Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD SUCKS

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 2, 2003 1:40:56 AM

I'll be the first to post in this Flaming Thread. The article clearly states they are following intel. So if AMD sucks then so must Intel.

I'm a proud Athlon XP owner. So if you don't like them don't buy em. Just STFU with the slander, I hope a mod closes this sad ass Thread.

I'm shouldn't even have written anything to this! I feel like I just lost some of my intelligence by even reading this.

One more thing why don't u give us some specs on your rig!
April 2, 2003 6:44:11 AM

Shouldn't posts like this be deleted?

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
Related resources
April 2, 2003 7:12:38 AM

Lol! Dude, you need to take your Prozac. AMD processors are fine. And no, they don't commonly melt and burn up, and they aren't particularly noisy. Newer XP's run cooler than newer P4s. And, by the way...AMD processors run on REAL mhz too! And 1 AMD mhz is better than 1 P4 mhz. Educate yourself, man! Yes, Intels are probably a tiny bit faster overall, but there is actually very little difference between the two.


<-----Insert witty sig line here.
April 2, 2003 7:18:45 AM

um, dude are you ok? oh no wait your just an uninformed Idiot =)


mhz dont mean everything.. an althon can complete more in one clock cycle than a P4 can. why am i explaining this?

actually... when i read this thread.. almost seems sarcastic, like he is an AMD fan TRYING to get a anti Intel flamewar going o.O

conspriacies abound!
April 2, 2003 7:18:45 AM

um, dude are you ok? oh no wait your just an uninformed Idiot =)


mhz dont mean everything.. an althon can complete more in one clock cycle than a P4 can. why am i explaining this?

actually... when i read this thread.. almost seems sarcastic, like he is an AMD fan TRYING to get a anti Intel flamewar going o.O

conspriacies abound!
April 2, 2003 7:25:04 AM

phial:

I saw your post was in reply to me, and I almost started crying. Then I decided you actually are replying to the guy who started the thread. :smile:


<-----Insert witty sig line here.
April 2, 2003 11:10:54 AM

Figwit is evil!

<font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS</font color=blue> <font color=red>AMERICA</font color=red>
April 2, 2003 11:24:46 AM

Well AMD are a little behind in the cpu race at the moment but their cpu's can almost equal the same speed as Intel's cpu's with a much cheaper price tag even when the price rise happens cause Intel cpu's are on the rise too.
April 2, 2003 11:50:36 AM

LOL, Hey DH should we kinda, tell 'em already?
Man the forum really is still sensitive.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 2, 2003 1:18:13 PM

Quote:
LOL, Hey DH should we kinda, tell 'em already?

Let me go out on a limb here.... FigWit is a non-existent person, formed out of an alliance between Dhlucke and Eden - bent on spreading discord and confusion throughtout THGC, so they can grab power in the confusion! :smile:

It's a conspiracy... or an April fools scam... Or it might be an idiot I suppose....



---
:smile: :tongue: :smile:
April 2, 2003 1:46:56 PM

In the imortal words of the human torch...."FLAME ON!" Let the torching begin...muahahahaha

Any man can withstand adversity...The true test of character is to give a man power <i>Abraham Lincoln</i>
April 2, 2003 2:41:49 PM

Its another nostalgic attempt to create a flame war that many have admitted to missing in the 'other' section. I thought they wanted to get rid of flame wars? Bum JCRules was talking the other day of how he wanted to see some more... strange eh? But still funny :smile:

<A HREF="http://service.futuremark.com/compare?2k1=5467618 " target="_new">Almost Breaking 12k!!</A>
April 2, 2003 5:58:31 PM

All I know is that Figwit is evil!

Lhgpoobaa is figwit as far as I can tell.

<font color=red>GOD</font color=red> <font color=blue>BLESS</font color=blue> <font color=red>AMERICA</font color=red>
April 2, 2003 5:58:52 PM

as much as i hate to admit, i miss amdmeltdowns posts. and for all you suckers that replyed very angrily sticking up for amd, it was a JOKE, damn people, get laid or somthing.

my computer is so fast, it completes an endless loop in less than 4 seconds!
April 2, 2003 6:12:26 PM

why amd cost cheaper when amd can run as fast as pIV ?

thanks
April 2, 2003 8:02:07 PM

ummm...people...

