Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How AMD became a tech favorite over Intel

Last response: in CPUs
Share

What processer do you prefer?

Total: 133 votes (2 blank votes)

  • AMD
  • 80 %
  • Intel
  • 15 %
  • Other?
  • 7 %
April 12, 2006 4:19:47 AM

Ok guys I don't claim to know everything about processors but I do know about
business.
Like most Tech companies Intel has a timeline that they set for new products and technologies. With each new processor technology Intel sets a date when the product will be released. Intel doesn't want to make new technologies available immediately; they want to make the most money off of each new product. If Intel released a 64 bit processor several years ago then the P4 wouldn't have had the sales that it did.

Now AMD has been close to going out of business several times now, in an effort to survive AMD created a 64 bit processor and released it before Intel had planned releasing 64 bit processors. This gave AMD an upper hand and allowed them to get a large amount of income and start development of new technologies. Meanwhile Intel struggled to release their 64 bit processor (it's pretty bad).

AMD has long been making power-efficient and cooler processors. This wasn't a real need until recently (The P4 was HOT). Intel realized that not everyone wants a air conditioner attached to their PC and has thus started making power-efficient and cooler processors.

Basically AMD caught Intel with their pants down; AMD is managing to develop new processors at a rate that Intel couldn't squash them so far.

Intel is better prepared now and despite AMD's sales they barely made a scratch on Intel.

Intel is going to race with AMD and new products will be flying everywhere.
This is good for customers and PC manufacturers.

It still has to be seen on if AMD will endure. Intel has almost limitless resources and doesn't like AMD messing with their timeline.

Right now I like AMD's processors and I use them whenever possible, I don't like the idea of a monopoly in the PC business or any other business.

People need to use their brains and use whatever processor best suits the need at the time.

P.S. give a valid reason why you like AMD or Intel. Don't say something like
"AMD Rulz". Also don't use the term "fanner".

-Audrais
April 12, 2006 5:10:13 AM

threads like this should even be made in this forum. I know you're trying to create a positive argument where everyone can give their opinion, but this forum is absolutely full of ignorant posters (see MMM, 9-inch, etc.) that are going to nail you with short, angry, unintelligent answers as to why intel "sucks" and AMD is king.

people like AMD because they're the underdog. they make great chips, and intel makes good chips. AMD fans see intel as this big, stupid, greedy company that wants to screw them in any way that they can.

I think intel is a very capable company. the p4 was really only a great chip during the northwood, 800mhz fsb, HT days. other than that it was mediocre compared to what AMD had. but aside from that, look at what else they've accomplished: pentium 3, pentium m, core duo, technology innovation other than cpus like; agp, pci express, USB, chipsets, manufacturing processes, low power wireless cards, instructions sets, bla bla.

AMD is also a very capable company, but they've really only made a _great_ cpu once with the k8. don't get me wrong, it's been very good, as it's pretty much bested intel for 2 or 3 years, but it's still only 1 architecture. they've innovated with 64-bit and the on-die memory controller, but again that's it.

I'm probably more "impressed" with intel, because of what they've accomplished. this doesn't mean I don't like AMD, but I'm more willing to side with intel because of all the apple-like naive fans that bash them because they don't have as good a performing desktop chip right this second.
April 12, 2006 5:15:16 AM

Currently i go with the AMD cores because they are real reliable, cooler than the Intels and i like the fact that you can get a 64bit processor for a great price, it makes it completely worth it to me and i hope that they can saty up their and not lose their edge this time, and since they just released a 3.0GHz Opty it should help them with the people who just go on clock speed alone. Normally i just go with the processor that is better at that time and is cost effective for my solutions to comuter builds. i have since built a few computers with the 64bit based AMD cores and they all run like hot melted cheese on a very hot summer day, remember i live in Texas so summers have been know to get up to 120 degrees, thats hotter than my AMD Athlon 64 4000 runs under load. hehe
Related resources
April 12, 2006 5:15:44 AM

Quote:
threads like this should even be made in this forum. I know you're trying to create a positive argument where everyone can give their opinion, but this forum is absolutely full of ignorant posters (see MMM, 9-inch, etc.) that are going to nail you with short, angry, unintelligent answers as to why intel "sucks" and AMD is king.

people like AMD because they're the underdog. they make great chips, and intel makes good chips. AMD fans see intel as this big, stupid, greedy company that wants to screw them in any way that they can.

I think intel is a very capable company. the p4 was really only a great chip during the northwood, 800mhz fsb, HT days. other than that it was mediocre compared to what AMD had. but aside from that, look at what else they've accomplished: pentium 3, pentium m, core duo, technology innovation other than cpus like; agp, pci express, USB, chipsets, manufacturing processes, low power wireless cards, instructions sets, bla bla.

AMD is also a very capable company, but they've really only made a _great_ cpu once with the k8. don't get me wrong, it's been very good, as it's pretty much bested intel for 2 or 3 years, but it's still only 1 architecture. they've innovated with 64-bit and the on-die memory controller, but again that's it.

