why are you sticking to intel?

Status
Not open for further replies.
hmm well i got my 640 almost 7month ago, it has been great, great multi tasker, intel has been great, but heat and power consumption maybe a lil issue but either then that its pretty good.
 
FalconSS said:
ive heard that intel wants quad cores by 2007 and AMD is pulling it in at 2008. I think intel trying to get a jump on them like amd did intel with 64-bit and dual core
Click to expand...
Intel and AMD are both saying 2007, but the difference is the process. AMD will most likely use the 65nm process and Intel plans to use the 45nm process.
 
dark_reign said:
Not really. Both the KT133 and KT266A chipsets were buggy. The KT133 had issues with my Monster MX300 sound card. It would cause the machine to lockup. Upgrading to an SB Audigy fixed that issue, but then there were issues with it relating to the 686A southbridge. It caused random crashes and the occasional screech of death. Various fixes were available but were of little help.

The KT266A was a much better chipset. I had it paired with a Athlon XP1800+. But it also had its share of weirdness. Random crashing, BSOD, etc. For the most part it was fairly stable, but once I upgraded to a i875p mobo I realized what STABLE really was once again. It was like going back to the 440BX days. Man, how I had missed Intel. :)

I realize that both VIA and NVIDIA chipsets have improved, and building a system around one might be okay now. But, I'm waiting for Conroe.
Click to expand...

I had a Gateway with an Intel chipset that would make my Audigy do the infamous Screech of Death. I ended up having to get another sound card. People with VIA chipsets were having the same problem. YMMV.
 
LstOfTheBrunnenG said:
I had a Gateway with an Intel chipset that would make my Audigy do the infamous Screech of Death. I ended up having to get another sound card. People with VIA chipsets were having the same problem. YMMV.
Click to expand...

Yeah but that's an OEM system. Not the same as a DIY system that many folks had problems with. There are millions of stories about OEM VIA and Nvidia nightmares. Many folks I talked to said the same thing or similar. "For the most part it was fairly stable, but once I upgraded to a i875p mobo I realized what STABLE really was once again.".

One guy told me; "Man, I looked at the forums and saw 8 out of 10 folks saying AMD was better. So for 2 years I thought that eventhough my systems sucked, it was at least better than Intel as 80% of the forum posters said. So I put up with it until I got the nerves to give Intel a shot. I've since cussed out those AMD Spinsters for lying to me.".

Some Dell systems had the Screech or Squeal of Death as well. All 3 I saw had one thing in common, too many TONE controls maxed out, you only need one and most stuff sounds better with NONE.
 
Eh, when you get to the level that you're producing hundreds of each platforms a month and you have competent production and R&D techs, it doesn't matter what's under the hood, they're both stable these days.
 
I didn't read the thread :X and I know how bad that is, but I will say this:


When I had my barton, I really wished I had a 2.4C, but it was too expensive. Right now it appears AMD is a 'better' (whatever that means) but I have noticed intels prices have been coming right into competitive range, so the very second intel drops a cpu that beats the amd for a fairly decent price, i'm there.
 
i honestly don't understand why so many people put so much weight in synthetic benchmarks-- sure they simulate games, but that's not what's important. real world stuff is a lot more important that OMFGOGGLES I GOT 3000000000 3DMARKS! OMG!...


but then again, I guess that's just my opinion..and I haven't run a 3DMark test since 2k1
 
Ive heard enough bs about AMDs stability issues. My via kt266a board had problems with my Audigy... but I fixed it! Also experienced the same thing on a kt133 board, but I fixed it.

If AMD was really untstable then Opterowns wouldnt be... well... owning.

And it doesnt really matter what enthusiasts buy, it doesnt change the market much at all, the real money for AMD and intel is in OEMs... unfortunatly intel pretty much has a monopoly on that by locking them in.
 
I am sticking with this intel box for a few reasons

A) It was FREE
B) It came in a shuttle FOR FREE
C) My Antec P180 was heavy and impractical for lans
D) It was FREE
E) The Shutle was FREE


nuff said :D
 
Intel and AMD are both saying 2007, but the difference is the process. AMD will most likely use the 65nm process and Intel plans to use the 45nm process.
Click to expand...

