Search
Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

another brainwashed store manager...

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share

So the other day i went over to a local computer store, and as I walked in, I noticed that there were all Intel procs. and no AMD's! So i asked the guy whats up and he says he doesnt sell AMD because they are terrible and Intel dominates the market share and he once sold a few AMD procs but their customer service is terrible and all his customers that bought AMD were unsatisfied with their system and INtel's boot speeds are so much faster and overclocking is ridiculous and the AMD thing about performing faster/mhz is bullshit and Intel is really the processor king and how the X2 procs are terrible and the PDs are so much better and his prescott 3.6 (which by the way, is not hot at all!) can run any game at max settings with his 6800GS.

i was just dumbfounded at this guy.

sorry about this big jumbled paragraph.

More about : brainwashed store manager

Register or log in to remove

Quote:
Hey, you sell what you got. (he probably has an A64 @ home, but Intel wont let him sell them)


Unfortunately, that is too true. We know they have done that type of thing in the past.

Anyone that tells you that one is great and the other is crap is an idiot. You don't get such a large market share (>20%), by being crap.

Intel=reliable,fast,long lasting => profitable
AMD="unreliable, not very fast, defective,i'd be too cheap to sell this kind of chips"=>unprofitable
Yup most of them think like this. There is some truth in this. AMD had probs in the past,more probs than Intel.
Related ressources
Ask the community

AMD has had problems like that in the past, though the pretty distant (in the world of Moore's Law) past. The last few generations of AMDs have been excellent chips. People seem to forget that you can't think that way in this industry without hampering yourself.

Since socket A was released, I have built systems using multiple chips @ each speed, up to the A64 3700. I have built thousands of systems. I have never had one Amd chip fail (except by purchaser abuse), or had anyone compain about stability( except for customer abuses such as virus, or hsf clogged by dust).
If you, or some other idiot could not make an Amd chip work properly, it was probably not the chip's fault.

Typical. The store manager was lying to you outright.

Marketing FUD.

Ignore ignore ignore and avoid avoid avoid.

He is clearly trying to sell you something and just give a damn how much he has to lie to get you to buy Intel.

Quote:
Intel=reliable,fast,long lasting => profitable
AMD="unreliable, not very fast, defective,i'd be too cheap to sell this kind of chips"=>unprofitable
Yup most of them think like this. There is some truth in this. AMD had probs in the past,more probs than Intel.



Absolutely utterly false.

AMD and Intel are about the same quality and reliability wise.

AMD has a superior architecture.

Intel has superior marketing.

AMD did have issues... prior to the K7. My Slot A 750 works just fine (Still), same with all my XPs (1600+, 2300+, 2400+, and my current system).

Still, it's hard to shake a reputation, and far too many people are aware of the issues of AMD some 10 or so years ago.

Tru64

On the AMD side:

0. AMD 386DX-40 = awesome :D 

1. 486DX4-1xx = awesome :D 

2. K5 = :-( :cry: 

3. K6 = :-( :cry: 

4. K7 = very nice :D 

5. K8 = fantastic :D  :D 

A lot of people are still mad about the K5 and K6 and some early chipsets which were not very good at all.

-1. not gonna go there

0. 386DX = :-)

1. 386SX = :-(

2. 486DX / DX2 / DX4 / etc = :-)

3. 486SX = :-(

4. Pentium = :-| later versions :-)

5. Pentium Pro = :-)

6. Pentium II = :-| later versions :-)

7. Pentium III = :-) to :D 

8. Pentium 4 = :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :cry:  :-( :-( terrible!


This is the honest objective truth the way I see it. Both companies have messed up over the years.

Lemme ask you a question. Please dont BS, answer correctly.

If that guy would only sell AMD processors and would say those things about Intel, would you actually care and even post a topic on these forums?

Yoar, Northwood was clearly the best P4. It had only 20 pipeline stages and was built on 130nm, yet it reached a maximum clock speed of 3.46 GHz. Clock speeds could be much higher by now, if Intel didnt go for clock speeds (now thats some irony in the story). Too bad Ive never owned a Northwood :cry: 

Quote:
Lemme ask you a question. Please dont BS, answer correctly.

