Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why did you buy A64?

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 17, 2004 1:09:23 AM

The fanboys and their bizzare ways of trying to phrase things to favor their favwite bwand, is one reason I don't hang out around here much. Since some clown was trying to say that 64bit is hoopla, and made some bizzare statement about people buying them for whatever reasons they buy them, I'm just starting this thread to hear why people who have bought them, bought them.

I'll start... I went dual Opteron because it spanks dual Xeon and fit within my budget. It only helped my decision that it was 64bit, it was not the reason in and of itself. I would not have bought it if it was slower at 32bit apps or didn't fit in my budget. But that was not the case, it was faster, and fit in my budget, why the hell should I have bought something slower? Just because there are not 64bit apps, I should not buy a processor that kicks butt at 32bit apps? Huh?

Today, I benefit from 64bit, because, unlike those spreading misinformation, there are 64bit apps under my OS of choice, Linux. Do they still have a ways to go to realize full speed up potential for the apps? I believe they do, but only for 64bit apps, because 32bit apps run plenty fast, because the chip itself is faster at 32bit than most 32bit procs.

That's why I went A64. It wouldn't have mattered to me if Intel made this chip, or hell, even if Cyrix made it. In fact, because of some stupid ignorant fanboy claiming that Xeons were faster, I came very close to buying Xeon. I'm really glad I didn't listen to that dummy, otherwise I'd be a prize chump who fell for some brand name cult members dogma.

Sorry for the harsh tone of this post, but I come here to read intelligent insights from intelligent people. If I wanted to read moron marketing spin, I'd go read Cnet, or visit corporate websites and read their press releases. And really, these clowns only make me hate their favorite brand when they do this crap.

<i>Fanboys make me wish FightClub was real.</i>

More about : buy a64

February 17, 2004 1:48:33 AM

You might want to correct your Sig....it should be: <i>Fanboys make me wish Fight Club were real</i>. The forgotten subjunctive....

No input on why I bought an A64 since, well, I haven't yet.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
February 17, 2004 2:02:19 AM

because its fast

because its cheap

because its cool

because its AMD
Related resources
February 17, 2004 2:08:56 AM

"You might want to correct your Sig....it should be: Fanboys make me wish Fight Club were real. The forgotten subjunctive...."

I is not a english major.

Just to show bad...

<i>Fanboys make me wish FightClub was real.</i>
February 17, 2004 2:11:50 AM

"because its AMD"

Argh. Right now, I wish that guy who will someday be rich and famous for inventing a device to punch people in the face over the internet, had already invented it.

<i>Fanboys make me wish FightClub was real.</i>
February 17, 2004 2:17:47 AM

dual Itanium2s should easily beat the 2x Opterons in linux 64.

<b><font color=blue>Geniune Intel processor</b></font color=blue>
February 17, 2004 2:30:05 AM

lol are oyu seriously wanting to put opterons and itaniums in the same category? I havent seen any reviews that pit the Itanium against the opteron, I saw a few benches that showed mixed results, some for the opteron, some for the itanium. They arent really in direct competition as much as the xeons and opterons are. Look at the prices alone.
February 17, 2004 2:30:26 AM

Yeah, that's in my budget. I'll just skip trading in my truck this year, cancel my childs health insurance, and buy Itanium. What a brilliant idea! That way, I can ditch my favorite Linux distro and try to find one that has native Itanium support, -or-, I can cancel some contracts with clients(who needs work anyway!?) and recompile all my packages to work with it. Oh, and let's not forget me needing to forget years of x86 development knowledge. Nothing like getting a REALLY fresh start.

And I'm sure the games out for Itanium rock. Solitare probably flies!

Yeah, Itanium. Anyone who is opposed to the A64 on the grounds of no native 64bit apps, and then thinks Itanium is a better choice, is either smoking crack, or, well, smoking crack.