<i><b>CHECK THE POST DATE!</b></i> :wink:

(i'd say ibtl, but hardly anyone mods here.)

<i>I can love my fellow man...but I'm damned if I'll love yours.</i>
April 2, 2003 8:31:00 PM

Problem is, Figwit writes so much cleaner than LHG's grammar and syntax!

Who is Figwit, dum dum dum!


--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 2, 2003 8:37:34 PM

Quote:
Who is Figwit, dum dum dum!

Iron Butterfly. Or is that iRon Flutterby...

<font color=blue><pre>If you don't give me accurate and complete system specs
then I can't give you an accurate and complete answer.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 2, 2003 9:40:23 PM

I can't concurr. AMD processors are fine. They don't burn up, they aren't noisy, they are still cheaper then intel and perform better as well. I used to be "intel-only" until the AMD Athlon XPs came out. I'm grateful to AMD for the competition and the benefits of the reduced costs to me with much more power.

Anyone that thinks intel is cheaper, faster, and quieter is dillusional.
April 2, 2003 10:02:03 PM

Actually the price of the CPU itself is about the same, at least not a big enough difference. But when you account in the mobos/RAMs AMD is cheaper.

About speed, I thought the last test on THG show the 3.06Ghz is as fast as if not faster than the fastest Barton.
a c 80 à CPUs
April 2, 2003 10:26:05 PM

Thats a Figwit of your imaginations!

<b><font color=purple>Details, Details, Its all in the Details, If you need help, Don't leave out the Details.</font color=purple></b>
April 3, 2003 2:00:28 PM

OH MAN! It's been a while since I laughed so hard at a FIGWIT of the imagination!!!!!!!

<font color=blue> Computer fans are really cooling fans for the user. When they run, the user is cool, but whenever they break, the user starts sweating!! </font color=blue>
April 3, 2003 3:40:34 PM

wow, talk about a flame war starter -_-, well i just finished modding my fans on my tbredb, i've got it running at 2.25ghz (2800+ which runs about the same as a 2.8ghz P4) with the cpu fan running i'd say about 3,000 rpm's, case fans going about 1500 rpm's, loudest thing in the case is my Allied PSU and my radeon 9700 pro fan. So loud can be avoided. Burning up at a high 51*C full load. I think i can deal with the high temp, low sound volume, and fast and flawless gameplay ^_^

"What kind of idiot are you?"
"I don't know, what kinds are there?"
April 3, 2003 7:27:48 PM

No you guys are wrong, AMD sux, i mean look at my crap 1700xp, lol seriously though... it runs all new games flawlessly with a good 3d card, even with 4x anti and 4x ani enabled. Even splinter cell never slows down :)  This has to be my best cpu purchase ever, i mean its lasted me 14 months and probably would be ok till end of year. Yeah it runs hot, its a palamino core, runs in the 50's but has always been super stable for me. I recently undervolted it to 1.675 volts and it idles in the 40's now while being just as stable.

P.S i hate uneducated ppl making stupid threads like this one...
April 3, 2003 7:46:01 PM

It's funny.

You can tell people flat out that it's a completely bogus user making a completely bogus post for the sole purpose of starting a silly flame war, and yet people <i>still</i> take the tainted bait like it was sweet sweet candy.

Gee.

<font color=blue><pre>If you don't give me accurate and complete system specs
then I can't give you an accurate and complete answer.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 3, 2003 7:54:08 PM

In the spirit of this whole silly thread, I add the following:

<b><font color=red>COMPUTERS SUCK!!!!!!!

AND ANYONE WHO BUYS ONE IS A DUMB IDIOTIC MORONIC STUPID-HEAD!!!!!!</font color=red>

If you want to write something, a pencil and paper works just as well. For the daring folk who like colors, they even make both colored pens and pencils! So anyone who buys a computer to write stuff is a f'ing idiot!

If you want to research stuff, try going to your local library. They're bound to either have or be able to get a book on whatever topic you need to know about. That whole internet thing is just so over-rated. And you can still send mail through the post office. Plus there are telephones. So email is just totally worthless! Anyone who buys a computer to use the internet is just a sucker wasting their money!!!

And computers just waste electricity <i>and</i> put out heat, which forces you to turn your AC up and costs even MORE money! Plus they keep requiring maintanance like cleaning and dusting and all that crap. And that's when it's <i>not</i> just plain breaking down with a hard drive crash!

