Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Should I wait for Socket 940?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
February 5, 2006 12:42:55 AM

Should I wait for Socket 940? Is it coming soon or should I splurge now with my IRS refund on Socket 939 with a Athlon 64-X2 4800+ CPU? Quick!!! The money is burning a whole in my pocket!!!!!! Aaaaaahhhh!!!!

...Ahh-hem...

Thanks. :?

More about : wait socket 940

February 5, 2006 1:45:18 AM

really, you should wait. Your patience will be richly rewarded and you know it.
February 5, 2006 1:51:55 AM

Yeah, but when is it due? Is it beyond the rumor stages yet or is it still in the vaporware stages?
Related resources
February 5, 2006 2:16:15 AM

S940 for Athlon64 will be DDR2 and that ZRAM whatever crap they just licensed.

Not much else is changing. There will be a performance gain, how much is anyone's guess.

If I recall, by Q4 2006, S939 is going to be retired. I recall them wanting to do it sooner rather then later.

I'm guessing the S940 A64 will be based on 65nm wafers, that's just a guess though. It makes sense however.

Linkage:
http://www.amdcompare.com/prodoutlook/
http://www.amdboard.com/amdroadmap.html

I didn't research it indepth again, just going from memory, feel free to call me a twit and prove me wrong.

Enjoy!
February 5, 2006 2:46:44 AM

if ur going to go with 940 u should wait at least a month or 2 after its release to upgrade, so that the socket has time to mature, amd is going from ddr to ddr2 which will have issues most likely, socket 939 is supposed to be supported until early 2007, there wont be a big perforamnce gain when comparing 939 and 940, itll be similar to comparing socket 754 and 939, theres a bit of a difference but not a really huge one, if heats an issue for u, then waiting could prove to be better since 65nm chips run cooler than 90nm... i suggest u upgrade now since 939 will be supported until 2007...
February 5, 2006 2:51:57 AM

o.0 First 940/754 when A64 came out then 939.. now back to 940? wth whats going on xD[/code]
February 5, 2006 3:00:07 AM

i duno but i like my 754 just fine :) 
February 6, 2006 5:24:27 AM

i bought myself a socket 939 system about 3 monts ago (my bro took my 754 for WOW) and a 3700 i fell confident in that i can wait and use this cpu for the next year or 2 and then as this cpu hits the end of the road i can probly pickup a killer 939 dual core for cheap.
February 6, 2006 5:53:17 AM

The question is how long can you wait. New motherboard most likely will be out late spring.
February 6, 2006 6:51:44 AM

Quote:
The question is how long can you wait. New motherboard most likely will be out late spring.


Well, to make this impatient fool angrier :x I went to a local (the last remaining remnants) computer vending show yesterday & found that none (eight vendors total) of these vendors were carrying the AMD 64-X2 4800+ on hand. The excuses ranged from "there isn't that much demand for it" to "it costs too much to stock cuz prices change too fast". They all gave me crazy looks when I said "Do you carry any Mobos that have both AGP & PCI-E slots?". They were all quick to point me to the ASUS boards on their tables, when I was all excited & then, realized they were all only for the Pentium CPU's.
I guess my english wasn't good enough to speak it with a practiced broken Taiwanese accent. " :roll: I be gotta goes to a place where I can be learned gooder Engrish".
I was soooo ready & willing to drop my money. What a dissapointment. I guess it's a sign for me to try to hold out a bit longer. To make it worse, 7 out of the 8 vendors said "there is no such Mobo for AMD CPU's" or they'd be too slow if they existed. I walked away in disgust saying to myself, You ID-10-TS!!!" DAMMIT!!!! :x
February 6, 2006 7:27:26 AM

well i've read this article at anandtech and they said that the AM2 launch might be in June. :D 
a b V Motherboard
a b à CPUs
February 6, 2006 7:30:32 AM

if you are patent, perhaps wait to see how Intel's conroe turns out?
February 7, 2006 2:12:55 AM

Quote:
Apache_lives wrote:
If you are patient, perhaps wait to see how Intel's conroe turns out?