I'm probably more "impressed" with intel, because of what they've accomplished. this doesn't mean I don't like AMD, but I'm more willing to side with intel because of all the apple-like naive fans that bash them because they don't have as good a performing desktop chip right this second.


Yahhh Man! I'm Ignant! Woop!!

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
April 12, 2006 5:20:30 AM

Mike stop being an ass, what would Chuck Norris think of your comment???
yea exactly so stop. and remember one day when Chuck Norris was walking down the street, he got a bonner, there were no survivors. so maybe one of those people might be you when Chuck Norris walk by. now what do you have to say mike, huh????????????
April 12, 2006 5:32:22 AM

still you voted for AMD legenic? it's AMD 4 - 0 - 0

btw there's enough of intel boys around to, see ycon & crew.


I like AMD more then Intel because I had bad experiences with intel.

I jumped one of many intel future's without a future many of you didn't recall hence you still not considering this, but any long time pc user knows how the monopolistic company tries to force things that are not always in the good for the consumers. with me that happenes in the willamette/rambus era, seeing my hard eaned cash as a youngster go to such a "fiasco" hurt bad...

and see a few months later: ooh you bought a crappy i850 and a unseperateble expensive rambus kit for nothing, and if one of the rimms die on you you can forget it...

we (intel) will be offering sdram now like amd has been doing for our customers and not only that, but also a new socket 478 instead of the 423.

too bad for your money pal...

good call intel, your visions have a rep of doing this to the poor consumer, see slot processors, or even mmx! oh, don't forget paying multiple $1000s for a Intel 386 cpu because there was no competition, only to see falcon 3.0 needed a 33Mhz DX2 instead of a 25Mhz DX.

of course me & dad the unknowing consumers back then were BS in a sense (also our own fault for trusting too much...).

well now I realiose that for us consumers to win in the future, we need competition. just like ATI and Nvidia.

their war is good, not like Microsoft vs linux.. as you see there, the utterly big and monopoly for Microsoft has technological advance on a hold. only delays and NO innovation (dx10 4 years after dx9?, glass interface for fruits after years of developmen in vista?)

so basically I don't root for AMD.

I root for competition so we'll see advancements, innovation, and above all competitive pricing!

I don't want an uber expensive Intel product like Windows ME as only choice for years, hence why I support AMD to become strong and make the market for both Intel and AMD consumers a healthy choice.

conroe will only be here because of competition (-> AMD so even Intel diehards, be grateful, else we all would be running $2000 166MHz Pentium MMX'es now).


/rant 8)
April 12, 2006 5:37:35 AM

Quote:
still you voted for AMD legenic? it's AMD 4 - 0 - 0


actually I didn't vote at all.

people can vote without posting you know.
April 12, 2006 5:43:03 AM

man two companys with a massive amount of power in there hands
people struggle to back up there companys with lots of research and like Mad Mod Mike -he has the evidence to back up his statements

not like the other members of this forum who really shouldnt saying anything if they dont know a product

-reminds me of Pepsi vs Coca Cola
or Chevy vs Ford

they continue to make better and better products

i dont know much about market share but the way i see it
Both intel and AMD have there strongholds in the market

u got to see

alot of People dont know much about the emerging Technology in both the CPU companys , they run down to there Best Buy or Fry's wherever to get a computer

-to them a computer is a computer
and Intel has set people's thoughts in buying an Intel PC

i was like that -then i got into the tech community , on giving me advise n such

its a good post u made

-im only 17 and i see un-knowledged people wight how one company is better then the other , its dumb

many members of this forum already know that

=]

i am the uber_g
April 12, 2006 6:05:30 AM

Quote:
threads like this should even be made in this forum. I know you're trying to create a positive argument where everyone can give their opinion, but this forum is absolutely full of ignorant posters (see MMM, 9-inch, etc.) that are going to nail you with short, angry, unintelligent answers as to why intel "sucks" and AMD is king.


Step back a bit man, and think about what you did by singling out Mike and 9cm. I've seen Mike do a bit of name calling and maybe get a bit cantankerous at times, but if you spend time on forums long enough, you'll see enough flamage that you get sort of carbonized and, well, flame-resistant. So if you'd made some kind of factual critique, I could have accepted it. But to call him ignorant is an ignorant statement by you. He may be OPINIONATED and willing to mix it up, but so what? He is educated on many of these topics and I'm not afraid of someone being opinionated, even if I disagree. Diversity is a healthy thing. Sorry, but I haven't paid enough attention to know that much about 9cm other than most of his posts are immediatled followed by him being flamed by Action Man. Are those replies automated, AM? If not, you should, dude. This is a forum focused on speed and efficiency, so why manually post the same reply repeatedly?
April 12, 2006 6:13:50 AM

Quote:
still you voted for AMD legenic? it's AMD 4 - 0 - 0


actually I didn't vote at all.

people can vote without posting you know.


hey are you high?

if you're going to be sarcastic make sure you at least do it right:
"people can post without voting you know."

and FYI when I started the post none of the others after you had posted yet :roll:
April 12, 2006 6:14:58 AM