I hope AMD releases a quadcore soon because Intel's quadcore development sure looks healthy to me ;) I hope with this product, Intel will be able to retake the lead in the server market.

Again, due to confidentiality issues, I could not post more details.
 
SPQQKY said:
Plus I swear I get sharper images on my screen than with AMD, but maybe that's just me.
Click to expand...

ahaha! Im not trying to be mean but thats honestly really funny :p

The cpu will have virtually zero effect on the clarity of the video, that would be the video card (drivers), and monitor. I think when people say things like this they are creating things in their mind because they are so biased towards one brand. Again, not insulting you.
 
streetkid said:
so the very second intel drops a cpu that beats the amd for a fairly decent price, i'm there.
Click to expand...

They have it, Pentium D 920 if you aren't afraid to do a basic OC on air.
 
wee96 said:
ahaha! Im not trying to be mean but thats honestly really funny :p

The cpu will have virtually zero effect on the clarity of the video, that would be the video card (drivers), and monitor. I think when people say things like this they are creating things in their mind because they are so biased towards one brand. Again, not insulting you.
Click to expand...
No, it could've been interference caused by AMD chipset. But since we're in the Intel forum, enough with the AMD talk. :)
 
Chris_Morley said:
Eh, when you get to the level that you're producing hundreds of each platforms a month and you have competent production and R&D techs, it doesn't matter what's under the hood, they're both stable these days.
Click to expand...

Yes, there's stable and then there's stable. Everyone's Idea of stable might not be the same. IMHO, it does matter what's under the hood. ECS and PC Chips are NOT the same as Asus, MSI or ABit. Then there's the whole CheapSkate way nVidia tries to avoid paying license fees that screws them just like it did VIA. There are just plainly fewer "Landmines" to worry about with Intel Chipsets IMHO. If they skipped fees to save money, it was clearly NOT passed on to the consumers.

I know at least two folks (posters on other forums) who work/ed for Dell. When talking about AMD, they've went from "You're kidding, their platforms suck" to "Dual DualCore Opteron RAWKS". Dell & Gateway has to build Millions a Quarter. R&D for none standard stuff wouldn't help. That's why Gateway found it easier to just buy out EMachine and let them worry about it. I'm surprise Dell hasn't done the same. Maybe Dell could buy you out? Not trying to kiss up to ya' or anything but hey!

On that note, I laughed until I cried when I saw that Dell case painted with Flames :D Pretty yes but their marketing blew it concidering all the talk of HottScotts and etc....

Donnie27
 
Donnie27 said:
Yes, there's stable and then there's stable. Everyone's Idea of stable might not be the same. IMHO, it does matter what's under the hood. ECS and PC Chips are NOT the same as Asus, MSI or ABit. Then there's the whole CheapSkate way nVidia tries to avoid paying license fees that screws them just like it did VIA. There are just plainly fewer "Landmines" to worry about with Intel Chipsets IMHO. If they skipped fees to save money, it was clearly NOT passed on to the consumers.
Click to expand...
My idea of stable is based on thousands of machines in the field with metric-driven support statistics. It has to be more stringent for me than your average consumer even enthusiast because it affects my bottom line. (Did...I don't play the game at the level I used to.)

And trust me, that bit about R&D is hogwash. Dell brags about how little they engineering their products. Dell's partners already have AMD designs ready.
 
Chris_Morley said:
My idea of stable is based on thousands of machines in the field with metric-driven support statistics. It has to be more stringent for me than your average consumer even enthusiast because it affects my bottom line. (Did...I don't play the game at the level I used to.)

And trust me, that bit about R&D is hogwash. Dell brags about how little they engineering their products. Dell's partners already have AMD designs ready.
Click to expand...

Last things first, AMD can't fill Dell's large orders=P They can't truely threaten Intel with a Walk out or Cut Back unless AMD could ship TWICE as many processors as they ship now. Intel gave Dell and exclusive price that no one but Dell and Intel Knows. Ask HP?Intel soaks up marketing Dollars Dell also saves. AMD can't even consistantly pay for its own Ads. Seen the New Intel-MAC ads? Still want to know why Steve went with Intel?