One of my local peers just told me something along those lines, or more like "screw AMD they're buggy!, Wait for the Conroe." Seems like the techies I meet online praise AMD's, but the local shops that are installing workstations & servers in corporate environments don't agree. I personally have done some consulting prior to the last 2-3yrs for local PC shops & they, too, say "Go Intel they are much more stable than AMD has been under Windows when you're not playing video games. So I made a few personal phone calls & got more of the same attitude & negative news towards the AMD CPU's & positive news on the Intels. Sheeesh!!! Am I ever more confused about switching over to AMD & droping Intel cold Turkey. All I know is that I hate my Intel & Mobo due to the overheating I've experienced, freezing & lockups. My two other pals have the exact same setups & they have the same issues. This is the second CPU & Mobo Intel sent me under warranty replacements & it was more of the same. They (@ Intel Tech Supp) went as far as blaming my case not having enough ventilation. So I went out & bought an ANTEC case $130. Still there was no change. I gave up & I just don't keep my system on as long as I normally would. :?
February 7, 2006 2:49:34 AM

Unless AMD has some tricks up their sleeve we're not aware of socket AM2 shouldn't make that much of a difference except for the fact that socket 939 prices should go down when AM2 comes out.

Just so you know socket 940 has been out for years. Socket AM2 also 940pin but NOT compatible with socket 940 ( for 2xx and 8xx Opterons ) so watch out!

DDR2 will probably not make that much of a difference ( I hope to be pleasantly amazed when it's released tho ).

You could certainly grab a 3200+ +nForce4 to upgrade to now and wait for AM2 to be released and have the bugs worked out before you upgrade.
a b V Motherboard
a b à CPUs
February 7, 2006 4:33:18 AM

Quote:
Go wherever your heat, power bill and wallet takes you.(You'll find you're heading toward AMD)

Waiting for Conroe is like waiting for snow in Africa.


Conroe is due out mid year and was brought foward - its only a couple of months after amd's refresh - it wouldnt be a bad idea IMO to wait for both amd and intel to bring there new stuff before buying a new system and besides, P4 is close enough to AMD now, conroe can only do better, and there targets are lower power/heat levels etc - im interested.

Im not expecting it to go as far as hammer an amd into the ground and put them out of buisness - i expect them to be quicker then a P4 ASWELL as having lower power/heat levels - thats worth a few months wait to see what its all about.

As for DDR2 for AMD - yeah, the higher latencies wont make it an overall faster deal but faster memory will, and lower heat (due to lower controller vcore) and lower power levels from the on die memory controller (DDR2 vcore compared to DDR1 vcore) will give some more headroom.
February 7, 2006 8:24:17 PM

so do u think well see some AMD cpu's clocked as high as p4's by the end of the year? thatd be sick :p  (dont flame me for caring about clock speeds, it still is a factor and most normal users only know about clock speed so it may help to boost amd's profits if they can match p4's clock speeds... i wonder if any1 agrees with me)
February 7, 2006 9:31:14 PM

well then do u believe that amd will catch up to intels clock speeds by the end of the year? since intel has still yet to go higher than 3.4? there might be a 3.6 but ive never heard of it... and since amd will have even lower temps, i believe by the end of this year amd cpus might be able to hit 4.0 with good water cooling :)  or at least i hope! thatd be fasttt and yes im aware that clockspeeds arnt that important... people i talk with dont know muc habout computers and believe that higher clocked computers are faster, my friend has a 2.8 p4 with a 9600se and thinks its faster than my amd 3700 at 2.4ghz with an x700pro... although my computer is by no meas blazing fast, compared to his 2.8
February 7, 2006 10:42:03 PM

wow 3.8... pretty fast :p  i bet a amd64 3200 could beat it :lol: 
February 8, 2006 3:12:34 AM

Well I went to a few local shops today & got shot down even more for inquiring about AMD's. Seems like I either live in an anti-AMD city (NY) or the negativity is based on their actual experiences.
I was ready to drop $700+ beans & they warned me about the AMD's & preferred that I go by way of Intel or even wait until June. I'm just so bumbed out about all this. :cry: 
If CompUSA carried an Athlon X2 4800+ I'd walk in there & just purchase one right now to see for myself. But, they don't carry them, at least not the shops around these parts. They don't mention anything higher than 4400+ online either. I say CompUSA because if it doesn't workout for me they'll take it back, hassle-free. The local Asian/Korean shops don't want to here of it :x (my returning anything unless it's actually defective). These places just want the money & the hell with ya after you hit the sidewalk. Sheesh!!!!
February 8, 2006 3:36:42 AM

REALLY???!!! 8O I'm not surprised.
February 8, 2006 4:07:56 AM

Remember newegg is your friend!!!! :D 

Your best bet is to pick up your system or parts online.