Quote:
Step back a bit man, and think about what you did by singling out Mike and 9cm. I've seen Mike do a bit of name calling and maybe get a bit cantankerous at times, but if you spend time on forums long enough, you'll see enough flamage that you get sort of carbonized and, well, flame-resistant. So if you'd made some kind of factual critique, I could have accepted it. But to call him ignorant is an ignorant statement by you. He may be OPINIONATED and willing to mix it up, but so what? He is educated on many of these topics and I'm not afraid of someone being opinionated, even if I disagree. Diversity is a healthy thing. Sorry, but I haven't paid enough attention to know that much about 9cm other than most of his posts are immediatled followed by him being flamed by Action Man. Are those replies automated, AM? If not, you should, dude. This is a forum focused on speed and efficiency, so why manually post the same reply repeatedly?


think of him what you may, but literally every post I've seen of his has just been him being a full out a**hole. go to any thread about conroe and see what I mean.
April 12, 2006 6:21:48 AM

9 posts since october 2005 and now 3 more just on MMM being mean and you calling him names because he gives his opinion in your precious Conroe treads?

be cool man and don't get your panties in a bunch after the cool 6 months lol


6 posts and then acting like this? pathetic
a b à CPUs
April 12, 2006 6:23:36 AM

who cares what brand it is aslong as its:

Fast
Cheap (or at the correct price or price:p erformance ratio)
Reliable
Cool enough to run on air (100w or less)
Compatible

Currently Intels there, BUT AMD does it better, where as within 6 months Intel will do it better so meh changes all the time, who cares bout favourites - my favourites are as above and thats also why we dont see Cyrix or anything in the market (or barly).
April 12, 2006 6:31:22 AM

Quote:
9 posts since october 2005 and now 3 more just on MMM being mean and you calling him names because he gives his opinion in your precious Conroe treads?

be cool man and don't get your panties in a bunch after the cool 6 months lol


6 posts and then acting like this? pathetic


holy man, settle down.

just because I have 9 posts doesn't mean I don't READ the forums. you can read every word here without posting you know.

and what's with your bad attempt at offending me with the "precious conroe threads" comment. nowhere have I even mentioned conroe, besides pointing out the threads about them as a good place to see MMM being "mean".

forget it. this thread isn't about MMM. this forum is way too good at veering off topic.
April 12, 2006 6:45:33 AM

wait a minute, I just read a few ago in anantech that who designed pci-express was NOT INTEL, but IBM , and it was microsoft who pushed intel to move to that technology since its more stable than regular PCI-express with shared bus.
April 12, 2006 7:02:29 AM

Quote:
think of him what you may, but literally every post I've seen of his has just been him being a full out a**hole. go to any thread about conroe and see what I mean.


Think what you may, but I've read some worthwhile posts by Mike, including:

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...

And, since you say "literally every post", here's another useful reply of his:

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...

Etc., etc. I'm not defending the times he flames, just the ABSOLUTENESS of your rant. You are either uninformed or you lack accuracy.
April 12, 2006 7:04:26 AM

I Pick other for they did not have Both. Here why. Amd and intel has Good and bad years. Which helps us in prices. If Amd or Intel seid let stop making cpus. Think of the prices of the CPU. Could it be
$2500 for the next gen Amd or Intel chip? Think about How long the upgrade would take?

1 Prices will go up?
2 How long the will the upgrade take? a year or two?
3 Remember Both Amd and Intel Need each other.
April 12, 2006 7:07:30 AM

lol @ legenic, 4 posts in one day after previously 6 posts in 6 months... that's what I mean, 4 posts just for attacking ppl like MMM/9cm and now me.

legenic, that's pathetic, but you probably won't ever get it. (and go get an "true 64bit" itanic) :p 







(btw, I'm just teasin ya, don't pop a vein, too many fanboys gone crazy about that ;)  )
April 12, 2006 7:17:34 AM

Quote:
think of him what you may, but literally every post I've seen of his has just been him being a full out a**hole. go to any thread about conroe and see what I mean.


Think what you may, but I've read some worthwhile posts by Mike, including:

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...

And, since you say "literally every post", here's another useful reply of his:

http://forumz.tomshardware.com/hardware/modules.php?nam...

Etc., etc. I'm not defending the times he flames, just the ABSOLUTENESS of your rant. You are either uninformed or you lack accuracy.

It's nice to know some people don't hate me ;) .

Yea, I know, I can be a @$$ sometimes, but of my 1,700 posts, excluding the 500 posts I posted to defend myself against the onslaught of Conrad Lovers, maybe 50 of them were flaming, and dare I say, also included some "useful" information :wink:.

~~Mad Mod Mike, pimpin' the world 1 rig at a time
April 12, 2006 7:37:48 AM

Hong Kong? Man, the air in that place can kill ya!
April 12, 2006 8:31:16 AM

i voted amd for one main reason i had a P4 1.6AOC@2.1gig when Unreal 2 came out my buddy of mine had a 1900+ stock and he ran circles around my setup i had a GF4400 and he had a GF4200 same amount of ram...he loaded faster and he was benching better than me...and since then intel hasn't given me a reason to go back

since that moment i have had an amd xp 2400+ A643200+ socket 745 and now A64 3700+ socket 939
April 12, 2006 9:12:24 AM

Well this just proves that potentually up to 70%+ of the 'advice' given here is biased towards someone.... I wonder who ?

