a solution, examine your needs and possible needs, then choose the technology thats best for your needs, and budget. For me, lately that's been AMD. I've not owned an AMD processor before teh system in my sig, since 2000 or whenever the T-Birds were top dog of the AMD world and the Pentium 4 was just rearing its ugly head.

I moved to Intel when the Northwood came out and I've only owned Intel until 5 or 6 months ago. My point is that bias and loyalty to anyone in the computer hardware industry is ludicrous. It will not serve you to be that way at all. You really can't go wrong on either side if your stuck on one brand or the other, however, I think constantly evaluating the products and really seeing what each vendor has to offer is the best way to ensure you get the best parts and performance for your dollar.

The Pentium M is faster per clock than AMD's A64 and has no HT and can not by design. Dual core is the answer there, and dual core is on the way for it. That processor is code named Yonah. The Dothan and Banias can't match the A64's in stock form. Only OC'ing unleashes the potential of that processor. If you look at the benches, in some desktop apps it falls way short of the Pentium 4 and the Athlon 64 in many areas. Its not ready for desktop use yet.

When it comes to the Athlon 64 X2 vs. Pentium D, the Athlon X2 wins on almost every count. HT doesn't even save the Extreme Edition. The Pentium D lost some of its clock speed to coutneract the heat and power problems running at such high clocks, and therefore lost TWO of the things that can make it compete with AMD in alot of apps. The clock speed and HT are virtually gone. With Oc'ing the tables might turn a bit, but I doubt it. Having a second core in the X2 brings its multi-tasking capability up to the level of any Intel SMP system and then some. I won't get into AMD vs. Intel SMP implimentations, I'll just say that dual core systems will suffer from the system bottlenecks that older SMP designs and even the current Xeon have faced in the past and face now. Even so, there can be dramatic improvement with a second core on hand.

AMD didn't have to lower clock speeds to put two cores on die. Intel did. That hurts them. With multi-cores they didn't need HT which is fine, however they should have created dual 90nm Northwoods instead in my opinion. That would have made it much more competative. However I don't know if it would have been possible to add EM64T.

I don't think there was a clear winner between the Pentium 4 600 series and the Athlon 64 S939 CPU's. They've both got strengths and weaknesses.

However in dual core processing I think the AMD is nearly better all the time. If Intel ever screwed up its really with Pentium D. Just my opinion.

 

[pxc]

Price gouging like crazy, but what did you expect from a new product at newegg?

... plus a new 945 or 955 chipset board is also required. And if the upgrader is not coming from a 915/925 board, new memory and a new video card (and possibly a new PSU) are also needed.

I used to like Intel for incremental upgrades, but the last several months have had too many incompatible transitions (LGA775, PCI-E, DDR2, ATX 12v v2.2, dual core).

But I would buy a dual core 820 prebuilt if I could find a great Dell deal on one.

 

[Dan_D]

... plus a new 945 or 955 chipset board is also required. And if the upgrader is not coming from a 915/925 board, new memory and a new video card (and possibly a new PSU) are also needed.

I used to like Intel for incremental upgrades, but the last several months have had too many incompatible transitions (LGA775, PCI-E, DDR2, ATX 12v v2.2, dual core).

But I would buy a dual core 820 prebuilt if I could find a great Dell deal on one.

If you buy all the right parts at the same time, the new stuff works great. The problem is, so much has changed all at one time, that you really need to build a whole new system to use the Intel stuff.

