"Oh I've always liked Intel, AMD was just a hobby..."

nobi125 said:
Why can't people just buy whatever gives them the most value for the money they have to spend and not worry about branding (Videocards and CPUs alike).
Click to expand...
It depends on what it is. You certianly wouldn't want to buy a cheap generic PSU or cheap generic RAM if you are building a box for serious work or gaming. You're going to buy the more expensive stuff. If you can find a good deal on that stuff then great. But it's still going to cost you more money over the cheap stuff because you want what's best for performance and stability reasons.

In the case of CPUs or video cards it's more about what you need and/or preference for a lot of people. Not everyone is looking for the best value. I certainly wasn't when I built my last Intel rig. I spent $190 on the mobo becuase I wanted the better features it offered over many cheaper and less featured mobos. Plus, I had great luck with a previous Soyo mobo, so I bought another one because of it. That ain't brand loyalty. It's trust with a company's products.

With the video card I bought ATI (9800 Pro > X800XL). Why? Because I never really liked NVIDIAs AA/AF or 2D quality. Call me picky, but I can see the difference. Unless ATI does something to screw things up I'll stick to buying their video cards.

With CPUs all I can say is that AMD just isn't for me. I'll spend more money on Intel for the rock solid stablity and easy setup that I've ALWAYS experienced with them. AMD is a different story. I just never really liked any of the AMD rigs I built. The stability just isn't there like it is with Intel. AMD is sort of an odd duck, IMO. At this point I doubt I'll ever build another one for myself. I just don't see any "value" in something that is high maintenance.
 
just one question... what good is speed when you are shackled by DRM? Now your rights can be taken away even faster?
 
JSquid said:
just one question... what good is speed when you are shackled by DRM? Now your rights can be taken away even faster?
Click to expand...

If DRM becomes a bandwagon, I can bet you that AMD, Apple, and everyone else who wants to make money will be jumping on it.
 
*sigh* 6 months IS a long time to wait...

to all the guys like me out there that are waiting for Conroe/Merom, a word of advice: save your money! 6 months is a long time to save money, and in the end, the little extra we can save will help for when we want to buy a higher binned Conroe or maybe even the EE.

Yea, i know its hard for us comp nerds to not blow all our cash on more HDs, or RAM, or a new vid card in the meantime, but if you have anything better than an Athlon XP and a radeon 9800, just wait... your wallet, and your e-penis 6 months from now will thank you

could be worse... you could be me, and be stuck with NOTHING but a Dell 700m till then...
 
1c3d0g said:
No, AMD didn't get beaten, they got thrashed! Big difference... ;)
Click to expand...
Even if AMD got annihilated, Conroe is still half a year away, and all the benchmarks you have seen were held by Intel. The FX line also 'thrashed' the P4 EE line when it came to gaming and such. Really the P4 EEs could only compete when they were on the 65nm process which allowed insane OCs.

This is really like saying it's amazing how a P4 EE managed to beat the Athlon XP.
 
JSquid said:
just one question... what good is speed when you are shackled by DRM? Now your rights can be taken away even faster?
Click to expand...
What rights are you referring to . Because of the hugh number of immoral people in the world that steal copy protected material. Safe guards had to be put in place. I don't like it but I can understand it. I for one would not stand up a scream about DRM being exactly what it is cause it kinda says something . Get my drift. Don't Blame Intel MS or Sony blame the people that abused the openess of the PC platform.
 
Shameless Liar said:
Even if AMD got annihilated, Conroe is still half a year away, and all the benchmarks you have seen were held by Intel. The FX line also 'thrashed' the P4 EE line when it came to gaming and such. Really the P4 EEs could only compete when they were on the 65nm process which allowed insane OCs.

This is really like saying it's amazing how a P4 EE managed to beat the Athlon XP.
Click to expand...


not really, b/c honestly, when most of us talk, we are talking about the future, not the present...

i dont think anyone seriously thinks that AMD will really have a match for this 2.66 Conroe that we're seeing in the benchmarks in 6 months.... anyone who believes that is just delusional

now abt that 3.+ ghz EE chip.....

AMD wouldnt match something like that until at least K10, or if K8L turns out well, a desktop version of that on 65nm..... and by then intel will be 45nm anyway...
 