You will end up with a much nicer system if you build it yourself or have someone build it for you.

AMD is the way to go no matter what anyone might have told you locally.

The local shops will also usually rip you off.
February 8, 2006 8:10:29 AM

Intel is based America

AMD is based in Germany / Europe

The efficiency and resourcefulness of the processors they design is representative of their countries of origin... economically speaking.

Intel is likely cheaper to get in America, like AMD is cheaper to get in Germany / Europe for shipping reasons.

Shop owners may want to push 'the local product' for their own economies, etc.

There is less AMD in the world, and people fear them because of that.... their loss, leave AMD to the techs who know better IMHO.

About half my PCs over the last 10 years have been Intel based, and about half AMD... a very small percentage where neither (IBM / Cyrix, etc). Both platforms are highly compatible with each other, only power consumption and performance tend to differ noticably. Each have similar problems aswell, although very minor as they are. (eg: Norton Ghost and platform IDE chipset support, minor bugs in the CPUs on both sides, etc). However because of my current system more of my processor cores have been AMD... but only just.

Go for whomever provides the most cost effective solution, they are each easy to build from parts... you may want to factor the power usage in (ongoing cost), or you may just look at initial purchase cost instead.

There are many people out there who have never installed a platform chipset driver, and because of this AMD 'appear buggy' to them, when it is actually the tech who is totally clueless to industry standard procedures and building dodgy systems by just slamming an OS + software on after building the box.

System building is as much of an art form as it is technical in nature, and there are many thousands, or even millions+ of 'ugly' configs / setups on PC rigs out there.
February 8, 2006 10:54:31 AM

wise men talk from extensive experience
February 8, 2006 10:57:43 AM

Indeed :D 
February 8, 2006 12:50:02 PM

Quote:
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/news.php?aid=9834
All this happened last year. Not sure what the result was.


Of course, M$ doesn't do stuff like that, do they? They didn't snuff out Novell's DOS-7 (a multitasking OS that actually worked before Windoze 95 was released. Novell DOS was formerly known as DR-DOS, a product of Digital Research.) And, M$ did not cause Dell in 1997 to sell servers with NT or No Operating System (NOS) but they didn't offer NetWare. But if you complained to Dell, threatened to buy another server brand, they WOULD sell you NetWare over the phone and even match your best price!

Point is, this has been going on forever. M$ has made Netscape a force of the past -- it used to be a pretty damned good browser and had some advantages over IE. Now that AOL owns it, I think it sux, but that's MHO.

I have no doubt Intel has a crane holding a wrecking ball over Michael Dell's house, and you can bet M$ has its crane right next to Intel's.

Want to have some fun? Go to dell dot com and look around until you find a computer you can build with NOS -- No Operating System. They are models like GX150N for example. Build the absolute best one you can with the fastest processor, most memory, etc. Save it to your cart.

Now go back and build an identical computer with the exact same processor, memory, etc. Make everything (EVERY THING!!!) the same.

Save it to your cart. Now print your cart and compare.

LOL. The one with Windows is cheaper!! (or maybe the same price or maybe ten bucks more)

Even WORSE is the fact that you could NOT select the processor you wanted, you could NOT select even the MODEL you wanted.

Now, tell me that M$ is not guilty of anti-trust violation!

Someone Help It Through! (decode that!)

If the world were indeed round, Dell would sell you a Dimension or Optiplex with SuSE 10 installed and you could save money on both the hard drive and the memory.

It is easier for me to understand the advantage of being 100% Intel (from Dell's point of view) than the advantage of being 99.9% M$. By sticking to Intel, they reduce the number of models/mobos/cases they have to deal with. If you were AMD, you'd try to find a way of solving that logistics problem for Dell and sue Intel if they tried to drop the wrecking ball.