 

[pigpen]

Holy Shit!! $1200 for the 3.2ghz

 

[(cf)Eclipse]

From all the posts Sir-Fragalot posted I read, he hardly bashes threads. He actually right in alot of them, and always provide very good reponses.

i agree

also.. it is interesting that the egg is charging so much. i'm hoping prices will go down soon, as everywhere i've seen the X2 for sale is ~$40-50 over amd's msrp

If you buy all the right parts at the same time, the new stuff works great. The problem is, so much has changed all at one time, that you really need to build a whole new system to use the Intel stuff.

yes, the transition is somewhat... abrubt. don't take me the wrong way, but even if i was considering an upgrade to p-D, there is no way i could justify new cpu (fortunately relatively cheap, despite the gouging), new ram (ddr2), and a new mobo that will support dual core

 

[SirKenin]

I never bashed Intel. I still own an Intel rig and its great. Its difficult to ignore hard data concerning performance.

When you go from "Oh, a processor is available" to "Yeah, but it can't do this, this or this and it costs a million dollars more than AMD so I bought an AMD", you are bashing. Simple. Factual or not. Call it "factual bashing" if that makes you feel any better.

 

[perplex]

end of 2004 was a good time to move to AMD. but now intel people thinking about moving to AMD are just stupid. intel have some nice things lined up for 2006 and 2007, such as 65nm then 45nm. AMD will lag behind with the 65nm and 45nm shifts like always. and these days AMD arnt even cheaper like they used to be.

 

[f U z ! o N]

Thanks

On another note, when I talk about performance I was talking about the application I use my main rig for. which is gaming. Plain and simple, the A64 was the right choice. For me anyway. I still have an Intel rig, which my girlfriend uses primarily. My new Opteron rig should serve all my needs.

Its best to evaluate the technology on all sides of a solution, examine your needs and possible needs, then choose the technology thats best for your needs, and budget. For me, lately that's been AMD. I've not owned an AMD processor before teh system in my sig, since 2000 or whenever the T-Birds were top dog of the AMD world and the Pentium 4 was just rearing its ugly head.

I moved to Intel when the Northwood came out and I've only owned Intel until 5 or 6 months ago. My point is that bias and loyalty to anyone in the computer hardware industry is ludicrous. It will not serve you to be that way at all. You really can't go wrong on either side if your stuck on one brand or the other, however, I think constantly evaluating the products and really seeing what each vendor has to offer is the best way to ensure you get the best parts and performance for your dollar.

The Pentium M is faster per clock than AMD's A64 and has no HT and can not by design. Dual core is the answer there, and dual core is on the way for it. That processor is code named Yonah. The Dothan and Banias can't match the A64's in stock form. Only OC'ing unleashes the potential of that processor. If you look at the benches, in some desktop apps it falls way short of the Pentium 4 and the Athlon 64 in many areas. Its not ready for desktop use yet.

When it comes to the Athlon 64 X2 vs. Pentium D, the Athlon X2 wins on almost every count. HT doesn't even save the Extreme Edition. The Pentium D lost some of its clock speed to coutneract the heat and power problems running at such high clocks, and therefore lost TWO of the things that can make it compete with AMD in alot of apps. The clock speed and HT are virtually gone. With Oc'ing the tables might turn a bit, but I doubt it. Having a second core in the X2 brings its multi-tasking capability up to the level of any Intel SMP system and then some. I won't get into AMD vs. Intel SMP implimentations, I'll just say that dual core systems will suffer from the system bottlenecks that older SMP designs and even the current Xeon have faced in the past and face now. Even so, there can be dramatic improvement with a second core on hand.

AMD didn't have to lower clock speeds to put two cores on die. Intel did. That hurts them. With multi-cores they didn't need HT which is fine, however they should have created dual 90nm Northwoods instead in my opinion. That would have made it much more competative. However I don't know if it would have been possible to add EM64T.

I don't think there was a clear winner between the Pentium 4 600 series and the Athlon 64 S939 CPU's. They've both got strengths and weaknesses.