Shameless Liar said:
Even if AMD got annihilated, Conroe is still half a year away, and all the benchmarks you have seen were held by Intel. The FX line also 'thrashed' the P4 EE line when it came to gaming and such. Really the P4 EEs could only compete when they were on the 65nm process which allowed insane OCs.

This is really like saying it's amazing how a P4 EE managed to beat the Athlon XP.
Click to expand...

4months or less your just hoping for 6 months to a year
 
$BangforThe$ said:
4months or less your just hoping for 6 months to a year
Click to expand...

Werent they talking about a September release? That's 6 months from now.

I wish they were shipping product tomorrow, TBH. I need something new to be excited about selling.
 
robberbaron said:
SuperPi scores are way more important than the superbowl.



Few reasons. Some feel the need to align themselves with a faction. Those are the ones that lack hope.
Others stay "loyal" to a brand due to either past positive experiences with said brand or past negative experiences with the competing brand(s).
Click to expand...

Well said but there is one more reason When I bought My daughter Comquak overpriced $3000 pc for my daughter to use at college . AMD fans were Flaming the shit out of Intel users. and I really got pissed . I was always a value type so is my wife. But my daughters education meant I lot to me . SO I bought her what I believed was the most reliable platform

But these very aggresssive AMD !!!!!!s made me hate AMD products. So I started studing everthing I could about Intel dug up everthing I could and I used that info to fight back. It was AMD fans that turned me against AMD . So now I am 100% pro intel this really does go against my nature but whats done is done and there's no turning back for me.
 
wee96 said:
Conroe looks promising, but the whole "taking sides" to computer parts is hilariously childish. I love AMD and Intel cpu's, both perform really well these days, I guess its the middle/high school kids who create the "cyber gangs" AMD vs.Intel.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
robberbaron said:
Werent they talking about a September release? That's 6 months from now.

I wish they were shipping product tomorrow, TBH. I need something new to be excited about selling.
Click to expand...
Everthing points to a July maybe june release for DEll and Apple
 
brucedeluxe169: you sound like a desperate fan boy who's run out of reasons to stay with AMD... :p
 
$BangforThe$ said:
What rights are you referring to . Because of the hugh number of immoral people in the world that steal copy protected material. Safe guards had to be put in place. I don't like it but I can understand it. I for one would not stand up a scream about DRM being exactly what it is cause it kinda says something . Get my drift. Don't Blame Intel MS or Sony blame the people that abused the openess of the PC platform.
Click to expand...

If you don't stand up to DRM is says something. Rights??? I guess you have never heard of FAIR USE. DRM won't stop anyone from stealing anything. What it will do is frustrate honest people, cost us money, time and aggravation. Today i can buy a CD, put the tracks on my Ipod, listen to them on my pc, and make mixed MP3 cd's to play in my car. All LEGAL. Big music would rather i pay for the music 3 times. pay for the ituens version, pay for a version that plays in my car and pay for a version that plays in my house. i say screw that and screw DRM. If you lay down and take it now it will only get much much worse.
 
You people talk big, but when someone is bashing your brand of cpu you can't take it. Like they aways say "They can dish it out, but they can't take it."
 
Ok granted Conroe will be something tough to compete with. I think we can agree on that, but I honestly think the gap can be closed significantly by AMD. I'm not going to argue over this, I'm just gonna wait it out and see what AMD coughs up.
 
beh.

and what you dont think the sames gonna happen for am2?

im not jumping ship. i have had this socket A atholon XP for 3 years now. with a 6600GT. i can run every game out there, with decent quality. no complantes. and look i really dont care for a 5% or 10% speed increase in the cpu, cuz i just dont need it, nor do most gamers.

my rig scored higher then xbit labs or firingsquads rigs with a 6600GT, they all got 1500-1600 on 3dmark 06, im getting 1650. not much more but my point is there all using FX-57's and im using an Ath. XP. so cpu really doesnt have that much an effect on gameplay. unless of couse you wanna run WMP, source, messanger, and w/e other background programs at the same time.

and even so the people at AMD wont let it take complete control for long, i think you guys underestimate the power of even the erliest AM2 cpus. remember intel always scores higher in pcmark, but they always get less fps in games, and longer times when incoding. so numbers, mean nothing.

wait for the real benchies. not just previews.
 