<i>Fanboys make me wish FightClub was real.</i>
February 17, 2004 2:35:09 AM

dude, you really dont want to fight me.

and by the way, what`s wrong with being a fanboy?

ill be a fanboy till AMD`s market share is 50%
February 17, 2004 2:36:37 AM

Intel won't allow tipping the competition by allowing Itanium2s to be benchmarked. But from what I read, they are great performers. A Itanium2 1.5ghz cost about $1,500 each. Itanium uses IA64 architecture but with software emulation, it can also run IA32 software, but very slowing , PII speeds. Itanium was not targeted for gamers.

<b><font color=blue>Geniune Intel processor</b></font color=blue>
February 17, 2004 3:24:18 AM

"dude, you really dont want to fight me."

No, I don't even know you. In reality, I believe in peace, except in the most extreme circumstances.

EDIT --- I read your statement wrong the first time, I thought you were asking a question like "dude, do you really want to fight me?" Please tell me this statement wasn't going to seguey into high school trash talking. Because that would actually make sense, you being a fanboy, and being in high school.

"and by the way, what`s wrong with being a fanboy?"

What's right about being a fanboy?

"ill be a fanboy till AMD`s market share is 50%"

And then what?

<i>Fanboys make me wish FightClub was real.</i><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by raretech on 02/17/04 00:49 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
February 17, 2004 3:36:20 AM

"A Itanium2 1.5ghz cost about $1,500 each."

And then the motherboards, last I heard, starting at 600 bucks. That brings me to 3600 bucks, just for those parts alone. That's a down payment on a car and more money than my whole dual Opteron system combined. And for what? To have pathetic 32 bit performance, and even less hope of native application support in the future.

"Itanium uses IA64 architecture but with software emulation, it can also run IA32 software, but very slowing , PII speeds."

Yes, I know the 32bit performance is slow. Shoddy 32bit performance, extremely over priced, and few native 64bit apps(that'd I use anyway). So why would you offer this as a suggestion?

"Itanium was not targeted for gamers."

I know this, which makes it an even more pathetic choice for a desktop system. I'm not a gamer, persey, but I do play games. I keep a windows partition on my system to play games occasionally(as do most linux geeks that I know).

So why would you bring up Itanium? What benefits does it have? You can't even demonstrate a real speed advantage, thanks to a lack of comparable benchmarks, let alone a speed advantage that would justify getting stuck with what is a slow POS for 32bit apps, and a 64bit platform extremely limited by native app selection. So why would anyone want that? Would you buy it instead of an Opteron?

<i>Fanboys make me wish FightClub was real.</i>
February 17, 2004 3:51:38 AM

lol you shouldnt ask that question, Im pretty sure you already know the answer to that. why would he hype it up so much if he didnt want to have it so bad.
February 17, 2004 4:27:32 AM

amd supporters are the reason why intel p4s prices are reasonable. remember back when the p2s were first released.

and by the way, i had no intention of doing trash talk.
February 17, 2004 4:28:25 AM

And then the motherboards, last I heard, starting at 600 bucks. That brings me to 3600 bucks, just for those parts alone. That's a down payment on a car and more money than my whole dual Opteron system combined. And for what? To have pathetic 32 bit performance, and even less hope of native application support in the future.


1.5 ghz cost 4500 US OEM only.There at lease 1000 time more software that been port with certification for itanium compare to opteron.

On 32 bit performance does a Xeon 1.5 ghz 400 FSB dual channel DDR and 2 mb of L3 will be ok for you?

Just to show dad
February 17, 2004 4:30:31 AM

no itanium will have is butt kick in every benchmark if the review is made by any website.

Just to show dad
February 17, 2004 7:04:28 AM

according to my cpu poll, there is not a whole lot of A64 users here to answer you question. However, I intend to buy one this spring for the following reasons:
*) best price performance ratio on games (now at least, I suspect this wont change)
*) decent if not, fastest encoding performance now with the tools I use (Xvid, TMPGenc, AVIsynth,..)with promising free performance boosts on the horizon.
*) cool& quiet, cool& quiet, cool& quiet, cool& quiet,
*) cool
*) quiet
*) 64 bit support. I do have and need 1.5 GB of ram, and I do occasionally run into "out of virtual memory" errors. Having a 64 bit OS would most likely rid me of these for quite some time, even running my old 32 bit apps.