So when people receive advice they should take that into consideration.

8)
April 12, 2006 9:53:39 AM

Hi guys,
This is my first post here... I've been with the computers since VM/VAX times... I had several computers myself, starting with a Sinclair ZX Spectrum...

I have owned 3 PC's until now First being a 486 SX then a PII 350 Now and Athlon XP 2500+

The mainboard I have now is an ASUS A7V "Classic" and after 6 years I am stilll able to use it... I have upgraded the HDD, graphics (First it was a TNT2 64, now ATI Radeon 9200 pro) upgraded the RAM... (Original 128 MB now 1 GB)

And it runs whatever I need to run... By the way, I'm a computer programmer who uses resource hungry tools... But At 1400 MHz my XP2500+ does well...

Since I bought this mainboard I forgot how many times Intel changed the specs of their motherboards... I'm planning to retire my old buddy by the end of this year (not because of performance issues - its USB controller is getting mad, external ports don't work anymore) only because parts have started failing...

So, I like AMD, just because of consistency... I'm not sure if I'll get back to Intel again or not... But I just dream about another system that can live such a long time...

Do you have any ideas on this?
April 12, 2006 11:53:27 AM

Wusy brings up a good point with Cyrix. How many of you remember the 486 days and had a Packard Bell or IBM machine that was so proprietary you just scream? With the competition we have grown as an industry. Intel may have been a driving force behind much of the hardware progress as far as CPU and math co-processor design, but also the competition from AMD PUSHED Intel to make better faster chips, and vise versa. We now have set standards, and still have innovation. Microsoft had its hands on the movement from 16bit to 32bit too. Windows98 was a progression from 16bit to 32bit.

I have to admit, I own a p4 w/ 512mb 32bit 1066 rambus ram, and I still currently use it; it still does the job that I built it to do, with few flaws and personally it was a good investment for me. (BTW I went with rambus after reading several articles from Tom's, and I still don't regret doing so just for the learning experience.) I've also got an Opty165, 1700+ Athlon, 700 Duron, 500 Celeron, etc...... The fact remains competition is good, drives up technology capabilities, and keeps prices competitive, and demands for innovation, all parts of a capitalistic society.
April 12, 2006 12:39:32 PM

Currently IM in teh AMD camp, I get my dualy 2moro.

That said Im not so blind to thinK AMD are the B'all and End'all.

Ive only been reading these forums a few days and I am already getting irrated with the "your a fanbot biatch!" comments. But I accept my daddy is harder then yours will always happens.

If you have gone out and spent money on somthing you want to think its the best. (coughps2vsXboxcough).

I will buy wha performs best at the time I am buying a computer, I have a loyalty towards amd because they have always perfomed beter for me, (my old athlon prior to hthis perfomed better then my P3 by the way). But if intel release a chip that the same proice and better performce then a amd equivilent I WILL buy it, Im not screwing myself over company loyalty

Quick Note: the axp 2500 runs at 1800mhz ish not 1500
April 12, 2006 12:52:57 PM

I've only built a few computers. I started with Intel because it was the most popular at the time (AMD was just a baby). I've never had a bad experience with Intel, so why switch?
a b à CPUs
April 12, 2006 1:02:19 PM

Quote:
who cares what brand it is aslong as its:
Fast
Cheap (or at the correct price or price:p erformance ratio)
Reliable
Cool enough to run on air (100w or less)
Compatible


I hear that! What else could an enthusiast want in any component but more so a proc. These are the exact reasons why I checked out and started using AMD back with the K5 & K6.

I give props to Intel for leading the industry but really have to give it up to AMD for being a better competitor and beating Intel at their own game.

But I'd have to say my main reason for preferring AMD the past few years has been because of compatibility and price. I got really disgusted with Intel after releasing the Skt423 P4's, wtf was up with that, shame too because I thought Rambus was a nice technology. Not having to get a new mobo or being forced to upgrade (almost) my whole machine every time I wanted something different. The Socket A Athlons and DDR have proven to me to be a cheaper and more reliable solution than Intel. AMD seems to have repeated that success with Skt939.
April 12, 2006 1:36:24 PM

I remember when I was still teching. Everyone was an Intel fan. The first Athlons came and we hated them. Everyone bought them cause they were fast and cheap. We had so many problems with them. Crashes, bugs, overheating. People were constantly burning them up and bringing them back. I had a brick thrown through my storefront window at 2 in the morning over a processor I wouldnt take back cause the guy installed his fan improperly. Forgot to take the plastic stick on off of the thermal pad on the bottom of the heatsink. I told him the directions were right on the box. After that we offered free pinning and mounting of cpu's with mobo, cpu, fan purchase. Cut down on a lot of returns. Anyways when AMD beat Intel to 1ghz it was all but over for Intel. They gained some market but are losing big time now. Too bad this almighty "Conroe" hadnt come out 6 months ago. I hope it does prove to be all that, cause competition is good for us, the consumer. Just remember how much they hyped Prescott!! That turned out to be an expensive space heater.
April 12, 2006 2:19:29 PM