1c3d0g said:
brucedeluxe169: you sound like a desperate fan boy who's run out of reasons to stay with AMD... :p
Click to expand...

you sound like a jerk'

Originally Posted by wee96
Conroe looks promising, but the whole "taking sides" to computer parts is hilariously childish. I love AMD and Intel cpu's, both perform really well these days, I guess its the middle/high school kids who create the "cyber gangs" AMD vs.Intel.
Click to expand...

cyber gangs, love it.

yea compitition is good! drives prices down.

and yea, people who become loyal to companys are sorta weird. but then im a hypocrite, i find myself defending amd even when intels a clear winner. i donno i guess its just the fact that every pc builder i know uses amd and says intels just not worth it. and the only pc builder i do know who uses intel also happens to be the information in communication technology (ICT) teacher at my school. who i strongly believe is a total dork.

but hey 65nm. that probibly means serios cost reduction.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
beh.

and what you dont think the sames gonna happen for am2?

im not jumping ship. i have had this socket A atholon XP for 3 years now. with a 6600GT. i can run every game out there, with decent quality. no complantes. and look i really dont care for a 5% or 10% speed increase in the cpu, cuz i just dont need it, nor do most gamers.

my rig scored higher then xbit labs or firingsquads rigs with a 6600GT, they all got 1500-1600 on 3dmark 06, im getting 1650. not much more but my point is there all using FX-57's and im using an Ath. XP. so cpu really doesnt have that much an effect on gameplay. unless of couse you wanna run WMP, source, messanger, and w/e other background programs at the same time.

and even so the people at AMD wont let it take complete control for long, i think you guys underestimate the power of even the erliest AM2 cpus. remember intel always scores higher in pcmark, but they always get less fps in games, and longer times when incoding. so numbers, mean nothing.

wait for the real benchies. not just previews.
Click to expand...


So your using the excuse that you have a crappy video card as a reason CPU's don't matter in gameplay?

And everyone is not underestimating AM2, the benchmarks out right now shows little to no increase in performance.

Please stop making statements based on your made up facts.
 
my made up facts? (which btw wounldnt be my made up facts it would me my opinions)

but hey, my two cents. and as for you calling my system crappy...

i really dont have the money to go buy a new 7900GTX or X1900XTX, nor do i have the money to even get a 7800 or X1800. so dont look down on people who dont have $2000 to upgrade there computer everytime a new technology comes out.

anywho if you do actually need the cpu power, the conroe definatly promises a helluva big performance increase. but amd's just gonna release something new and hey look, your all gonna have to jump ship again. hey look intel released conroe^. jump ship again!

my only point is its useless to defend a company, or to say your using one as a hobby. and any gamer here thinking of buying a new cpu dont! get a new Video card instead.
 
MrWizard6600 said:
my made up facts? (which btw wounldnt be my made up facts it would me my opinions)

look dude i dont wanna get into an arguement with you but people overvalue cpu power. i mean for the casual user, 32bit technology is more then enough. for the gamer a 64bit bus is nice, but ocing the shit outta the fsb, which is all conroes gonna do, is excessive. dual core is neither here nor there. you cant run a game on two fsb's so only one core can be for the game. the other idles or runs backgroud applications. not to mention the powerusage on that thing.

but hey, my two cents. and as for you calling my system crappy...

i really dont have the money to go buy a new 7900GTX or X1900XTX, nor do i have the money to even get a 7800 or X1800. so dont look down on people who dont have $2000 to upgrade there computer everytime a new technology comes out.
Click to expand...



Wow...I'm amazed that someone could actually get so many terms wrong and say something that makes no sense like the gibberish you just posted...

Again...I am amazed.