Actually, a more appropriate question would be: why NOT get a A64 ? Unless you're on a tight budget and are looking for something in the 2500+/2.4 GHz range, or you do a lot of encoding with DivX or Lame (who does ?) or 3D rendering using a P4 friendly package, I think there is little reason not to pick up a A64.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
February 17, 2004 9:28:11 AM

AND WHAT THEN?

I'll be 100% via/transmeta fanboi!!!!

A long long time ago, but I can still remember how that music used to make me smile... <A HREF="http://www.nexus.hu/zonix/DIGGER.MID" target="_new"><b><font color=blue>Digger rulz</font color=blue></b></A>
February 17, 2004 3:21:13 PM

I agree A64 3000+ gives lots for the money!

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
February 18, 2004 8:14:24 AM

Well said!! It will fall on deaf/dumb ears the Intel boys are all in a little group of their own and cant see the big picture.

Aside from AMD being first to the punch for the 64 CPU they have also provided the best application CPU's for gamers for many years even if that was not AMD's intent.... and simply put AMD has been the Gamers choice for so long not because of cost but because of performance.

My AMD systems with me driving the mouse have kicked holy internet first person shooter games all over the internet for decades.

I have tried Intel CPU's to game with and simply put they fail to perform I really don't know why it could be for many internal CPU design reasons and I simply could care less about Intel for a game computer they do not have what it takes to hold their own in first person combat. There is no reason to argue about instruction sets or the new Hyper threading or the advantages of some AMD internal protocals because it is not worth hashing over again and again.

I play a game called Day Of Defeat online and I have ADMIN control on more then a few servers. We have our Intel fans playing as well as our AMD boys all going head to head and having lots of fun but the Intel guys consistently perform badly and cannot maintain the cutting edge required to keep their stats in the upper 15 player level on any of the servers.

We looked at the top 15 players for 3 servers that mainline DoD 24/7 the stats are updated every 12 hours and the consistent top 15 players all use an AMD home built system.

There are sparsed in amongst the AMD top players a few Intel owners but they are guys that built their own computers.

This is where the hidden CRUTCH lies in any online first person shooter game. It is so obviously apparent that the top players in a very skill orientated combat environment are players that build there own game computer AT home on the dinning room table.

This again gives us room to form a simple premise and follow through on it in this manner.

If say 10% of online gamers build their own computers and the other 90% buy a store built computer then why are 5% of the retail version computers in the top 15 rankings of each server we looked at AMD users.

This brings us back to our statement that AMD even in a Store built computer will on average out perform the Intel Retail computer by as much as 85% in order for the AMD crowd to take and hold the top 15 player positions for each server.

In the end it is the guys that build their own computers be it Intel or AMD that hold and own the top 15 rankings but of those top 15 rankings 80% of them are AMD players not Intel.

Since the personnel skill sets of all the players can be taken into account it is obvious that Intel CPU's don't have the proverbial BALLS to hang in such a complex combat environment as a 20 to 32 Multy Player environment.

Never mind the Bench Marks AMD proves it's self every time for gamers right up front and personnel when you pull the trigger the other guy dies and you don't.

The world Half Life Tournament was held last month in Las Vegas and all the LAN systems set up for the match were AMD based computers identically matched in all aspects.

Big AMD signs hung all over the buildings outside and in the game room lobby's.

Intel was very absent from this event and for anyone who is a hardcore gamer this was taken notice of immediately.

Barton 3200+ 400MHz
A7N8X Deluxe
Liquid 12 Celsius
2x512 Crucial DDR 400 PC3200
GeForce FX5900
Two Maxtor 40Gig 8MB cach 7200rpm
SONY RW 52x/24x/52x
SONY DVD 16x/40x
February 18, 2004 8:44:32 AM

thanks mate, that post made me laugh :D 

unless someone now breaks my bubble and convinces me you where actually being serious, cause then I think I'm gonna cry...

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
February 18, 2004 12:45:00 PM

Quote:
thanks mate, that post made me laugh :D 

unless someone now breaks my bubble and convinces me you where actually being serious, cause then I think I'm gonna cry...

Do you read his posts?