So computers just plain suck because they waste money and you can do anything you want without one just as well if not better. All you computer geeks are just stupid nerds wasting your money! :-p</b>

<font color=blue><pre>If you don't give me accurate and complete system specs
then I can't give you an accurate and complete answer.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 3, 2003 7:54:18 PM

Yeah, even when you TOLD them it's a joke!

Oy!

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 3, 2003 7:59:59 PM

Quote:
Yeah, even when you TOLD them it's a joke!

Oy!

He he he. It's kind of funny, really. :) 

<font color=red>></font color=red><font color=black>:</font color=black><font color=green>)/\/\/\-</font color=green> Uh oh, look out for the deadly snake! It can jump off of the screen and bite you, you know. Haven't you ever heard of computer venoms? They're just like a computer virus, only ten times worse! IEEEEEE!!!!! (And firewire even.)

<font color=blue><pre>If you don't give me accurate and complete system specs
then I can't give you an accurate and complete answer.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 4, 2003 2:13:44 PM

April fools or not, AMD really rules because:
*severly edited*

1) AMD CPUs don't "start to smoke" unless you have a mainboard not supporting the thermal diode.

2) AMD platforms are mostly cheaper.

3) AMD CPUs are, based on my experience more overclockable.

4) AMD Athlon XP CPUs have a higher temp threshold than P4's.

5) AMD seems to use more honorable marketing strategies.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by sabbath1 on 04/09/03 08:56 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 4, 2003 4:07:38 PM

Figwit,

You dumb, uninformed, sorry excuse for a non-entity!

OK! That was my flame.

To everyone who wrote to this POST and took it seriously well, only thing I can say is DUMB!!!

Hope y'all had fun DUMMIES. :o P

<font color=blue><b>VAGABOND</b><font color=blue>

<b><font color=blue>veni,vidi, and ended up in THGC<font color=blue></b>
April 4, 2003 4:39:14 PM

Quote:
April fools or not, AMD really rules because:

Are you serious?

Quote:
1) AMD CPUs don't "start to smoke" unless you have a mainboard not supporting the thermal diode.

And Intel CPUs don't "start to smoke" <i>EVER</i>. So Intel:1, AMD:0.

Quote:
2) AMD platforms are cheaper.

Not true anymore. The processor costs are virtually identical now. AMD dual-channel DDR motherboards are cheaper than Intel DC-DDR mobos, but at the same time Intel DC-DDR mobos only need PC2100 to rock, but AMD needs PC2700 for the 333MHz FSB Athlons to rock. The price difference in RAM thus negates the price difference in mobos. So in the end, they're really about the same.

The only two places where AMD really has any pricing advantage is rock-bottom performance crap parts, and extreme high-end parts. (Where, by the way, AMD can't even count since their performance isn't competetive here.) But hey, just to be nice I'll actually give you this one anyway, even if it's much more fiction than fact these days. So Intel:1, AMD:1.

Quote:
3) AMD CPUs are more overclockable.

I don't know where you get this idea from. Have you ever heard of the P4A 1.6GHz and 1.8GHz? On top of that, any of the C stepping Northwood P4s overclock amazingly well. AMD has to 'great' OCers, the Barton 2500+ and the T-Bred B 1700+. Anything else isn't bad, but isn't great either. All-in-all, you're more likely to get a better OC out of an Intel CPU than an AMD CPU. So Intel:2, AMD:1.

Quote:
4) AMD CPUs have more headroom to max die temp.

And Intel CPUs have more surface area and thus are much easier to cool. Therefore they don't need nearly the same headroom to their max die temp. Therefore when you look at the <i>whole</i> picture it's really a tie. So Intel:2.5, AMD:1.5.

Quote:
5) AMDs boxed coolers runs more silent.

Considering that I can't even find any review that actually lists the db of an Intel retail cooler, it's really hard to verify this. However, since AMD's latest retail is a respectable 47, I'll grant that this may indeed be true. So Intel:2.5, AMD:2.5.

Quote:
6) AMD use more honorable marketing strategies.