Yeah, but remember my line about White and Brown box Dell AMD systems? Not quite the same as having Dell stuck on it so sheep will buy it, or is it? I don't blame Dell for just acting like the Wal-Mart of the Industry just selling for whatever price they can get a profit on. Hogwash it might be but I'm just going with what the Dell guys said.

You have to have a good product and I don't doubt it or you for a Minute. If not, you'd be talking about what you use to own like many others. There are crap loads of Big and small companies that got left beside the Road. I just saw 20 Micron PC AMD based systems sent to the Recycle Dump! The stats are very clear BTW. Micron went AMD only, almost went out of business and the begged for Intel's help to keep out of Bankruptcy.

Personally, Intel was easier for me to setup and I've only been building computers since 1994. Unlike my current system, first AMD in 3 year for my person use. I didn't need 4 BIOS flashes, 4 different Windows installs and etc..
 
Ok, here's the thing: Stability is based on the chipset AND more importantly the board design. This is where the R&D come into play. You can give a company the greatest chipset in the world, and it's only going to be as good as the board that is built around it. Let me give you a trade sekret...... ASUS, Abit, Giga-byte, etc all cut corners, regardless of the chipset what makes the difference is in the production process and the interaction between the chipset maker and the board maker. Intel puts A LOT of man hours into this, I can't be sure about nVidia (the real person that we are talking about here) and AMD but I doubt they have the money or the pull in the industry to mach Intel on this end. But you know what... even Intel chipset based boards can be crap. Hell, I'm looking at a $400 dollar RETAIL server board that nobody here can figure out why it even works, it's just built that bad. You want a stable system.... by an Intel board. There you can be guarenteed stability.
 
i personally havnt owned an intel since my Pentium 3 1.0Ghz Tualatin. ive been purely an AMD guy and mostly because thats what im comfortable with. the price was right and it performs how i would expect.

with that said i also want to note that ive never had a problem with stabilty on and AMD or Intel system, unless some other hardware was failing (hard drive, ram, sound, etc..). it also seems to be that people are using their stability of their overclocked systems to put blanket statements on one brand over another. this really isnt the proper way to test a system. what you should be doing is taking the base system with stock settings and running it to compare. this is more likely the scenario the hardware was designed for and will actually give you a reasonable comparison of different items.
 
Because upgrading to PCI express is a pain in the ass, and consequently, a pain in the wallet.

I am still happy that my 2.53 and intel mobo (the pebt2) are still chugging along on the same windows xp install from feb 2003. sure i dont have the most 3dmarks or the most fps, but i dont have to worry about my particular components being suspect for failure.

having my computer available to game/surf/play music/record TV is what i want.
 
BMW said:
Because upgrading to PCI express is a pain in the ass, and consequently, a pain in the wallet.
Click to expand...

Upgrading to PCI-E on my 3.0E setup was the easiest thing ever with my 7800GT, unlike the begining days of AGP with all the GART drivers and such was the biggest PITA!!!!! Now a pain in the wallet can't say my 7800GT wasn't worth it for the performance in all the games i have now.

I am sticking with intel cause there isn't anything my computer can't really do, multitasking is great, takes 4 or more winrar sessions simutaneously to bog my system down while playing music without skipping, but net browsing gets a bit slower. I might not have the highest FPS in games, but don't have any problem really playing them at acceptable frame rates although another 1gb upgrade looks to be my next upgrade :)

Now stability has always been great using Intel chipsets with the P3/P4, although i think a tweaked OS/newest drivers always help this out in any setups situation.

I think my next cpu upgrade won't be till the quad-cores hit the floor, main reason is alot of programs by 2007 should have SMP support :cool:
 
RogueTrip said:
Upgrading to PCI-E on my 3.0E setup was the easiest thing ever with my 7800GT, unlike the begining days of AGP with all the GART drivers and such was the biggest PITA!!!!! Now a pain in the wallet can't say my 7800GT wasn't worth it for the performance in all the games i have now.