However in dual core processing I think the AMD is nearly better all the time. If Intel ever screwed up its really with Pentium D. Just my opinion.

i would say your wrong on some things. intel made the cores at 2.8ghz for the entry level so it would be cheap. they want to ease it into the market. last year amd 64 was king. this year its dual core. im sorry, intel has a better value than amd does. the heat is not gonna be an issue either considering its only drawing 95 watts for 2 cores. intel has a nice processor thats dual core and ready for the future. i cant see many people paying 537 bucks for an x2 when they can get a nice decent Intel one for 311 bucks

 

[visaris]

i cant see many people paying 537 bucks for an x2 when they can get a nice decent Intel one for 311 bucks

You're right. People will look at their budget and see that they can't buy an X2. Then they will compare Intel dual-core to AMD single core, and when the 820 get's it's ass kicked, they buy the single-core AMD.

 

[SirKenin]

You're right. People will look at their budget and see that they can't buy an X2. Then they will compare Intel dual-core to AMD single core, and when the 820 get's it's ass kicked, they buy the single-core AMD.

And then your mom came into your room, hit you over the head with a frypan and *poof* the fairy tale was gone, from whence it had come.

 

[Kritter]

but i have to admit that for some reason i can't see myself buying an AMD, even though i know they are better. Whats wrong with me?

Even though i love intel, i'd like an amd chip. But i will probably never buy one.

 

[Epicenter]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116213
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116212
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116214

Price gouging like crazy, but what did you expect from a new product at newegg?

"Price Gouging"? What are you talking about? The Prices you saw earlier, $250 ish and $1000 for example .. were for WHOLESALE purchases of THOUSANDS of processors. Not for individual purchases. NewEgg is one of the best computer parts retailers around, so please get your facts straight or shut your mouth.

 

[nattoNrice]

When you go from "Oh, a processor is available" to "Yeah, but it can't do this, this or this and it costs a million dollars more than AMD so I bought an AMD", you are bashing. Simple. Factual or not. Call it "factual bashing" if that makes you feel any better.

This is probly not a good second post but hey ... meh. I think Sir's comments in this thread (and others) are the most non-biased, sensible comments i have ever heard from any forum and any person, with the possible exception of Cathar (from ma country! Yay!).

I don't see how you can whittle down an indepth, balanced view of the situation to "Yeah, but it can't do this, this or this and it costs a million dollars more than AMD so I bought an AMD". I think you're an idiot.

Have you actually added anything of meaning to this thread or are you just here to piss people off?

 

[Buckus]

If you're folding - which you all should - then a Pentium D @ 2.8 is preferable to an Athlon64 at the same price point. For the folding fanatic, it's like getting two computers for only a small premium over one computer. True, the motherboards are not cheap - yet, and you'll have to get DDR2 and possibly a PCI-X graphics board and new power supply, but if you're building a new computer for yourself - and you're a folder - then dual-core is THE way to go.

BTW, I haven't seen Athlon64 X2's for sale yet. I did see some Opteron dual-core on the 'egg, but they were way more expensive than the Pentium D @ 2.8. Although the performance is going to be better, the extra $$$ doesn't justify it yet.

 

[SirKenin]

Have you actually added anything of meaning to this thread or are you just here to piss people off?

What is there to add further than what I have? You have a couple of people that have completely detracted from the intention of the OP by taking pot shots at Intel. It's bashing, nothing more. It falls under the guise of pretending to be objective, and is smattered with the occasional fact that I agree with, but it is still bashing for all intents and purposes.

If this thread STAYED ON TOPIC and stuck to discussing the arrival of dual core processors, which has been officially derailed by people offering their opinions on why they switched to AMD, then there might be something left to add besides "who gives a shit?".

 

[Kritter]

BTW, I haven't seen Athlon64 X2's for sale yet. I did see some Opteron dual-core on the 'egg, but they were way more expensive than the Pentium D @ 2.8. Although the performance is going to be better, the extra $$$ doesn't justify it yet.

Pentium D is on Newegg, and aparantly Tiger Direct is selling X2s.