But, if nobody can successfully thwart M$, what are the odds that anyone could thwart Intel? Not good, I proffer.
February 8, 2006 2:27:19 PM

So do you not want to order online zuki? Newegg is pretty good about returning defective items. I have had to return a bad video card and cdrom and they were both easy to do!

I say wait for AM2 if you are one to keep your same components for a while and you are OK with your current PC and performance. S939 isn't going to die anytime soon but it's obviously a dead end for upgradeability. If you can wait, I say do it as the FX-60 will be the last (supposedly) dual core and therefore best proc you will be able to get for S939.
February 8, 2006 2:55:45 PM

Quote:
So do you not want to order online zuki? Newegg is pretty good about returning defective items. I have had to return a bad video card and cdrom and they were both easy to do!

I say wait for AM2 if you are one to keep your same components for a while and you are OK with your current PC and performance. S939 isn't going to die anytime soon but it's obviously a dead end for upgradeability. If you can wait, I say do it as the FX-60 will be the last (supposedly) dual core and therefore best proc you will be able to get for S939.


Yah, I was trying to stay away from online ordering if I could help it. In the 15+ yrs I've been building systems (excluding the past two yrs) I found that when I bought parts locally, if they were defective from the get-go, I could at least show up with my Geek mob threatening the vendor to either replace it or give me my money back in person. The online stuff tends to be a hassle for me, unless I'm saving a great deal of money online vs. local purchasing.

Yep, I also am trying to hold on to as much of my existing hardware (Xcept for the CPU & Mobo) during this upgrade phase.

...either way I will hit some more local shops for today to see if I get lucky.

Thanks guys for the response.

PS: I whole heartedly agree with everything you guys have to point out.
February 8, 2006 3:14:24 PM

OK. Here's a question. I don't know how the CPU speed rating is compared with the AMD's vs Intel, but I have a 2.8Ghz Intel Prescott-EE (Extreme) CPU with Intel Mobo with an Antec Super quiet black case & 400W PS & has 4 fans in it. Needless to say, this setup is very stable, too. - my last blue screen happened Feb.-2005.
Which AMD processor is faster (not equal to, but faster) than the existing single-core CPU I have?
(My scenario):
I'm needing something faster without breaking the bank or my having to sell my motorcycle which is why I've been looking at AMD's Athlon64 Dual-core X2 4800+ for simply converting my old VHS tapes, editing family videos from the Camcorder (hense my AGP-ATI AIW 9800PRO 128MB Video Card & 2GB System RAM). I currently do this with this CPU & Intel 865GBF Mobo & it just SUX!!!! It takes roughly between 5-6hrs to encode/render, convert to DVD format & then burn to DVD a 60min. video using Pinnacle-Syst. Studio version 9 or v10 (my video editing software which I love the most over the others I've tried) under Windows XP Pro. I'm willing to drop upto $730 for this (if I can save a little off this projected price that would be a plus, of course).
Am I asking for too much? :?
February 8, 2006 3:15:58 PM

Quote:
Yah, I was trying to stay away from online ordering if I could help it. In the 15+ yrs I've been building systems (excluding the past two yrs) I found that when I bought parts locally, if they were defective from the get-go, I could at least show up with my Geek mob threatening the vendor to either replace it or give me my money back in person. The online stuff tends to be a hassle for me, unless I'm saving a great deal of money online vs. local purchasing.


Makes sense, I've gone to CompUSA a couple of times just because I know they'd take it back with a receipt and with minimal hassle. Sounds like you're screwed for the local shops though. If you come to the bain of KS I can hook you up with a great local place. I don't know if the guy is Korean but he defintely speaks broken Engrish. He's a nice guy though (knowledgeable too) and he's always pushing AMD.
February 8, 2006 8:23:24 PM

I customized that one for the OP who already had 4 sticks of 512 DDR400.

I'll make you one too :D 
February 8, 2006 8:33:01 PM

Quote:
http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/Wishlist/WishShareS...

Here's an upgrade for you: $565 delivered for a motherboard + CPU + VGA :D 


Hey, Linux_0

Add some memory to that will ya? And will that fit in my ATX case? And is my 250 W PSU adequate?

Here you go:

http://secure.newegg.com/NewVersion/Wishlist/WishShareS...

The 7800GT and Corsair XMS C2 is a bit overkill.

