Why did you choose Intel?

CastleBravo said:
This "heat doesn't matter" stuff is bunk, and I say that as a recent Prescott owner. Intel and AMD are both good at some stuff and weaker at others, why do people have to exaggerate and pull stuff out of their butt to justify their purchases?

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041114/index.html
Click to expand...

Lets see, if the processor can safely handle the heat, and the motherboard can handle the heat, how is it bunk?

I agree that it would be nice if it ran cooler, that way the clock speeds could be ramped up some more.

Heat never mattered the first Athlon owners. Those suckers got hot and often died from it. Intels don't usually die from heat. Not thier own heat anyway. They've had excellent thermal protection since the Pentium III's.
 
1. All the video editing applications I use are coded specifically for Intel processors with hyperthreading.

2. Better motherboard features. NCQ is a big help when dealing with larger files i.e. multi-gig chunks of video. PCI-Express was Intel only for quite a while there (I'm really digging this $120 6600 I have oc'ed to near 6600gt performance).

3. $50 rebate on my AA8 Dura-Max =)
 
mlbruehlly said:
I chose an Intel (P4 540 socket T) because I work there... :D
Click to expand...

Ditto. Also I do more video compression then gaming and Intel still blows the doors off AMD in that respect.
 
CastleBravo said:
This "heat doesn't matter" stuff is bunk, and I say that as a recent Prescott owner. Intel and AMD are both good at some stuff and weaker at others, why do people have to exaggerate and pull stuff out of their butt to justify their purchases?

http://www6.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041114/index.html
Click to expand...


i like how he talked about pulling stuff out of their butt, and then quoted Tom's :rolleyes:
 
rayman2k2 said:
i like how he talked about pulling stuff out of their butt, and then quoted Tom's :rolleyes:
Click to expand...



was kinda thinking the same, didnt that guy loose any credibility he once had a while ago
 
seems to me there was ahuge flame war with him a while back, forget what it was about
 
Where he loses credibility is in the stuff he says. When he goes against what every other site says, you can clearly see that many of his reviews are biased twords his advertisers. His site for example is the one site that shows P4 performance winning more often than it does or should. It also showed the FX5x00 series kicking ATi's ass. Which we all know is crap.

So basically when you compare his reviews to others you end up going WTF? He comes to the exact opposite conclusion as everyone else. Then you look at the advertising banners on his site and you'll know why.
 
People flame Tom's hardware around here because they think it is cool and makes them look [H]ard. :rolleyes:

If you can't explain why the article itself is technically invalid, you are just talking out of your ass by just ranting about how "Tom 5uxx0r5!"
 
Tofu Drift said:
There are a plethora of reasons why AMD64 is considered a better buy by many in this generation of competition. What are the reasons why you chose Intel?

- My uncle works in IT, he just bought a new Intel 3.0 and partly convinced me to do the same.
- My Thunderbird had to have its HSF replaced a few times--annoyed me and I felt it was time for a change.
- It wasn't that much more expensive than the A64 alternative.
- A good friend of mine in Computer Engineering tells me Intel processors are more "robust" than AMD--whatever he meant by that, it had an effect.
Click to expand...

why did i choose intel? hmmmmm this is hard one. i choose intel simply beacuse Intel is WAY BETTER than AMD. thats why.................nuff said.
 
Well, Tom's article is a bit strange... Basically all it says is "Intel includes good quality thermal pads, don't replace them with cheap paste, or you'll get in trouble".
It's just the way he says it, I suppose. I think he makes a very big deal out of it, with the video and all.
Now if it would overheat even when you use the stock cooler and thermal pad, THEN you'd have a reason to worry, I think.
 
first thing i do if im going to use the stock heatsink is put some wd40 on it to eat the thermal pad away and put as5 on there :)

using my zalman 7000 cu now.. dropped it a few degs and much quieter, still hit 60 under load, but it remains fast and stable.. so i dont care
 
since i was 5 (im now 13) ive always used intel processors. my friends who have had amd cpus before always called me over and kept asking me to fix their comps and it was always their amd cpu overheating, crashing, etc. even though i game alot, ive never had a problem with intel so i stay with them
 
Heh, heh...just a random remark, I posted in this thread when it was in it's wee stages of life, then just today I looked at how many pages it now contains and said to myself "ha! I bet you they're all arguing about something!" Took a peek, sure enough, flame wars sequel number x is waging. Anyways, have a good talk everyone! Don't hurt each other too much! :D
 
to complete my journey to," The Dark Side ". That's right I was once a sweet young Commodore and then Amiga user. But the Intel machine pulled me in and I liked it. I can't get enough of it. It is my driug of choice. I use my Systems for video editing. And yes most editing software is written with Hyper-threading in mind. So for me it was the logical choice. I do play some games and run the benches too. I get tired of people thinking that A64's own us at games. When I go to Aquamark and hit compare. You will see that in the whole world of Aquamark, only 1 that's right only one A64 has a higher cpu score than my 3.0C OC'd. that means there are a boat load of 64's behind me. Hey I think AMD builds a hell of a processor. Make no mistake I would love to play around with an FX-55. But not for that kind of money!! Geez that's as bad as Intel. Oh yes there are lot's and lots of FX-55's behind my cpu score on Aquamark also. That however is the fault of the user.
A picture says a 1000 words

yadayada.jpg


WZ
 
I picked Intel because of the the platform, particularly the chipsets. I setup this system in October 2003 and I wanted it to be a system I didn't have to open and mess with, and it has been. Over the time since then I upgrade the 9600 Pro I originally put in it to a 9800 Pro, and I upgraded the DVD burner. Now I'm doing the biggest upgrade to it I have in a while (New Flat Panel, 3.2c CPU, adding a RAID 5 array). Throughout all of this, I have never once had a driver issue. I have never once had stability problems. I have not had XP crash one time. I do not believe that with a VIA or SiS chipset that would be the case. I've had so many problems with VIA and others in the past, and this Intel set has gone beautifully, and I have no doubt this setup is going to last me another year now, maybe longer. I don't overclock, I don't push this thing to its limits, I just use my PC. I play WoW and I do a lot of writing, web browsing, music and movie streaming. I just want something solid that I don't have to tinker with.