More honerable as in lying to their customers about the actual performance gain granted by the additional cache of a Batron over a T-Bred? Or how about how AMD obfuscates the actual MHz of their CPUs beause they assume that their customers are too stupid to comprehend IPC? Or how about all of the paper-launching that AMD has been doing ever since Intel <i>stopped</i> paper-launching processors? And let's not forget the lame excuses that AMD gave for both the Thoroughbred delay and now the Athlon64 delay. You know, the Athlon64 that AMD marketing claimed would be out over a <b>year</b> ago... Yeah, AMD <i>really</i> uses more honerable marketing strategies.

Granted Intel is certainly no peach either. So I consider this one yet another tie. Which concludes this whole silly comparison at Intel:3, AMD:3.

Gee, a tie. Go figure. So then I guess that means that if AMD rules then Intel rules too. Everybody wins!

(Well, everybody except for owners of that VIA C3/Eden/EPIA/whatever junk! ;-p He he he.)

<font color=blue><pre>If you don't give me accurate and complete system specs
then I can't give you an accurate and complete answer.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 4, 2003 5:13:11 PM

*edited*

1) Yes in my mind, AMD rules. And yes, I'm serious.

2) Intel CPUs never start to smoke. True, but based on my experiences, they overclock worse, and more often break because of current overload.

3) AMD platforms are definitely cheaper, the CPU's are a little cheaper, and boards are quite a lot cheaper.

4) See point 2.

5) Athlon XP 3000+ comes bundled with a HSF that's running more quiet and seem to be keeping CPU temps lower, than what seems to be possible with the HSF that comes with the P4 3.06

6) Intel seem to use more strong-arming tactics than AMD.

And, AMD uses eg: "2800+" PR ratings because intel's been spreading the word about MHz all the time. MHz is a Myth.
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by sabbath1 on 04/09/03 09:09 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 4, 2003 5:21:12 PM

Quote:
as much as i hate to admit, i miss amdmeltdowns posts.

LoL!!!

I've spent most of the last year well away from the CPU section. I popped in to make a thread, and spotted this. Nothing ever changes.

He was funny, wasn't he?

<b><font color=blue>~ <A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=32..." target="_new">System Specs</A> ~<font color=blue></b> :wink:
April 4, 2003 5:42:11 PM

How can a processor be noisy? Do you even know how a PC works?

"I'm a man armed with a fork in a land of soup."
April 4, 2003 5:55:39 PM

Oh dear LOL here we go again...
April 4, 2003 6:05:18 PM

Ok i cant resist hehe... Heres my opinion on the current AMD situation. The new bartons are a waste of money if you ask me, except the 2500 which offers performance close to a 2700. The 2800 is slower than the 2700 and the 3000 is same as the now ended 2800 tbred b. The only real choice for ppl without loads of money is either a 2500 barton or a 2700 tbred b. And those wanting a pure performance cpu will go the intel route rather than the 3000 route im sure.... I know i would...
April 4, 2003 6:44:29 PM

Quote:
1) Yes AMD rules. And yes, I'm serious.

You <i>really</i> are serious?

Quote:
2) Intel CPUs never start to smoke. So what. They self-destruct if you overclock them, ´cause they can't handle the extra current.

See, this is why I have to call you on this crap. That's just plain old-fashioned FUD. <b>ANY</b> CPU can become damaged by overclocking it if you push it too hard. Intel, AMD, it doesn't matter. They're both the same here, and I challenge you to prove otherwise.

Quote:
3) AMD platforms are definitely cheaper, the CPU's are a little cheaper, and boards are quite a lot cheaper. Go check a price list.

Okay.
<font color=green><b>AXP single-channel DDR mobos:</b>
VIA KT266A = $45
SiS 730 = $50
AMD 761 = $50
VIA KT333 = $55
VIA KT400 = $60
ALi Magick1 = $70

<b>AXP dual-channel DDR mobos:</b>
nVidia nForce2 = $85
nVidia nForce2 deluxe = $145</font color=green>

<font color=blue><b>P4 single-channel DDR mobos:</b>
VIA P4M266 = $45
Intel 845 = $45
SiS 650 = $50
VIA P4X333 = $50
VIA P4X400 = $50
Intel 845PE = $75

<b>P4 dual-channel DDR mobos:</b>
SiS 655 = $95
Intel E7205 = $175</font color=blue>

So for single-channel DDR motherboards Intel and AMD are tied. For dual-channel DDR motherboards Intel costs a little more, yes. However, when you add in the fact that Granite Bay runs smoothly on PC2100 even with a P4 3.06GHz, but for any AXP 2500+ and higher you need PC2700 or better, the cost difference in the RAM makes up for the cost difference in the motherboard.