AMD is the best cpu for gamers. :twisted:
April 12, 2006 3:28:28 PM

here's my 2 cents on this tópic, i'm a intel user, always used intel but i have to admit that the AMD Processors that i messed and installed are quite good chips and very impressive in terms of silence and TDP, they are maybe better chips that the intel ones but everybody only talks about the p4 and how about the xeons and the ithanium chips , intel is not only the mobile chips and the p4 chips, i think whe only have to gain on this infamous war of the silicon, beeter chips cheaper chips better architecthure only positive things let se about the new conroe and the Amd counter answer, i'm thinking about changing my computer next year then i will weight the 2 manufactures propositions.
April 12, 2006 3:52:48 PM

Quote:
Hi guys,
This is my first post here... I've been with the computers since VM/VAX times... I had several computers myself, starting with a Sinclair ZX Spectrum...

I have owned 3 PC's until now First being a 486 SX then a PII 350 Now and Athlon XP 2500+

The mainboard I have now is an ASUS A7V "Classic" and after 6 years I am stilll able to use it... I have upgraded the HDD, graphics (First it was a TNT2 64, now ATI Radeon 9200 pro) upgraded the RAM... (Original 128 MB now 1 GB)

And it runs whatever I need to run... By the way, I'm a computer programmer who uses resource hungry tools... But At 1400 MHz my XP2500+ does well...

Since I bought this mainboard I forgot how many times Intel changed the specs of their motherboards... I'm planning to retire my old buddy by the end of this year (not because of performance issues - its USB controller is getting mad, external ports don't work anymore) only because parts have started failing...

So, I like AMD, just because of consistency... I'm not sure if I'll get back to Intel again or not... But I just dream about another system that can live such a long time...

Do you have any ideas on this?


I agree with you there. AMD had mad wild success with Socket A and stuck with it for quite a while. Then the next major socket, 939. Socket 939 had a pretty decent run and it looks like it's about over though.

In June Socket AM2 will come out. I suspect socket AM2 won't last as long as Socket A or even 939, but I recommend you use AM2 for your next machine (assuming you stick with AMD).

Someone said that the poll indicates that 70+% of the members here are "biased" towards AMD. Perhaps that is because 70+% people find that AMD makes better products for their purposes? Not just because a fanatical purchases? All of the system builders I know use AMD whenever possible.
April 12, 2006 4:51:20 PM

Quote:
who cares what brand it is aslong as its:

Fast
Cheap (or at the correct price or price:p erformance ratio)
Reliable
Cool enough to run on air (100w or less)
Compatible

Currently Intels there, BUT AMD does it better, where as within 6 months Intel will do it better so meh changes all the time, who cares bout favourites - my favourites are as above and thats also why we dont see Cyrix or anything in the market (or barly).


My personal opinion is exactly the above.

I started with an Intel 386SX, then an AMD 386, followed by Intel 486, Cyrix P166+, AMD K5, Intel Pentium, Intel Pentium III and now an Intel Pentium 4 530. My feeling is that if i had to bought now a new processor maybe i'd go for an AMD (less heat, good OC capabilities, good performance, a bit cheaper). But then maybe i say so because i have now an Intel...

Just my 2 cents...
.- Luis Duarte
April 12, 2006 5:06:50 PM

Quote:
If Intel released a 64 bit processor several years ago then the P4 wouldn't have had the sales that it did.
-Audrais


One other poster alluded to this, however, I'll empahsize the point. Intel did release a 64-bit processor. In fact, it is still available. It is called the Itanium. There also is a second-generation version of this processor available called the Itanium 2. Itanium was available some time before AMD's 64-bit processors. There was one problem that, IMHO, prevented wide marketplace acceptance. Itanium had little, if any, backward compatiblity with IA32 processors meaning that if you purchased one of these 64-bit processors, you also had to replace all of your existing software with software compiled specifically for Itaniums. :roll:

These processors were a complete marketing flop and were dubbed "Itanic" for this reason.

AMD (smartly, IMHO) decided that forcing everyone to upgrade their existing software was not a viable path forward and implemented a 64-bit architecture that was completely backward compatible to the 32-bit realm by including a 32-bit hardware core on the chip along with the 64-bit core(s). In fact, AMD64 processors will even run MS-DOS. 8O That meant that anyone wanting an AMD64 processor did not have to spend lots of money on software and hardware to move into the 64-bit realm. All their existing 32-bit software and any remaining 16-bit software would run on the AMD64 platform.

You can bet that Intel spent lots of bucks on Itanic and Itanic 2, I'd be surprised if they ever break even on Itanic development efforts from Itanic sales. I would not be surprised if Intel execs would privately and off-the-record admit that they wished that they had taken the completely-backward-compatible-with-32-bit-processors-and-software tack first in releasing a 64-bit processor - before AMD - as Intel has had to accept the AMD64 world and, in fact, embraced it by releasing EMT64 processors. This was probably a very difficult pill to swallow for Intel as "Chipzilla" had to admit defeat to AMD in doing so.