BTW, I looked at your old posts and must ask, why is it necessary to always mention you have a 6600GT, do you really think anyone cares(no... they really don't)?
 
k well you "looking at my other posts" is kinda creepy.

and i have mentioned my 6600gt in what... maybe a grand total of 5 posts? remembering of couse 90% of my posts are in the VGA forum.

and yea. conroe is gonna have extreemly high core speeds, intel always does, (i dont mean like 5ghz but anything higher then 3ghz to me is pretty fast) relitivly fast mem speeds, and the mobos that support it are gonna have cranked speeds for the fsb. found that in an artical somewhere i try to find it.

and iv never really worked on a dual core system. and im pretty sure thats what you mean by wrongly labelled terms. so straighten my story out

intel released its sandwiched core technology one fsb and two processers. so this inceased performance, but not as high as it could go. so when amd released dual core with two fsb, they got way more of a performance boost from it. intel has now realeased the core duo, which is the first to have two fsbs from intel. all the D processers only have one.

for the casuel e-mailer and web surfer, what do you need 64 bit for?



what else......
 
rusek said:
So your using the excuse that you have a crappy video card as a reason CPU's don't matter in gameplay?

And everyone is not underestimating AM2, the benchmarks out right now shows little to no increase in performance.

Please stop making statements based on your made up facts.
Click to expand...

No, his statements are made with his heart and not his mind. He's doing just what he says the folks he disagrees with are doing, or so he says.

MrWizard6600 said:
and yea. conroe is gonna have extreemly high core speeds, intel always does, (i dont mean like 5ghz but anything higher then 3ghz to me is pretty fast) relitivly fast mem speeds, and the mobos that support it are gonna have cranked speeds for the fsb. found that in an artical somewhere i try to find it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sometimes I post something dumb just to see if folks are paying attention. From Pentium M to Conroe, these processors were never based on High MHz but low latency, less power Draw and dissipation and high IPC=P

i
MrWizard6600 said:
ntel released its sandwiched core technology one fsb and two processers. so this inceased performance, but not as high as it could go. so when amd released dual core with two fsb, they got way more of a performance boost from it. intel has now realeased the core duo, which is the first to have two fsbs from intel. all the D processers only have one.
Click to expand...

This is a 1066MGz FSB and each core, if maxed out, would have an effect 533MHz share of that FSB. Now please compare each system using sending and receiver data from RAM? Still wonder why AMD is going with DDR2 and not skipping it as many AMD Fans love to say?
 
rusek said:
And everyone is not underestimating AM2, the benchmarks out right now shows little to no increase in performance.
.
Click to expand...


There aren't any valid/relevant benchmarks of AM2 yet.

There's a 13 page article about comparing DDR2-400 with DDR1-400 on the K8, but still nothing about DDR2-667 or DDR2-800 with AM2.
 
robberbaron said:
There aren't any valid/relevant benchmarks of AM2 yet.

There's a 13 page article about comparing DDR2-400 with DDR1-400 on the K8, but still nothing about DDR2-667 or DDR2-800 with AM2.
Click to expand...

AM2 ES Benchmarks

Pretty sure they are using DDR2-667 with that ES CPU.



Tom's Hardware Page 1 of AM2 Testing Article said:
It is equally amazing to see everybody anticipating the change in generation, although the switch to DDR2 is not expected to make a great difference in performance by itself. As our benchmarks show, going from DDR400 to DDR2667 with current silicon would not make a noticeable difference at all, because the integrated memory controller suffers more from relaxed memory timings than it can gain from speeding up clock speed via DDR2.
Click to expand...
 
JSquid said:
If you don't stand up to DRM is says something. Rights??? I guess you have never heard of FAIR USE. DRM won't stop anyone from stealing anything. What it will do is frustrate honest people, cost us money, time and aggravation. Today i can buy a CD, put the tracks on my Ipod, listen to them on my pc, and make mixed MP3 cd's to play in my car. All LEGAL. Big music would rather i pay for the music 3 times. pay for the ituens version, pay for a version that plays in my car and pay for a version that plays in my house. i say screw that and screw DRM. If you lay down and take it now it will only get much much worse.
Click to expand...


I, for one, am glad that AMD isn't endorsing 'trusted computing' or DRM at all because....oh, wait...

http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/sh...JUMEKJVN?articleID=52601317&_requestid=258742

https://www.trustedcomputinggroup.org/about/members

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2002june/chi20020624015112.htm
 
rusek said:
AM2 ES Benchmarks

Pretty sure they are using DDR2-667 with that ES CPU.
Click to expand...