So in other words, it's a tie. They both cost about the same for motherboard + RAM for DDR SDRAM systems.

Quote:
4) Since the P4's sometimes break after a semi-long term of overclocking, the Athlon XP is a better choice.

This is <i>exactly</i> the same as your point 2. And again, it's complete FUD. <i>Any</i> CPU will 'sometimes break' when you OC it.

Quote:
5) Athlon XP 3000+ comes bundled with a HSF that's leaps and bounds supreme to that of a P4 3.06.

'leaps and bounds'? If you say so. As far as I can tell the only advantage to AMD's retail HSF is that it's a little quieter. (Certainly not a HSF that I would actually use in a 'quiet' PC though.) The Intel HSF however expels more heat and mounts much more easily and securely.

I know if I was going to seriously OC using the stock heatsink only I wouldn't even consider AMD for a second. And if I was going to build a quiet PC, I wouldn't use <i>either</i> of the stock heat sinks.

But hey, if you want to call that 'leaps and bounds' ... whatever. Shall I just call the sky red while we're at it?

Quote:
6) Intel gets caught all the time with all those strong-arming tactics. And that's a fact, much like that of Micro$oft.

1) Show me five individual examples where Intel was 'caught' using 'strong-arming tactics'.

2) Meanwhile, AMD has been using a lot of decietful tactics lately. I don't know about your morality, but mine says that's certainly no better.

Quote:
And, AMD uses eg: "2800+" PR ratings because intel's been spreading the word about MHz all the time. MHz is a Myth. And that's a fact.

MHz is a myth is a fact. Intel 'spreading the word about MHz' is <b>not</b> a fact. <i>That</i> is FUD.

Show me just one Intel ad that says MHz even so much as matters. The TV and magazine adds have simple said to the effect: "Aliens like Pentium 4s because they're good at multimedia." and "Blue people like screwing with the number 4." MHz wasn't mentioned once.

The truth of the matter is that the only people who say MHz matters are the AMD fanboys trying to put down Intel. Intel certainly doesn't even bother with MHz. They just care about brand recognition above all else. Macintosh only says MHz don't matter. And AMD just sells their CPUs with part numbers that look awfully suspiciously like MHz but in reality are completely baseless numbers of no relevance.

In reality AMD is the <b>only</b> CPU company trying to perpetuate the MHz myth, and they do so by using the very technique that they claim is to counteract the MHz myth.

Quote:
So in my mind AMD rules.

That's nice.

Quote:
If you don't think so, fine.

I should certainly hope so. However, I personally think that Intel and AMD both simultaniously rule and need a good margin of improvement. Neither company is perfect, but their CPUs are <i>both</i> pretty good.

Quote:
Just don't spill blood on my opinion. I'll respect yours. If you respect mine. Which you don't seem to do very well.

There is a considerable difference between expressing an opinion and telling lies to support that opinion. If you just said "AMD rules" that'd be just peachy-keen. If you said "AMD rules" and gave actually legit reasons why AMD rules, that'd be even better. However, being a fountain of lies is <i>not</i> acceptable.

Further, this is a public forum. It is a place for people to talk, converse, and sometimes even **shock and horror** <i>debate</i>. If you have a problem with people challenging you to prove your statements as being true (not even your opinion, but just your 'facts' ... and I use that term extremely loosely in your case) then you're clearly in the wrong place. Here at THGC we happen to be on the majority people who are:
1) Smarter than the average bear.
2) Open-minded and educated on PCs.
3) Not blind fanatics of anything.
Granted, you will find some exceptions. As I said, it's on the majority. Still, when someone comes in sprouting complete and utter bull-drek, you pretty much have to expect to be called on it because we're not <i>that</i> dumb or that accepting of FUD.

So have whatever opinions that you like. Just don't tell lies to support them unless you want to be challenged on the validity of your supporting statements.

<font color=blue><pre>If you don't give me accurate and complete system specs
then I can't give you an accurate and complete answer.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 4, 2003 6:46:52 PM

Boy, you really are biased, as you said in another post of yours...