So, from my techie, hardware standpoint, it was Intel's (maybe with input from software companies :?: :twisted: ) idiotic decision to obsolete the 32-bit world with one fell swoop in Itanic that gave AMD the current leap that it is enjoying.

On the downside, as I see it, the Intel fiasco had made AMD the premium brand at a premium price :evil:  . I'd be up to X2s by now if it were not for the premium price. :( 
April 12, 2006 5:18:21 PM

Quote:
threads like this should even be made in this forum. I know you're trying to create a positive argument where everyone can give their opinion, but this forum is absolutely full of ignorant posters (see MMM, 9-inch, etc.) that are going to nail you with short, angry, unintelligent answers as to why intel "sucks" and AMD is king.


Step back a bit man, and think about what you did by singling out Mike and 9cm. I've seen Mike do a bit of name calling and maybe get a bit cantankerous at times, but if you spend time on forums long enough, you'll see enough flamage that you get sort of carbonized and, well, flame-resistant. So if you'd made some kind of factual critique, I could have accepted it. But to call him ignorant is an ignorant statement by you. He may be OPINIONATED and willing to mix it up, but so what? He is educated on many of these topics and I'm not afraid of someone being opinionated, even if I disagree. Diversity is a healthy thing. Sorry, but I haven't paid enough attention to know that much about 9cm other than most of his posts are immediatled followed by him being flamed by Action Man. Are those replies automated, AM? If not, you should, dude. This is a forum focused on speed and efficiency, so why manually post the same reply repeatedly?

I do tend to agree with you on this. I know MMM and 9-inch aren't bad guys. They're just like anyone else that wants to share wealth of information. The problem is, as soon as someone comes up with anything to debate what was said, they usually immediately start flaming even while the other person has not said anything.

I guess it's all a respect thing. If MMM showed more respect towards everybody in here, it wouldn't be so bad or just simply answer and move on. I'm not afraid to admit at all that I haven't learned something from MMMs posts in fact if anything, he's the one that really changed my mind in the way I think of AMD and now, i'm using them in all of my machines.

MMM, your a decent human being with good knowledge. Just take a chill pill dude! :wink:
April 12, 2006 5:45:40 PM

The last time my AMD at the hottest is 80C, but thats when I forgot to put in my heatsink.
April 12, 2006 8:53:30 PM

Quote:
wait a minute, I just read a few ago in anantech that who designed pci-express was NOT INTEL, but IBM , and it was microsoft who pushed intel to move to that technology since its more stable than regular PCI-express with shared bus.


Dude, I am sorry I do not know what you are referring to :)  .... I do not recall making a PCI-Express comment on this thread or any other :) 


maybe you're preety blind, read the comments of the rest of the thread..
one guy mentioned and gave intel the ownership of things they didnt created.
April 12, 2006 8:58:17 PM

lolz...what does "others" mean? :D 
VIA? :twisted:
April 12, 2006 9:09:24 PM

Some stuff I forgot to mention:

Compitition and new tech is a really good thing in some respects but you also have to consider how this affects the value of older products.

With every new chip the price of the older chip drops. This will mean your chip may be outdated in less than a month and will cost 1/2 what you payed for it.

New tech cuts the useable lifetime of a PC.

You have to realize the actual AMD maketshare compared to Intel. AMD didn't hurt Intel that bad. Intel was the only decent processer for a long time (mainly PI and after). Intel has a HUGE buffer.

Also you have to realize the main sales for PCs. PC manufactuers like Dell and HP have long term contracts with Intel and this is where most processer sales are from. Dell doesn't use AMD processers (This could change with Dellianware) but HP uses them on their better models.


Processers could completely change with the new carbon nanotube chips. These chips use carbon nanochips insted of silicon. Thiese processers will be cool, fast and small. This is cutting-edge stuff so it could be a decade before we see any useable products.


P.S. Try and avoid off-topic comments, even if you are defending someone. Also try to write at least a paragraph on why you like your favorite brand.

P.S.S. "Ohers" refers to smaller processer brands. Until recently MACs used PowerPC chips.
April 12, 2006 10:40:20 PM

I've been reading on this forum for some time but did not register. I only registered to reply to this thread.

My first computer was a Macintosh, but I switched to the IBM/Intel world because of limited software available for the Mac and the high price. I started on the 486, which was a good machine in its day and I used Intel processors until last year.

I did my first build last year and switched to the AMD (A64 2800+). I must say I am impressed with the machine that I built and it has only had stability issues when I tried to install an old version of Diablo II.

I am planning on building another machine this year based on socket 939 and a dual processor. The computers I buy/build are for gaming primarily with some business components; I aim for last year's bleeding edge technology so that I am not paying through the nose for a decent system.

As for the Intel vs AMD debate. AMD gets my vote today, but that doesn't mean it will get my vote in six months. No need to argue about processors that are not yet available. When they are mass produced, they will be put through the ringer and we will see who ends up on top.