I gave up reading his post long ago

----------------
<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86" target="_new">My Website</A></b>

<b><A HREF="http://geocities.com/spitfire_x86/myrig.html" target="_new">My Rig & 3DMark score</A></b>
February 18, 2004 2:38:26 PM

I bought my AMD64 for two reasons.

1. It was fast in games.
2. And it was affordable.

Now since getting the system I found another benifit. It is cool and quiet! As was stated in an earlier post is is insanely cool and quiet. So cool in fact,my CPU fan often shuts down completely. When I first got the box, and was smacking some stuff in, the fan shut down and I freaked out because I figured I had just fried my chip. I rebooted, and it worked. So I watched it for about 2 minutes, and it shut down again. So I reached out and touched the heatsink...cool to teh touch.

I do however have to say that stating that the chip you run, when your talking relative apples to apples, is a critical factor in online gaming is one of the most ridiculous things i have ever heard. I to am a online gaming junky, and as long as you have a capable system, it's all about player skill. I went undefeated for a 6 months span playing MW4 online. At that point two guys from my unit and I were untouchable. Now yes, they did run AMD that they had built. I however was on a P4 1.3 built by Gateway.

On the flip side I got owned when playing CS. Well I finally retired the P4 to my wifes desk and got a 64 3200+. Guess what? I still get owned at CS.
February 18, 2004 2:50:26 PM

Quote:
It is cool and quiet! As was stated in an earlier post is is insanely cool and quiet. So cool in fact,my CPU fan often shuts down completely.

What is your motherboard and BIOS revision, we often read that Cool & Quiet is not yet implemented in most A64 boards?

--
Would you buy a GPS enabled soap bar?
February 18, 2004 3:53:07 PM

He's always serious... and contradictory apparently.

In another thread he stated it's not CPU performance that matters, it's the person behind the keyboard. Now, he's gone another complete 180 and says it's solely because of AMD processors that people perform so well.

I sincerely hope no one ever buys a system based on his advice without a second / third / fourth+ opinion. It's not that AMD systems are bad (they are quite good, in fact), but he elevates them to such a lofty position that it's ridiculous. I swear he has a pedastal somewhere in his house surrounded by candles with an AMD processor mounted on it that he goes to nightly to bow down to the AMD god.

Seriously, SoD... get over yourself. You make many claims about your qualifications, yet you show yourself to be an idiot when it comes to assembling/maintaining/overclocking a computer; despite you claims. If I was in charge of the school that gave you your 'degree', I'd seriously be questioning my professors.

<font color=red> If you design software that is fool-proof, only a fool will want to use it. </font color=red>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
February 18, 2004 4:24:06 PM

Amen
February 18, 2004 7:39:46 PM

Quote:
What is your motherboard and BIOS revision, we often read that Cool & Quiet is not yet implemented in most A64 boards?


It's an ASUS KV8 Deluxe. I'm not sure what version the BIOS is, would have to look when I got home.
February 18, 2004 8:10:14 PM

I think every shipping board supports it now, only requires a BIOS update at most; but if you're unlucky and ended up with one of the first A64 chips, the chip won't support it.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
February 18, 2004 9:26:52 PM

Yeah, I've pretty much stopped reading them as well...they say nothing in a lot of words.

Judging by P4Man's comment, this one is pretty funny. I might have read it over, just to be in on the action.

Maxtor disgraces the six letters that make Matrox.
February 19, 2004 12:32:47 AM

Your thoughts please. I keep hearing that it is only the extra registers that make A64 worthwhile. ( we bothe dissagree ) If Intel were to adopt the added registers only, would the extra memory addressing cause more fragmentation of available memory? Would that not make it obvious that we need x86-64 now.
February 19, 2004 2:19:51 AM

Back to the topic:

We're expecting the delivery of our new hardware by tomorrow, 2 P4C 2.8 (Multimedia station and Office server), and 5 AMD64 3000+ workstations. I provided the specifications based on the information I culled from THG and similar sites.

Why AMD64?
1. Superior 32-bit performance
2. Does not require top memory modules
3. Future-proof.

We're into software support and do a lot of programming in Windows.
!