Intel didn´t need to spread the myth that Mhz=Power. They never advertised in that way; rather, their current architecture was designed with low IPC and high clock rates in mind. AMD chose a different - the opposite - path. I don´t think they really "strong-armed" the whole thing; rather, their design choice is one that looks better to the uninformed. I never saw an Intel ad saying "MHZ = POWER". They never lied. They don´t even advertise saying "ours has more Mhz" - and I´m sorry to say that, even <i>if they did</i>, they wouldn´t be lying. If they said the 3.06Ghz is the fastest processor ever, then they wouldn´t be lying either.

One more thing I have to say: this argument of yours was funny:
Quote:
5) Athlon XP 3000+ comes bundled with a HSF that's leaps and bounds supreme to that of a P4 3.06.

Yes, so the HSF is much better, but the processor is not! The 3.06Ghz performs better! And consider HT.

Besides, this "AMD rules" thing is nonsense. You shouldn´t decide "who rules", then buy a CPU; you should decide which CPU is best for you, regardless of company. You´re buying a CPU, not a company! Choose your processor, not your company. Based on needs. That´s all. That´s what I think. You, of course, are free to think what you will about this whole subject. :smile:

<i>Actually, I´ve just read slvr_phoenix´s post. I completely agree with the guy - he usually says noteworthy stuff anyway, by the way.</i><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Mephistopheles on 04/04/03 02:54 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
April 4, 2003 6:51:57 PM

Quote:
except the 2500 which offers performance close to a 2700.

From where the hell did you get that the 2500 performs on par with the 2700? I´ve never seen anyone say that kind of thing before! :eek:  It´s certainly not what I´ve seen!
April 4, 2003 8:00:47 PM

Quote:
From where the hell did you get that the 2500 performs on par with the 2700? I´ve never seen anyone say that kind of thing before! It´s certainly not what I´ve seen!

Wow. I completely overlooked that one too.

Last time I checked, the 2600+ totally reems the 2500+. If I were staying at stock speeds, I'd take the 2600+ over the 2500+ any day of the week, so I'd <i>definately</i> choose a 2700+ over a 2500+.

The only 'good' thing about the 2500+ is that it OCs well because it's <i>the</i> lowest-end Barton. Other than that I think it's a bit overpriced for the actual performance that you get at stock.

<font color=blue><pre>If you don't give me accurate and complete system specs
then I can't give you an accurate and complete answer.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 4, 2003 8:04:19 PM

Could not agree more Slvr. This guy has problems.

Although, I will only agree on one thing, and it is that normally, a decent low-end setup USING high-end mainboard and RAM, you will still get more value off an AMD. But if you go to XP2700 heights, you're challenging your pocket. Additionally, any Dual Channel interface with PC2100 for P4 is still not very competitive to the point of being crowned as the best alternative. PC2700 makes it much closer to PC1066, but 266MHZ DDR just ain't cuttin' it IMO. It doesn't matter though, recently I've seen Crucial branded PC2700 RAM for a mere 45$ a 256MB at my local shop. Who really cares when it's that low? Eventually PC2100 will be more expensive as it becomes "legacy".

Oh and Slvr, I've heard Intel HSFs, and they are the most silent of the two. They run at a mere 2200rpm and cool CPUs down to 40s FULL LOAD. They are very efficient for their kind, and apply their maximum thanks to the high pressure mounting of the retention mechanism. The Retail HSF for the XP2000+ for example, which I have once seen assembled and heard, is not noisy, but it definitely is hearable and perhaps a bit annoying at first. It is more noisy than the P4 HSFs. Although the problem with the P4 ones is they are at the noise level of high-pitched spinning noise which also tends to be annoying. I dunno about the XP3000 one though it is awefully similar to the XP2000+.
Anyways who cares, this guy is loading FUD with retail fan arguments, which are false at best. The Intel HSF is more efficient and silent due to low rotation speed, PERIOD.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 4, 2003 8:11:48 PM

Ok, your opinion is your opinion, but you sir, are a fanboy and need to seek help.

Seriously, this is a place for OPEN-MINDED people. You not only, as Slvr has proven you, spread FUD and lies, but you put them as your opinion. For a guy your age, 24, I'd say you are definitely not mature, you're not open-minded. You should get out of here, and come back when you can actually discuss open-minded with us, who can perceive that neither company is perfect and who don't need to kiss ass behind them. They are a company, plain and simple, and they can disappoint anytime. I like AMD as I like Intel but I certainly don't go pray for their might every night as you seem to do for AMD.