I am just happy there is no Intel monopoly; competition is good for the consumer. The bleeding edge technology of today can be purchased for the same price as the mediocre machine could be purchased five years ago.
April 12, 2006 11:37:33 PM

Quote:
threads like this should even be made in this forum. I know you're trying to create a positive argument where everyone can give their opinion, but this forum is absolutely full of ignorant posters (see MMM, 9-inch, etc.) that are going to nail you with short, angry, unintelligent answers as to why intel "sucks" and AMD is king.


Step back a bit man, and think about what you did by singling out Mike and 9cm. I've seen Mike do a bit of name calling and maybe get a bit cantankerous at times, but if you spend time on forums long enough, you'll see enough flamage that you get sort of carbonized and, well, flame-resistant. So if you'd made some kind of factual critique, I could have accepted it. But to call him ignorant is an ignorant statement by you. He may be OPINIONATED and willing to mix it up, but so what? He is educated on many of these topics and I'm not afraid of someone being opinionated, even if I disagree. Diversity is a healthy thing. Sorry, but I haven't paid enough attention to know that much about 9cm other than most of his posts are immediatled followed by him being flamed by Action Man. Are those replies automated, AM? If not, you should, dude. This is a forum focused on speed and efficiency, so why manually post the same reply repeatedly?

I do tend to agree with you on this. I know MMM and 9-inch aren't bad guys. They're just like anyone else that wants to share wealth of information. The problem is, as soon as someone comes up with anything to debate what was said, they usually immediately start flaming even while the other person has not said anything.

I guess it's all a respect thing. If MMM showed more respect towards everybody in here, it wouldn't be so bad or just simply answer and move on. I'm not afraid to admit at all that I haven't learned something from MMMs posts in fact if anything, he's the one that really changed my mind in the way I think of AMD and now, i'm using them in all of my machines.

MMM, your a decent human being with good knowledge. Just take a chill pill dude! :wink:

yes but... if you have converted entirely to MMM I feel for you. He's right about the efficiency of current AMD processors. Intel is good for overclocking tho, and you know that too ;) , but I concede that in the war for speed at stock, AMD wins for now. He claims that Conroe will never succeed because of some logical calculations he makes... however, he fails to realize that Intel is planning on making changes to the bus system, and even if Conroe comes out with the FSB at first, in teh future, there are going to be improvements. It's kinda like how the K8's came out with DDR RAM, in the future, AMD adds on DDR2. Same thing will happen with teh FSB I believe, then we will have eliminated that bottleneck, and we will see some real performance from Intel's processors. Even then, there are some benchmarks that seem to indicate that even with a bottlenecked FSB Conroe is performing fabulously... (this is like watching the trailer to a movie, we will not know how good the movie is until we actually get to see it, we have just got a taste of Conroe). Who said that Conroe is gonna be cripped with the same kind of FSB we have now? How does he know that it's gonna have such and such a problem? He can't see the future any better than I can.

I voted for Intel... and I'm really glad for the competition and the great processors AMD makes, but I would not buy from them now. They have switched places, and are now the most expensive for the performance. And even if AM2 were cheaper than Conroe, I would buy Conroe because AM2 doesn't hold much in the way of an upgrade, or in performance. However, time will tell. I have to see the actual benchmarks of AM2 as opposed to a Conroe. :) 

returning to MMM for a moment, I did not appreciate his flaming of me for stating what I believed about Conroe. Nor would he post any facts to back up his posts, as he has other times, and I really respect some of the information he has shared (yes even against Intel) because they were quite valid.
April 13, 2006 2:09:59 AM

Quote:
yes but... if you have converted entirely to MMM I feel for you.


Jesus, what is this "converted" crap? My comments have been fairly specific. I'm not slapping him on the back telling him to flame on, OK? I'm just saying that calling him an idiot or saying he hasn't contributed to the forum is complete and utter BS. Like most aspects of life, Mike has more than one way. Then again, flames don't bother me much, even if they are directed my way. I think of them as a reality check, even if they are misdirected or uninformed. The anonimity of the Internet and all that.

Quote:
returning to MMM for a moment, I did not appreciate his flaming of me for stating what I believed about Conroe. Nor would he post any facts to back up his posts, as he has other times, and I really respect some of the information he has shared (yes even against Intel) because they were quite valid.


Well, it does get hot in the oven. One can either get out of the kitchen or put on a flameproof jumpsuit. Me, I just don't care much as long as you leave my mother out of it.

No mothers, man. (who said that?)
April 13, 2006 2:12:39 AM

Yeah I know what you mean man. I've been just sorta sittin back and watching the show here lately because I find it rather sickening and I don't agree with anyone flaming anyone. I mean, once or twice maybe I can see it but, it just keeps going and going and gets about as old as an old man trying to get an erection.

Like I said, I know those guys have good info to share just like anyone else. Just lay off the flames.
April 13, 2006 2:16:44 AM

Quote:
Yeah I know what you mean man. I've been just sorta sittin back and watching the show here lately because I find it rather sickening and I don't agree with anyone flaming anyone. I mean, once or twice maybe I can see it but, it just keeps going and going and gets about as old as an old man trying to get an erection.