 

[xonik]

"Price Gouging"? What are you talking about? The Prices you saw earlier, $250 ish and $1000 for example .. were for WHOLESALE purchases of THOUSANDS of processors. Not for individual purchases. NewEgg is one of the best computer parts retailers around, so please get your facts straight or shut your mouth.

On the contrary, wholesale prices are quite indicative of the final price that customers pay. After the hype has died down, the better online retailers charge very close to the 1000-unit price. Before that, we have price gouging, and NewEgg is well known for this.

What is there to add further than what I have? [...]

It's ironic that both of your posts in this thread have been off topic themselves, so I don't think you're in a position to judge. And don't you dare respond to this post without contributing to the content in this thread.

 

[SirKenin]

It's ironic that both of your posts in this thread have been off topic themselves, so I don't think you're in a position to judge. And don't you dare respond to this post without contributing to the content in this thread.

Too late. That trick doesn't work (and that's all it was). The thread was already derailed by the "buy an AMD" fandweeb club before I said a word. After that, anything goes, same as now.

Now... if it HAD stayed on topic, then I would have had nothing to say and we'd still be chatting like adults about this newest release instead of masquerading as objective and yet again pimping the latest AMD hardware in an INTEL thread in an INTEL forum.

 

[(cf)Eclipse]

Too late. That trick doesn't work (and that's all it was). The thread was already derailed by the "buy an AMD" fandweeb club before I said a word. After that, anything goes, same as now.

hahahaha, that made me laugh

Before that, we have price gouging, and NewEgg is well known for this.

i will back this up, having seen it happen a few times before. wait a month or so, and prices will "drop" to where they should be

 

[SirKenin]

i will back this up, having seen it happen a few times before. wait a month or so, and prices will "drop" to where they should be

I never looked at that behaviour as being specific to New Egg.

 

[xonik]

Of course it's not specific to NewEgg , but we're talking about the availability of a product at NewEgg. If no other online stores carry the Pentium D currently, what's the point of mentioning the other stores?

 

[TheLonelySwedish]

My dothan frickin owns you all...

Dothan= +1 inches to Epenis

 

[xonik]

Oh snap, Dothan 1.7 @ 2.2 GHz, checking in

 

[Rembrandt]

I will pass this generation of chip for what’s going to come out next year. Give me a fatter useful and useable buss size among other things instead of flash.

 

[robberbaron]

I will pass this generation of chip for what’s going to come out next year. Give me a fatter useful and useable buss size among other things instead of flash.

I agree.

Neither the Dothan, Smithfield, or Toledo/Manchester are enough to take me away from my trustworthy Clawhammer.

I'll probably end up skipping the next generation though, since I heard that something called college is a little expensive can someone confirm?

 

[ashmedai]

When you go from "Oh, a processor is available" to "Yeah, but it can't do this, this or this and it costs a million dollars more than AMD so I bought an AMD", you are bashing. Simple. Factual or not. Call it "factual bashing" if that makes you feel any better.

I call shennanigans. Intel lost this round, what's wrong with reacting to news of a product's release with "why should I care?" instead of being all excited and in awe?

If you're not open to positive as well as negative input, then...aww damnit...gotta think of something that doesn't involve nazis. Erg. But you can't just go whining about it when someone says something negative just because you think differently.

 

[pxc]

I call shennanigans. Intel lost this round, what's wrong with reacting to news of a product's release with "why should I care?" instead of being all excited and in awe?

I wish I could "lose" like Intel. They'll still sell several times as many processors as AMD.

 

[ashmedai]

I wish I could "lose" like Intel. They'll still sell several times as many processors as AMD.

Processors, plus last I heard they still had the video market cornered, motherboards, and God only knows how many other pies they have fingers in. Bloody well run company, right there.

 

[perplex]

PLUS they have excellent profit margins while AMD's rubber dingy floats on red!