I am sticking with intel cause there isn't anything my computer can't really do, multitasking is great, takes 4 or more winrar sessions simutaneously to bog my system down while playing music without skipping, but net browsing gets a bit slower. I might not have the highest FPS in games, but don't have any problem really playing them at acceptable frame rates although another 1gb upgrade looks to be my next upgrade :)

Now stability has always been great using Intel chipsets with the P3/P4, although i think a tweaked OS/newest drivers always help this out in any setups situation.

I think my next cpu upgrade won't be till the quad-cores hit the floor, main reason is alot of programs by 2007 should have SMP support :cool:
Click to expand...
Umm Amd Dual core=Own P4 with HT :p ;)
 
BMW said:
Because upgrading to PCI express is a pain in the ass, and consequently, a pain in the wallet.

I am still happy that my 2.53 and intel mobo (the pebt2) are still chugging along on the same windows xp install from feb 2003. sure i dont have the most 3dmarks or the most fps, but i dont have to worry about my particular components being suspect for failure.

having my computer available to game/surf/play music/record TV is what i want.
Click to expand...

I just sold another of my 3 year old 2GHz - i875 rigs, Have an nVidia 939/PCI-E ATI X800XL/ 3500+, the others are a 2.6C/i875, i850E/1.7GHz for the wife and an old File server/back up P3-866/VIA 694, a P3 550 in closet with a mobo that will not remember BIOS settings for one reason or another, Asus CUBX mobo. That's a first run 1.7GHz Willy that I got in a trade with a Bud. 512MB of RAMBUS, hehehehe! Only the Audigy 1 blows big ones in that rig.

Now maybe I can afford at least an 840 and 7800GT or maybe a 4400+. If I wouldn't have gotten my X800XL for $199 from CompUSA things might be different. I instead bought a Guitar and will be in Germany for the Stuttgarter Folks Fest Sept/Oct!LOL! The 2.6C runs all of my Optimized for P4 apps just fine thank you very much. I built the AMD for mainly Games and Music. I will move the P4 downstairs to my Den for HTPC duties, might even go SFF!

Donnie27
 
Vengance_01 said:
Umm Amd Dual core=Own P4 with HT :p ;)
Click to expand...

Sure will! Never said P4 w/ HT was the best, just waiting for the next best upgrade, I stayed Socket478 with 3.0E and a PCI-E 7800GT cause it was cheaper than a new new barebone system w/videocard.

And i'm not so much brand loyal, would try AMD, but it would be like my 4th or so time going with a AMD setup, just hated VIA/Apollo chipsets so much back then with the K6/K7 series, and it does sound like its improved alot, but just the complete ease of setup with a intel cpu/intel chipset will whoop the setup of a AMD anyday :)

Anyways i have a Dodge Stealth and Dodge Daytona to sink my money into so can't spend it all on the PC :D
 
RogueTrip said:
but just the complete ease of setup with a intel cpu/intel chipset will whoop the setup of a AMD anyday :)
Click to expand...

Um... not true. Ive never had problems setting up any AMD based system unless a part I recieved was DOA. That includes intel as well. Unless the problem is pebkac, then any BS about intel being easier to setup, more stable, or being "better" is complete BS. They are exactly the same in terms of formating, installing Windows, installing drivers. How could it be any easier or harder simply because it says AMD and not intel?
 
I find it much more time consuming to get Intel drivers off of their site than nVidia's chipset drivers. So much for ease of use.
 
1c3d0g said:
No, it could've been interference caused by AMD chipset. But since we're in the Intel forum, enough with the AMD talk. :)
Click to expand...

K now im rotfl :D
 
1c3d0g said:
No, it could've been interference caused by AMD chipset. But since we're in the Intel forum, enough with the AMD talk. :)
Click to expand...

haha, I went back to find this after I saw the above posters post... this is #@!%%! hilarious.
 
Ill wait till their like...15nm Process :D , 8 Cores per die FTW! Yea, a good 3-5 years till that happens :p
 
Emission said:
Ill wait till their like...15nm Process :D , 8 Cores per die FTW! Yea, a good 3-5 years till that happens :p
Click to expand...

You'd be able to put about 16 K8 execution cores on a 15nm process.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top