Your ATX case should work fine however, I'm sorry to say, your 250W PSU is completely inadequate. Which is why I added an Antec TruePower to the config.
February 10, 2006 8:23:37 PM

Quote:
Should I wait for Socket 940? Is it coming soon or should I splurge now with my IRS refund on Socket 939 with a Athlon 64-X2 4800+ CPU? Quick!!! The money is burning a whole in my pocket!!!!!! Aaaaaahhhh!!!!

...Ahh-hem...

Thanks. :?

No, you most definitely should not wait for socket 940 if your belief is that socket 940 will offer a significant increase in performance over current socket 939. I quote:

"Is it worth upgrading your AGP system by spending several hundred dollars given that the launch of AMD's new Socket M2 platform is only a few months away? No need to fret here. AMD's upcoming M2 platform is not going to outperform the current processor/platform offerings by much, if at all. You'll have to wait for AMD's 65-nm CPU generation and Intel's Merom/Conroe processors before you will see any noticeable improvements on the processor front, and it will be a while before these devices become available."
February 10, 2006 8:29:52 PM

yea if u plan to upgrade id go for 939 its going to be supported for a bit longer, if u have about 2k i recommend
amd x2
2 gb value memory
x1900xt
asus/dfi mobo

that will run around 1200-1300, so then u can spend the rest on case,monitor,keyboard,mouse,soundcard and such... if u dont have such a big budget, downgrade the proc to an amd64 3500+ and the total will run closer to 1000, very good deal...
February 11, 2006 2:57:11 PM

yes I have a 3500+ venice and 2gb ram which I am quite happy with. I got the system about a month ago and it already seems incredibly fast and stable (although I have tweaked windows and bios a lot although haven't overclocked), I can't really imagine how much faster or stable future systems can go in the short term. The next big leap for amd would seem to be .65nm processor technology which won't be for a good 2-3 years away (or sooner?).
February 11, 2006 4:07:43 PM

i think that 65nm is comming out from amd this year or early next year, and intel is going to have 45nm out by the end of next year? im not qutie sure either but i remember hearing sotmhing along those lines
February 11, 2006 5:17:21 PM

Quote:
if you are patent, perhaps wait to see how Intel's conroe turns out?


Intel Conroe?
$hit flies!
Not under my roof!
It is not an INTELigent decision!

The game of pocker left INTEL with bare ass!

Sorry I can buy cheaper MICROWAVE ovens!
For to many INTEL myth is over!

Moore's Law:
"What you can buy today, in 18 months would cost you half of todays price"!

The last and still the best INTEL was Pentium II 300 Mhz Dechuttes, anything after was only INTELs soap in your eyes.

I don't see myself to ever consider INTEL considering AMD employs ideas of Dirk Meyers!

Why one would waste their money on INTEL, while there are the real processors made by AMD!

The INTELs products are great only to keep AMD prices in check as corporate procurrement morons sit on INTELs brand! !

Should INTEL be an architect we all would be still living in tents, only with more airvents!

If every body will love red heads as I do blonds would be LESS BIENs!
February 11, 2006 6:11:18 PM

Quote:
Should I wait for Socket 940? Is it coming soon or should I splurge now with my IRS refund on Socket 939 with a Athlon 64-X2 4800+ CPU? Quick!!! The money is burning a whole in my pocket!!!!!! Aaaaaahhhh!!!!

...Ahh-hem...

Thanks. :?


If you want to be able to upgrade a little longer socket AM2 or F: YES

If no care for upgrades, 939 will be good enoufff!
February 11, 2006 10:41:21 PM

Well, after hitting about a dozen local vendors & wasting my time with them, I'll have to wait only because of the barage of confusing opinions on the street over which is better Intel or AMD.
Since hitting the pavement on this taunting subject I've concluded that I'd have to go with the opinions of the unbiased users around here who have spent their hard earned money & have nothing to gain from giving out free experienced advise. GO AMD!!!