Please, run along, and come back when you have a bigger mind, of your age. Christ, I'm 16 and I can see that neither company rules and should be my idol.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 4, 2003 8:53:14 PM

Quote:
Although, I will only agree on one thing, and it is that normally, a decent low-end setup USING high-end mainboard and RAM, you will still get more value off an AMD.

I won't really argue that. Still, I'd say that threshold is pretty much at the 2.4GHz / 2400+ point. Most people today look at that point as a minimum ... unless they're OCing or just looking for an internet appliance.

But then you have the distinct problem of some really bad hardware and firmware out there for AMD if you start going cheap on the mobo and RAM, so you've also got to be exceedingly careful how you build your 'budget' system once you get that far on the low-cost end of the spectrum. Where as if you stick with Intel mobo and chip, you don't have that kind of a worry.

Still, I've got to give AMD credit for drastically underselling Intel at that low end of the spectrum. I don't know why Intel feels it so necessary to charge so much for a 1.6GHz P4a. That's why my next system will probably be AMD and an OCed T-BredB 1700+.

Quote:
Additionally, any Dual Channel interface with PC2100 for P4 is still not very competitive to the point of being crowned as the best alternative.

It's true that it isn't the best, but no one said it had to <i>beat</i> RDRAM. I think even with PC2100, Granite Bay competes well with an AMD dual-channel solution when MHz/PR are about equal.

Besides, I was being <i>nice</i>. Most people who do the dual-channel DDR with the Athlon go with at <i>least</i> cas 2.5 PC3200, if not full out costly (but worth it in my opinion) Corsair TwinX 3200. The P4 simply just doesn't need that kind of RAM to OC well. Toss some Crucial PC2700 into Granite Bay and you're rocking.

Quote:
Eventually PC2100 will be more expensive as it becomes "legacy".

I think it's already getting there. It's darn hard to even find cas2 PC2100. :(  You pretty much just have to either underclock PC2700 or higher to get PC2100 with good timings, or hunt hard to find just the right PC2100.

Quote:
Oh and Slvr, I've heard Intel HSFs, and they are the most silent of the two. They run at a mere 2200rpm and cool CPUs down to 40s FULL LOAD. They are very efficient for their kind, and apply their maximum thanks to the high pressure mounting of the retention mechanism.

I kinda figured that it was something like that, but I couldn't find any reviews that gave the actual db of the Intel retail HSF. So I just didn't feel like contesting.

However, I suppose it is still possible that the P4 3.06GHz, running as hot as it does, makes that retail HSF run at a much higher RPM and thus makes it much more noisy. Of course just having good case cooling will probably make a world of difference there too.

Anywho, time to go drive through sleet and rain and snow and <explitive intentionally not entered> for an hour (or considerably more with the bad weather) so that I can start my weekend. Yipee?

<font color=blue><pre>If you don't give me accurate and complete system specs
then I can't give you an accurate and complete answer.</pre><p></font color=blue>
April 4, 2003 9:49:50 PM

I just wanted to say that this was an entertaining thread. I wish I would have thought to post a fun thread like this on April 1st, but I didn't even realize the date until about 8:00 that night.

I especially loved the post about why computers sucked.

Why have a computer to play Unreal Tournament when you can get real guns so easily and play with your friends?
April 4, 2003 11:18:43 PM

FIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGWIT my old buddy! Your alive! Despite what the noobs in the other forum tried to do

*HUGS*
...
*LONGER HUGS*
...
...
*ASS SQUEEZE*

<b>Damn War! I'm too young to watch other people die!</b>
<A HREF="http://members.iinet.net.au/~lhgpoobaa/images" target="_new">My Images!</A>
April 4, 2003 11:28:57 PM

OI! I resemble that remark eden!
And thats definately the last time im gonna give you naked sponge baths! Meanie!

<b>Damn War! I'm too young to watch other people die!</b>
<A HREF="http://members.iinet.net.au/~lhgpoobaa/images" target="_new">My Images!</A>
April 5, 2003 2:14:19 AM

Oy, you resemble that remark?
What is THAT supposed to mean? No really, I don't get that last one!

Quote:
And thats definately the last time im gonna give you naked sponge baths! Meanie!

How could you! I'm telling Wingding.... :frown:

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
April 5, 2003 3:03:03 AM

Lol, and why would ye resent that remark?

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
!