Read the benchmarks. It's clearly running at DDR2-400. It's already reported that AMD had to fix a memory controller bug on the AM2. Either AMD fucked up or TH did. I'm guessing a little of both.

But, the numbers speak for itself. Identical bandwidth speeds with DDR400. Even Intels get an extra gig/second from DDR400 to DDR-533, and their memory subsystem is less efficient than AMD's (real bandwidth versus theoretical bandwidth)

I dont think AMD has given an ES chip that does the correct DDR2 speeds to any review site yet.
 
O/T: Ew. Myg0t is so gay. You know you have to bake a cake to join them? It's gotta say "myg0t owns me" in the frosting. Someone showed me the pictures of these cakes earlier.

Long live AMD! I don't care how good they claim these new cpu's are, I've never had good luck with intel's chips. Every computer I had with an intel processor, It's caused me so many problems. Maybe coincidence, but first amd computer I had, no problems. 2nd and 3rd are still running strong.
 
robberbaron said:
Read the benchmarks. It's clearly running at DDR2-400. It's already reported that AMD had to fix a memory controller bug on the AM2. Either AMD fucked up or TH did. I'm guessing a little of both.

But, the numbers speak for itself. Identical bandwidth speeds with DDR400. Even Intels get an extra gig/second from DDR400 to DDR-533, and their memory subsystem is less efficient than AMD's (real bandwidth versus theoretical bandwidth)

I dont think AMD has given an ES chip that does the correct DDR2 speeds to any review site yet.
Click to expand...


AM22.jpg
 
I don't trust that THG AM2 crap. CPUz did not work, so how does anyone know what was up with the memory? I think it was 200mhz. The results show the worst possible. With a production board AUTO settings would be better than that, you would have to mess up everything to do as bad. But even with a 10% inprovement it would not be enough I hope for a suprise form AMD, but I'm not holding my breath. Conroe on pre-order anywhere?

CeBIT 2006 DDR-II 800 MHz may not be the final speed...
 
mICKEL said:
I don't trust that THG AM2 crap. CPUz did not work, so how does anyone know what was up with the memory? I think it was 200mhz. The results show the worst possible. With a production board AUTO settings would be better than that, you would have to mess up everything to do as bad. But even with a 10% inprovement it would not be enough I hope for a suprise form AMD, but I'm not holding my breath. Conroe on pre-order anywhere?

CeBIT 2006 DDR-II 800 MHz may not be the final speed...
Click to expand...

Dream on... http://www.computerbase.de/news/har...06/maerz/cebit06_athlon_64_x2_am2_benchmarks/
 
JSquid said:
and i'll be saying the same things about them, what is your point?
Click to expand...

I'm just saying the evil empire (Intel) isn't alone on DRM, but they are, convienently, the only one usually mentioned. I am NOT a fan of DRM, and Intel and AMD I'm sure are aware the community as a whole isn't. I think that's why we haven't seen alot of publicity from either on how Palladium will be addressed: it's not exactly a popular feature. I don't think hoping it will go away will work, but seeing how it's already endorsed, what then?
 
rusek said:
[IMGhttp://www.alexrusek.parhosting.com/AM22.jpg[/IMG]
Click to expand...

I give up. I can tell you don't know how to read a benchmark score.

Even Savantu is agreeing with me that those benchmarks at THG are bunk

That Cinebench is interesting, if the RAM is indeed running at 800MHz (the CPUz screenshot shows a big blank) I'd like to see more benchmarks sensative to memory speed though :D

edit: check this
http://www.computerbase.de/news/har...el/2006/maerz/cebit06_benchmarks_intel_merom/

I want.
 
robberbaron said:
I give up. I can tell you don't know how to read a benchmark score.

Even Savantu is agreeing with me that those benchmarks at THG are bunk

That Cinebench is interesting, if the RAM is indeed running at 800MHz (the CPUz screenshot shows a big blank) I'd like to see more benchmarks sensative to memory speed though :D

edit: check this
http://www.computerbase.de/news/har...el/2006/maerz/cebit06_benchmarks_intel_merom/

I want.
Click to expand...

You can tell that they crippled the benchmark. Or the bios was outdated. Or why are you comparing Yonah to something that isn't out yet. Etc.

For serious, that does look awesome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top