If that guy would only sell AMD processors and would say those things about Intel, would you actually care and even post a topic on these forums?


How about you? Would you post a topic?
Jus wondering.

I own an old 1.6ghz Willamette, and despite people saying they were a failure on release, I find it a very reliable little core and performed all my task for 4 years till I bought my AMD when I chose to upgrade. I wish I had gotten my hands on a 2.8ghz Northwood C before they seemed to fade out, I might have still stayed with Intel then :p .

How would you characterize someone like that?

Someone with a profit motive lying about a competitor's product.

Would you like it if someone forced you to buy AMD?

Should there only be one brand for everything?

Must we all be forced to buy $company Vehicles?

Should we all be required to purchase a $company operating system?

Should the consumer not have the right to choose?

Quote:
So the other day i went over to a local computer store, and as I walked in, I noticed that there were all Intel procs. and no AMD's! So i asked the guy whats up and he says he doesnt sell AMD because they are terrible and Intel dominates the market share and he once sold a few AMD procs but their customer service is terrible and all his customers that bought AMD were unsatisfied with their system and INtel's boot speeds are so much faster and overclocking is ridiculous and the AMD thing about performing faster/mhz is bullshit and Intel is really the processor king and how the X2 procs are terrible and the PDs are so much better and his prescott 3.6 (which by the way, is not hot at all!) can run any game at max settings with his 6800GS.

i was just dumbfounded at this guy.

sorry about this big jumbled paragraph.
oh my god dude same thing happenned with me do you live in brooklyn? and if so is the store called gs communications? oh my god if you do i gotta tell you the second time i argued with this guy a big vein popping from his forehead!

You are trying to expose his bias; I am trying to expose yours. Frankly I don’t know why anybody would be surprised to see a salesperson talk trash the competition, whoever it is.

Quote:
Intel=reliable,fast,long lasting => profitable
AMD="unreliable, not very fast, defective,i'd be too cheap to sell this kind of chips"=>unprofitable
Yup most of them think like this. There is some truth in this. AMD had probs in the past,more probs than Intel.

Be mindfull that i did mention that "most of them". I didn't insinuated anything,i just told a fact.

Quote:
Intel=reliable,fast,long lasting => profitable
AMD="unreliable, not very fast, defective,i'd be too cheap to sell this kind of chips"=>unprofitable
Yup most of them think like this. There is some truth in this. AMD had probs in the past,more probs than Intel.
actually dude when i used to ba an intel fanboy we thought like this <clearing throat>

intel= is the best omigod i love intel they have the p4 at 3.0 ghz omigod i gotta get it omigod i cant wait intel intel intel man the best proc ever!

amd=hmmph peice of crap they run slow and they suck at games even a celeron beats it.

now i think like this <clearing throat>

intel=overpriced overheated and underperforming except for the mobile chips they beat amd in battery consumption and apps performance.

amd=great desktops best dual core procs,best budget,take less power create less heat, and their server chips are good too but in mobile they arent that good.

Quote:
Intel=reliable,fast,long lasting => profitable
AMD="unreliable, not very fast, defective,i'd be too cheap to sell this kind of chips"=>unprofitable
Yup most of them think like this. There is some truth in this. AMD had probs in the past,more probs than Intel.
actually dude when i used to ba an intel fanboy we thought like this <clearing throat>

intel= is the best omigod i love intel they have the p4 at 3.0 ghz omigod i gotta get it omigod i cant wait intel intel intel man the best proc ever!

amd=hmmph peice of crap they run slow and they suck at games even a celeron beats it.

now i think like this <clearing throat>

intel=overpriced overheated and underperforming except for the mobile chips they beat amd in battery consumption and apps performance.

amd=great desktops best dual core procs,best budget,take less power create less heat, and their server chips are good too but in mobile they arent that good.