That is why I chose this particular platform (i875)

-Jeff
 
grenadier said:
1. All the video editing applications I use are coded specifically for Intel processors with hyperthreading.

2. Better motherboard features. NCQ is a big help when dealing with larger files i.e. multi-gig chunks of video.
Click to expand...

no actually NCQ is not better for something that is almost streaaming like that. the disc is writing or reading in order, and the NCQ will actually in most cases make it slower. (except for maxtor "10" for some reason, they got it right)

NCQ is for disks getting all sorts of requeests from different apps or users at the same time
so it sorts out the requests to a "faster" order of the reads/writes
 
DeFex said:
no actually NCQ is not better for something that is almost streaaming like that. the disc is writing or reading in order, and the NCQ will actually in most cases make it slower. (except for maxtor "10" for some reason, they got it right)

NCQ is for disks getting all sorts of requeests from different apps or users at the same time
so it sorts out the requests to a "faster" order of the reads/writes
Click to expand...

Perhaps he just uses highly fragmented disks :)
 
DeFex said:
no actually NCQ is not better for something that is almost streaaming like that. the disc is writing or reading in order, and the NCQ will actually in most cases make it slower. (except for maxtor "10" for some reason, they got it right)

NCQ is for disks getting all sorts of requeests from different apps or users at the same time
so it sorts out the requests to a "faster" order of the reads/writes
Click to expand...

The maxtor 10 is actually the drive I'm thinking about buying. The speed on this thing rocks, but I'm having trouble investing ~$190 for a hard drive made by maxtor.
 
grenadier said:
The maxtor 10 is actually the drive I'm thinking about buying. The speed on this thing rocks, but I'm having trouble investing ~$190 for a hard drive made by maxtor.
Click to expand...


lol especially when they make a more expensive version of exactly the same thing and sell it on its "reliability" (MaXLine III)

pick good ones and call them "maxline iii", all the crap thats left over gets to be called "diamondmax" its just for consumers anyways, screw them!
 
Papa-Ming said:
The Platform.

When I started the Via chipsets were ?? :eek: They might be better now so don't start a war over it.

I've never had any trouble with Intel chipsets.
Click to expand...

That's why I've stayed with Intel processors since my *only* AMD CPU (386DX-40 in 1994-1996).

I've had non-Intel *chipsets* driving Intel CPUs (including with the only SMP board I've ever owned, the VIA Apollo Pro 133A-chipsetted ABIT VP6); hwever, everything else since has had Intel as both CPU and chipset supplier (including my current ASUS P4C800E Deluxe).

Except for the VP6, I've had issues with VIA chipsets in motherboards I've both owned and supported. However, I've had NO issues with Intel chipset support.
 
my reply? There are major Intel Offices and labs in my city, they provide the most stable boards, and give me a good job. (the job part also lets me learn about the stable part)
 
I have three reasons. The first two have been stated quite a bit already, I'm just echoing:

1. Chipset/driver stability. I've been building PCs since the Pentium days, and was actually more of an AMD fan because their CPUs were cheaper and could take advantage of Intel's 430 chipset. Then it split off into the "II" days, with the Intel moving to a proprietary CPU architecture, but using and updating the 440 chipset, as opposed to the seemingly cobbled-together early VIA chipsets. I still have no respect for the early slot-based Athlons, that AMD had to build a chipset themselves in order to get a semi-working system up struck me as odd. I admit it's gotten a lot better, VIA's matured a lot but still isn't tops on my list, and nVidia shines. However, I've had very few problems out of Intel (815 MTH).

2. Hyperthreading. I do a lot of stuff at once, and I still can't say whether HT improves raw performance or decreases it slightly, but I do know my system's a lot more responsive. Most of my gaming is done in windowed mode, and I have my chat windows and web browser up at all times, and switch between them frequently. Even if it's as much as a 5-10% performance hit like some claim, it's worth it to me to switch between apps quickly without my CPU skipping a beat.

3. Company respectability. This really has nothing to do with anything, except my own opinions and peace of mind. Each company does things I approve of, and disapprove of, but the one event that sticks in my mind most was an AMD performance tour, back when the Hammer line was still in development. It was about gaming performance, and they had several machines rigged up in arcade-style cabinets, paired up, one AMD, one Intel, running the same game, side-by-side. Attendees were encouraged to play the games on the rigs, and see how much faster the AMD was. What they never said, except buried in specs, was that it was comparing based on integrated graphics solutions. Yes, they were comparing the nForce2 IGP to the i845G. AMD lost huge amounts of my respect at that event.

I'm not a rabid !!!!!! for either Intel or AMD, just the Intel currently suits my needs best. Actually, if I had the spare funds, I'd really like to build up an Athlon64 system, to see what 64-bit desktop computing is all about, and have a nice kickass system to have dedicated towards gameplay. But I'll still do all my important work (like browsing the web, and photoshopping moustaches badly on pictures of my friends) on my P4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top