Like I said, I know those guys have good info to share just like anyone else. Just lay off the flames.


btw Clueless I was talking to Luminaris, but thanks for your comments :) 

Luminaris: yeah same here, I'm starting to avoid hitting the reply button to even add useful information. All it will accomplish is starting another flamewar.
April 13, 2006 3:19:20 AM

Quote:
I root for competition so we'll see advancements, innovation, and above all competitive pricing!

I don't want an uber expensive Intel product like Windows ME as only choice for years, hence why I support AMD to become strong and make the market for both Intel and AMD consumers a healthy choice.

conroe will only be here because of competition (-> AMD so even Intel diehards, be grateful, else we all would be running $2000 166MHz Pentium MMX'es now).


/rant 8)


Well said.
:wink:
April 13, 2006 3:38:50 AM

I basically am going with AMD for the moment, since my X2 has brought with it nothing but awesomeness. Its cool, fast, and absolutely bombs it through games. This doesn't mean I hate Intel, I only hate P4's. They had their good days with Northwood, I had one for my last pc, but then came along Prescott. What was Intel thinking. I just hope they manage to atone for that sinful creation with the coming of Conroe.
April 13, 2006 3:58:38 AM

Quote:
Quote:


maybe you're preety blind, read the comments of the rest of the thread..
one guy mentioned and gave intel the ownership of things they didnt created.
And I still cannot find the reference you speak of I looked through the thread but still could not see where I made this statement.

I saw it once... I doubt I could find it again. Anyways, it's insignificant. :) 
April 13, 2006 4:20:50 AM

Quote:
I basically am going with AMD for the moment, since my X2 has brought with it nothing but awesomeness. Its cool, fast, and absolutely bombs it through games. This doesn't mean I hate Intel, I only hate P4's. They had their good days with Northwood, I had one for my last pc, but then came along Prescott. What was Intel thinking. I just hope they manage to atone for that sinful creation with the coming of Conroe.


No kidding, a collosal mistake of gargantuan proportions Prescott was....

Looking at a PC with a Prescott inside it kinda brings a tear to my eyes, because of all that potential being frittered away in the form of heat... and lots of it... :cry: 
April 13, 2006 4:36:15 AM

Quote:

Said it before and will say it again neither Intel nor AMD can beat the physics :) 


Physics rules all... with an iron fist of course! :twisted:
April 13, 2006 8:46:54 PM

Quote:
Quote:


maybe you're preety blind, read the comments of the rest of the thread..
one guy mentioned and gave intel the ownership of things they didnt created.
And I still cannot find the reference you speak of I looked through the thread but still could not see where I made this statement.

I saw it once... I doubt I could find it again. Anyways, it's insignificant. :) 

Yeah, I remember writing up something going through the list of innovations of each company, I did not recall putting the PCI reference it, though I can understand that I did as I associated the implementation of PCI-Express with Intel. Anyway, I want to be fair and if I am incorrect I am big enough to admit it and correct the mistake.

Jack

you didn't say it,... I saw the post that what's his face was refering to, though. You never said anything about PCI Express being made by Intel at first. It was somebody else, and when you replied, he said you were dumb, because you failed to see you hadn't said it, and that he wasn't talking about you... I dunno :lol: 

anyways, like I said, no big deal ;) 
April 17, 2006 2:45:57 AM

I work in the industry, and I happen to know that PCI-Express began life inside Intel as a technology called 3GIO, later also called HSIIO. This was later turned over to the PCI-SIG in the form of PCI-Express by Intel. Intel has a strong track record of inventing new technologies and handing them over to industry consortiums, in the interest of advancing the state of the art (thereby growing the market and creating more demand for its CPU's). This happened with the original PCI bus, AGP, USB, USB2.0, and now PCI-Express. I know there will be people challenging these points, and have tried to find some web link detailing the origin of PCI-Express, but have been unsuccessful. I guess Intel is serious about really making this "everybody's" bus, and has disassociated themselves from taking any credit for its inception. I've seen it suggested in this thread that IBM invented PCI-Express. IBM is merely one of the more prominent members of the PCI-SIG, which includes hundreds of other companies. I am absolutely sure that if anyone succeeds in finding a document crediting a single "company X" with the creation of PCI-Express, that company will turn out to be Intel. I am not talking about blogs, but more official documents, such as on the PCI-SIG site. If anyone is old enough to have been tinkering with PC's in the early 90's, they will also recall very clearly that Intel did in fact invent the original PCI, and its main competitor was the EISA bus. And there was a firestorm debate at the time over adopting a technology invented by "evil, greedy Intel" over an IEEE standard like the EISA bus. PCI was deemed technically superior, but backwards-incompatible with the ISA bus and more expensive to implement. There was at that time, no doubt in anyone's minds that PCI was an Intel-created technology. That is why I find it disturbing that now it is politically incorrect to attribute anything good to Intel, and history is being rewritten. I am sorry that I am talking about two separate things, but someone in this thread did also claim that Intel did not invent PCI.
!