My experience with my past 12+ Intel CPUs (286-16Mhz, 386, 386DX, 486, 486DX, 486SX, Pentium1-33/66Mhz, P1-100Mhz, P2-500Mhz, P3 & P4's has mostly been stability. As of lately (past three years), slow performance when it came to doing any video rendering such as encoding video, splitting up an MPEG file or simply doing an automatic chapter creation session under NeroVision (for us NERO fans who know what this is) on my P4.
One thing isn't clear, though, which all vendors agreed upon, even the competiont down the block. The local yocals all agreed that AMD is only good for gaming whereas the Intel can handle anything, a bit less on the performance side, but much more stable under Windows XP than AMD. Is this true or even remotley true?
February 12, 2006 1:02:11 AM

First, excuse the spelling. Im an engineer. Spelling is for secretaries

So, why are the local retail vendors in NY telling you AMD sucks? It has absolutely nothing to do with "Intel is american and AMD is german" as one individual posted. Its basically AMDs history. So lets have a quick history lesson:

Lets step back about 12 years, give or take. A big chunk of those vendors you talked to most likely used to run on the rapidly growing and successful (back then) TRI State (NY, Ohio, Penn) computer show circuit . Back then Pentium was the "wow" chip. AMD, new to the retail consumer computer chip arena, stepped up to the plate swinging the the not-so-almighty K6 chip. It was a horrendous failure, and in releasing it, AMD essentially shot themselves right in the face. What I mean to say is, the K6 really sucked. Badly. AMD cursed themselves with a bad reputation, and those vendors who fronted the K6s got serriously soaked on warrenty claims, consumer satisfaction offers and money back garuntees. With the K7 series chip, (P2 equivelent) AMD hit a homerun, and stole the performance crown from Intel, but it was too late. The damage done to AMDs reputation by the K6 chip was too deeply embedded into the retailer memories. To this day, this very moment, the bad rep persists. Case in point the guy who thinks its case of "nationism" He knows AMD has a bad rep in retail, but he doesnt know the history, so he guessed. So many people want "genuine intel inside" but dont know why. These are not people who build systems, read reviews or study performance charts. They only know what they hear, and lets face it, when was the last time you saw a "genuine AMD inside comercial"? Im not making fun of them, not at all. Theyre just victims of advertising. There was another manufacturer (whom I shall not name) who had an even more spectacular CPU series failure around the same time. Their chips were so bad as to be dangerous, to the point of actually causing fires!!! This only added to the "genuine intel" advertising fracas, seriously damning AMD.
So, thats why all those guys were probably telling you AMD sucks.

Something else for you and some others to consider. To the folks who were arguing/pondering the clock speed issue I say this:
Clock speed????!!! Who gives a crap if AMD ever "attains" the same clock speed as intel!

In simple terms

AMD = Porsche 911 turbo
INTEL = 1968 ford mustang 428BB

AMD: Same horsepower on half the cubic inches (or litres if you prefer) at a fraction of the wieght and significantly less fuel consumption.

Now dont get me wrong, I dearly loved my mustang, but arguing about how big its engine is completely pointless when a porsche blows by you. The porsche is faster, regardless of the fact that its motor is smaller. Period.

Whats all that mean? Go to the benchmark testing here or at anandtech. AMD generally equals or beats the "equivelent" Intel, even though the AMD has a lower transistor counts/lower clock speed. So who gives a crap if they clock less than Intel? Theyre still faster.


Finally, onto the original question. A computer is just about the worst investment you can make in terms of holding its value. A month after you buy it, at least one component in it is going to be available much cheaper. Ultimately, you have to bite the bullet some time, so consider this. Do you need a computer right this moment? If no, then wait. You'll always be able to buy faster-cheaper-LATER. When able, never, ever by newest generation stuff when its first released. AMD has been (contrary to the NY retailers opinions) pretty durn reliable with its new releases (at least relative to intel) since the K6 debacle. But the new chips are not your only concern. Where you run the real risk of getting screwed is in the other "new" hardware, specifically in this case , the mobo. The DDR2 has been out awhile, and the rest of the stuff is "seasoned" (for the moment). New video cards are dropping on the market so fast that their flaws arent even being fully identified before the next "newest" card hits the market. Just look at the ATI 1800 series issues just starting to surface, AFTER the release of the 1900 series. Well, guess what, the mobo/socket AM2/chipset combos will be brand spanking new too. Back in the day, the old rule of thumb with a VIA chipsset mobo was, dont buy one. If you insist, always wait until the "B" version of chipset came out. And with good reason. The A chipped mobos tended to have horrible reps. Ive had personal experiance with both and the reps and rule fitted. In your case, Id be much more concerned with finding a stable/reliable socket AM2 mobo, than worrying about the CPU value/reliability