Well put :D  :trophy:

Quote:
What do you mean the K7 go beat almost everywhere? The K7 500-1000Mhz hands down beat the pentium 3, a 500mhz K7 beat a 650Mhz P3, but the K7 started losing ground with the P4
no on clock for clock the k7 and p3 were about equal.

Quote:
Intel=reliable,fast,long lasting => profitable
AMD="unreliable, not very fast, defective,i'd be too cheap to sell this kind of chips"=>unprofitable
Yup most of them think like this. There is some truth in this. AMD had probs in the past,more probs than Intel.
actually dude when i used to ba an intel fanboy we thought like this <clearing throat>

intel= is the best omigod i love intel they have the p4 at 3.0 ghz omigod i gotta get it omigod i cant wait intel intel intel man the best proc ever!

amd=hmmph peice of crap they run slow and they suck at games even a celeron beats it.

now i think like this <clearing throat>

intel=overpriced overheated and underperforming except for the mobile chips they beat amd in battery consumption and apps performance.

amd=great desktops best dual core procs,best budget,take less power create less heat, and their server chips are good too but in mobile they arent that good.


Well put :D  :trophy: thank you linus btw im downloading those programs you sent me :D 

Quote:
Intel=reliable,fast,long lasting => profitable
AMD="unreliable, not very fast, defective,i'd be too cheap to sell this kind of chips"=>unprofitable
Yup most of them think like this. There is some truth in this. AMD had probs in the past,more probs than Intel.
actually dude when i used to ba an intel fanboy we thought like this <clearing throat>

intel= is the best omigod i love intel they have the p4 at 3.0 ghz omigod i gotta get it omigod i cant wait intel intel intel man the best proc ever!

amd=hmmph peice of crap they run slow and they suck at games even a celeron beats it.

now i think like this <clearing throat>

intel=overpriced overheated and underperforming except for the mobile chips they beat amd in battery consumption and apps performance.

amd=great desktops best dual core procs,best budget,take less power create less heat, and their server chips are good too but in mobile they arent that good.

Most excellent description of the facts. Keep up the good work. DVD :trophy:

dude the pentium d bottle necks alot because it does'nt have an integrated memory controller it takes it 10 times longer than an x2 to talk to the other core! and that can slow dowwn preformance look at the charts geez i never thought argueing with an intel fanboy would be this hard(oh wait i did i used to be one)

Quote:
I dont care about theory (noone does). Reality shows that the EE 955 is the best dual core out there (until the EE 965 arrives).
excuse me how do you know its gonna be the 965 ee maybe it could be conroe ee? and leadhead the k7 and p3 were about even

Quote:
Intel=reliable,fast,long lasting => profitable
AMD="unreliable, not very fast, defective,i'd be too cheap to sell this kind of chips"=>unprofitable
Yup most of them think like this. There is some truth in this. AMD had probs in the past,more probs than Intel.
You're an idiot. I use both Intels and AMDs all of the time, and both are fine. Performance wise the difference is usually very small. My Pentium 4 Northwood at 3.5GHz can still run any game out; however my Athlons do the same.
People like him shouldn't be on this forum; they're uneducated on the subject, and really don't have anything important to add.

Quote:
Mr Ycon seems to be implying one would have to purchase a $1200 Intel EE 955 to beat a $300 AMD x2 or Opteron.

I was actually saying that you buy a 999$ EE 955 and kick some 1.031$ FX-60 behind.

Quote:
Mr Ycon seems to be implying one would have to purchase a $1200 Intel EE 955 to beat a $300 AMD x2 or Opteron.

I was actually saying that you buy a 999$ EE 955 and kick some 1.031$ FX-60 behind.


This review seems to indicate otherwise

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64-f...

The EE 955 is defeated by the FX-60 in virtually all benchmarks.

The EE 955 is defeated by the FX-60 even when the Intel CPU is overclocked to 4.26GHz!
Register or log in to remove
 
Ask the community
Read discussions in other CPUs categories
!