 

[jacuzz1]

I used to be like that. You should really try switching. I did because SLi wasn't available on the Intel platofrm for quite awhile unless you went with the Xeon. I checked out several benchmarks, and when the Athlon 64 3000+ is capable of hanging with and dominating Intel's best processors at a fifth of the cost, its a compelling argument to switch.

I miss my multi-tasking. My Pentium 4 550 rig @ 3.9GHz was far superior in that respect. In games, there is no contest The AMD is FAR better. With dual core A64's I can get my multi-tasking back and have the best of all worlds. Now the Intel processors can barely win against AMD even at the things the P4 is usually stronger at.

Theres some data out there on Opteron scalability, the memory subsystem of the Opteron and Athlon 64 memory controller, is FAR superior to the way Intel does things in a multi-processor enviroment. I only mentioned the A64 as its controller is very similar to the Opterons. Although since they don't support SMP, they obviously don't scale at all.

Anyway, I am far from hardcore AMD, and I was so nervous about switching. I worked with AMD 486's which were crap, I worked with early K5's and K6's. They were junk. I worked with the early Athlon, while it was fast, they had some motherboard reliability problems. While not the processors fault, the reliability of the overall platform wasn't too good. Plus I owned a Athlon 1.0GHz which I upgraded a couple times, however until I installed the third motherboard, it never did work worth a damn. It was horribly unstable. I had the Abit KT7-RAID and KT7A-RAID. Which were crap. When I finally installed an Asus A7V-133A the problems were gone as far as stability was concerned. I did get a DOA 1.2GHz T-Bird which sucked. I returned it and got a 1.3GHz T-Bird later. All was well. The weeks and weeks of fighting and driver installations and memory and other parts swaps made me furious. I hated it. I just wanted a system that worked and played games. I felt I should have spent the extra money on the Pentium 4. Which at the time was actually terrible. Which was why I switched at that time. Finally though I decided reliability was a primary concern.

After that I decided never to go AMD again. I finally had a compelling reason with the game performance, and SLi. Plus AMD's defect rate is no where near where it used to be. Their quality is much better than it once was.

Now I own three AMD mobo/CPU combos.

A8N-SLi Deluxe w/3800+@2.67GHz
A8N-E w/3200+
Tyan S2882-D w/Opteron 246's (x2) (Board to be replaced later with a K8WE)

The A8N-E and Tyan combos are due to arrive the 21st. But I have no problems with AMD anymore. I've been really impressed with the quality and stability of the A64/O64 processors. The only piece of advice I have to give if your thinking about switching is to really choose the motherboard carefully. The quality of the board is very important. More so than it is with Intel based systems. The memory choice is also another factor, as is teh choice of motherboard chipset. The AMD platform is not as forgiving as the Intel based machines are where the above is concerned.

I had a similar experience and switched for much the same reason. I now cannot find any reason much less compelling, to return to Intel.

 

[ashmedai]

The thread title keeps amusing me...you know like those old style horror titles? I keep seeing it like that, and then that deep throated movie guy going "Its...arrived." followed by the dun dun dun music and everything.

 

[robberbaron]

PLUS they have excellent profit margins while AMD's rubber dingy floats on red!

Goes to show they screw their investors and make large sacrifices to keep people like me happy

 

[Selecter]

Intel going to get second looks from Mac !!!!!!es like me. I'm getting ready to build a new gaming box for Battlefield 2, now that I no longer need to put any money into my G5 while Apple gets the stuff sorted out.

Whats the ACTUAL PERFORMANCE difference between Pentiuum D and a single core A64, anyway? I cant seem to find anything decent on the compare.

 

[f U z ! o N]

Intel going to get second looks from Mac !!!!!!es like me. I'm getting ready to build a new gaming box for Battlefield 2, now that I no longer need to put any money into my G5 while Apple gets the stuff sorted out.

Whats the ACTUAL PERFORMANCE difference between Pentiuum D and a single core A64, anyway? I cant seem to find anything decent on the compare.

id like to know that too. the PD seems so enticing.