So, if you can wait, wait, as so many others have posted here, and then, after the AM2 drops on the market, buy the cut priced socket 939 CPU. On the other hand, if you have an infinite supply of cash, and dont care about taking a little risk now and then, go bleeding edge and buy the AM2

Just my 2 cents
a b V Motherboard
a b à CPUs
February 12, 2006 1:17:05 AM

Quote:
if you are patent, perhaps wait to see how Intel's conroe turns out?


Intel Conroe?
$hit flies!
Not under my roof!
It is not an INTELigent decision!

The game of pocker left INTEL with bare ass!

Sorry I can buy cheaper MICROWAVE ovens!
For to many INTEL myth is over!

Moore's Law:
"What you can buy today, in 18 months would cost you half of todays price"!

The last and still the best INTEL was Pentium II 300 Mhz Dechuttes, anything after was only INTELs soap in your eyes.

I don't see myself to ever consider INTEL considering AMD employs ideas of Dirk Meyers!

Why one would waste their money on INTEL, while there are the real processors made by AMD!

The INTELs products are great only to keep AMD prices in check as corporate procurrement morons sit on INTELs brand! !

Should INTEL be an architect we all would be still living in tents, only with more airvents!

If every body will love red heads as I do blonds would be LESS BIENs!

FYI intel conroe will be better then the P4's atleast and the P4's aint much slower then the A64's (so much for a "new" architecture), the intel fanboys who buy em will get better chips, and it will kick AMD off there ass and get to work on even better chips and add a little competition (unlike now where they got an edge).

Im not saying conroe will be the supreme ruler, im saying it will compete better with AMD, and that will result in better and cheaper cpus for us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But if you want to get into performance numbers, Yonah equals a X2 at 1/3 the heat and less the 1/2 the fsb and no mem controller - conroe can only be better.

DAM NOOBS
February 12, 2006 2:14:53 AM

Quote:
Intel is based America

AMD is based in Germany / Europe

The efficiency and resourcefulness of the processors they design is representative of their countries of origin... economically speaking.

Intel is likely cheaper to get in America, like AMD is cheaper to get in Germany / Europe for shipping reasons.

Shop owners may want to push 'the local product' for their own economies, etc.

There is less AMD in the world, and people fear them because of that.... their loss, leave AMD to the techs who know better IMHO.

About half my PCs over the last 10 years have been Intel based, and about half AMD... a very small percentage where neither (IBM / Cyrix, etc). Both platforms are highly compatible with each other, only power consumption and performance tend to differ noticably. Each have similar problems aswell, although very minor as they are. (eg: Norton Ghost and platform IDE chipset support, minor bugs in the CPUs on both sides, etc). However because of my current system more of my processor cores have been AMD... but only just.

Go for whomever provides the most cost effective solution, they are each easy to build from parts... you may want to factor the power usage in (ongoing cost), or you may just look at initial purchase cost instead.

There are many people out there who have never installed a platform chipset driver, and because of this AMD 'appear buggy' to them, when it is actually the tech who is totally clueless to industry standard procedures and building dodgy systems by just slamming an OS + software on after building the box.

System building is as much of an art form as it is technical in nature, and there are many thousands, or even millions+ of 'ugly' configs / setups on PC rigs out there.



Intel is based America - AMD is based in Germany / Europe

Since WHEN?

Since you have made your post?


common man! don't know don't rant!

Founded in 1969 and based in Sunnyvale, California, AMD provides microprocessors, Flash memory devices, and silicon-based solutions for our customers in the communications and computer industries worldwide.
February 12, 2006 2:19:51 AM

Quote:
Well, after hitting about a dozen local vendors & wasting my time with them, I'll have to wait only because of the barage of confusing opinions on the street over which is better Intel or AMD.
Since hitting the pavement on this taunting subject I've concluded that I'd have to go with the opinions of the unbiased users around here who have spent their hard earned money & have nothing to gain from giving out free experienced advise. GO AMD!!!

My experience with my past 12+ Intel CPUs (286-16Mhz, 386, 386DX, 486, 486DX, 486SX, Pentium1-33/66Mhz, P1-100Mhz, P2-500Mhz, P3 & P4's has mostly been stability. As of lately (past three years), slow performance when it came to doing any video rendering such as encoding video, splitting up an MPEG file or simply doing an automatic chapter creation session under NeroVision (for us NERO fans who know what this is) on my P4.
One thing isn't clear, though, which all vendors agreed upon, even the competiont down the block. The local yocals all agreed that AMD is only good for gaming whereas the Intel can handle anything, a bit less on the performance side, but much more stable under Windows XP than AMD. Is this true or even remotley true?


Here's my Experience: I have owned or built pretty much all the athlon series chips dating back to 800MHz, and I have never run into any more stability issues than I have with Intel chips. Not sayig Intel is more unstable, but there is no noticable difference. Also, in my experience, shops tend to be biased one way or the other. I have got a lot of incorrecnt information from local shops over the years by people trying to sell me one product or another, such as "You won't be able to get your AMD to run with that case, buy this one that is twice as much (luckily I knew better than to believe them).

As far as being more stable under XP, in my experience, that is total BS. I have built a lot of systems and never ran into that outside of XPs initial driver issues.

I currently run and A64 3800+ and use it for EVERYTHING! Gaming, programming, finances, video editing, web design, music encoding, p2p, you name it. There are some apps were you will run into a few seconds difference here and there, but nothing to say that AMD is gaming only.

CURRENTLY (and this WILL change to some extent back and forth in the future), AMD runs cooler, more efficiently, and is cheaper for performance. I say that if you are buying now, go AMD and don't look back. When Conroe comes out, this may change, it depends on your level of patience.

Also, if you are looking for a decent AGP and PCI-E board (I think you mentioned this earlier), lookup th Asrock Dual SATA 2. has both and seems to get good reviews. I am considering it for updating while keeping my AIW 9800 Pro as well.

Thats my $0.03 (a bit long for only 2 :D  ). Hope it helps and good luck.
February 12, 2006 2:33:02 AM

Quote:

In simple terms

AMD = Porsche 911 turbo
INTEL = 1968 ford mustang 428BB

So who gives a crap if they clock less than Intel?

Finally, onto the original question. A computer is just about the worst investment you can make in terms of holding its value. A month after you buy it, at least one component in it is going to be available much cheaper.

So, if you can wait, wait, as so many others have posted here, and then, after the AM2 drops on the market, buy the cut priced socket 939 CPU. On the other hand, if you have an infinite supply of cash, and dont care about taking a little risk now and then, go bleeding edge and buy the AM2

Just my 2 cents


AMD - Rolls Royce
Intel - Ford Pinto!

It is not the speed which counts, or ever counted by ability to perform the most transactions in the same time, with unsurpassed stability, with no (BSOD) crashes, or errors.

AMD wacks INTEL all the way!

Want the fastest CPU?

Put it into a pocket of Michael Schumacher when pushing the Ferrari formula!

Intel in sLide!


if you wait?

What for?

By the time the price drop my PC paid for several douzens of the newest!

When AM2 will be available you would be buying nothing else nyt the latest socket to have the abiity to catch with time.

It is not how much it costs, but how fast it will be a payback on it!
I see no reason to buy "dying sockets"!
February 12, 2006 2:46:23 AM

Quote:
The local yocals all agreed that AMD is only good for gaming whereas the Intel can handle anything, a bit less on the performance side, but much more stable under Windows XP than AMD. Is this true or even remotley true?


Intel can handle anything, Intel more stable?

Let's not repeat any longer such crap!

Intel always sways if is not supported by a steady broom stick!

Those who NEVER tried always have the most to say about!

Repeat after me:

AMD Athlon 64 have NO competition, as far as stability and over all performance, if you like it or not.

INTEL chocks when overheats! that must be a real stability!

Why do you think INTEL attempted to introduce on some processors Hyper-Threading Technology ?

Just to throw more soap in to your face!

INTEL the master of deception, power of monopoly and marketing by sacred lies and payoffs!

Hyper-Threading Technology

Intel knows very well how to milk the last drop of milk from dying cow!
!