It's a scenario seen in economics over and over. The people who make a quality product often get crush by the bigger cheaper company. For instance... According to a review (maybe even from this site) the AMD 1.6 gighz crush the Intel 2.2 gighz. So why would I turn in my 1.6 for something better if I'm already beating the competition. I'm not a power hungry fool... granted if I had the extra cheese in my pocket I would buy such a thing but you have to realize it just isn't necessary. So while other AMD fans like myself wait for the next new benchmark in CPU's intel steps in and corners the market with they're trend-whore style commercials of aliens flying around doing 'cool' stuff on their pc's and laptops. They advertise they're 2+ gig cpus but it seems as though nobody has told the chips how powerful they are supposed to be. (yes you actually need to tell them! hehe). But not to worry, this is no time to throw your money away on an Intel... I say wait and give it time... AMD may take awhile but a wise man once said "Good things come to those who wait." Don't sell-out. AMD loves us!
Amd's problem is not its product but rather its marketing practices. Like my brother, who's new to the computer hardware, the first thing came to his mind when he asked me to build him a pc was Pentium 4. I bet eight out of ten new pc users never heard of AMD before.
Stability is more then just the CPU. I've never had a stability problem with an AMD chip (Or Any chip for that matter). If you dont buy a stable board and RAM, you may as well give up on ever having a stable system. It also has to do with your Operating system, programs you run, and the drivers.
My current System is running 1.2ghz AMD, 640mb Crucial Mem(PC133/Cas2), and an ASUS A7V. I run Windows 2000 Pro and do some light gaming and watch TV on my pc when I browse the Net. I can easily go 1 or 2 months without any stability issues. It can probly last longer then that, except on occasion I play around in Linux.
So just rmember, stability really isn't a matter of the CPU, if it were, then every AMD chip would be unstable. The only chip I have EVER seen be unstable was an Intel P133 (While I was working in a Computer Shop, Repair work).
So please don't spread Rumors of AMD's not being Stable. Perhaps you had no idea what you were doing when you built the system or had the system built for you, and you purchased an unstable mobo or Ram.
"Stability is more then just the CPU. I've never had a stability problem with an AMD chip (Or Any chip for that matter). If you dont buy a stable board and RAM, you may as well give up on ever having a stable system. It also has to do with your Operating system, programs you run, and the drivers."
You're not getting it. It was stable for a year and then it died. You think i buy cheap parts? That motherboard was 170 bucks. The memory was 92 bucks about for 256 of corsair PC2400 CAS2. i was using windows XP.
Notice, you said 1 to 2 months with out any stability issues? Whats the deal with that? WHen you buy a car do you want a car that works some of the time? My computer is my life. I need it 24/7. Not for 2 months. Every Intel owner i know of still has there old pentium 3 systems working without any stability issues and noise. (WHICH BY THE WAY I'VE SAID IT HAS TO DO WITH VIA CHIPSETS NOT AMD CPUS. AMD CHIPS ARE GOOD STUFF). I'm sick of buying new parts every single year because of some compatibilty and stability issues.
I have a friend that was sick of the noise so he went out and bought a water coolent system. He could have bought an Intel in the first place to resolve the noise issue.
So where is this saving the money coming from? AMD's stock fans suck. SO you gotta fork up 30 bucks for a decent HS&F. But it's LOUD. SO now you go out and buy a water coolent system to lower the noise. Those water systems are expensive! So what money have you saved?
For 192 i bought a 2.0A ghz and i have it overclocked to 2.54ghz using intel's stock fan. So i have no need to go out and purchase another fan. You know what? It's faster then the t-bred 2200+. That t-bred is 250 bucks. So much for price/performance.
These are facts. Look at every benchmar and the 2.53ghz cpu crushes every AMD out there.
and stop putting words in my mouth. thanks ...
I don't wanna argue over a stupid cpu anymore. I have my opinions. If you don't like them then don't read it. I have my rights thank u.
I didn't mean I had to get a new computer every 2 months, I simply ment that I can run my computer for 1 to 2 months before I even have to restart. Then, about once every year or two I have to reinstall windows because Microsoft is the king of crappy software. (On that note, I'll add, I'm never going to install Windows XP on my home computer).
Basically my origional post was to simply ask that you not spread disinformation. I do respect your opinion ect, and I never fault someone for buying Intel over AMD, because it is a personal choice. You have a choice of chipsets with AMD, and you could have chose one other then Via. Via is not the only option for AMD.
"For 192 i bought a 2.0A ghz and i have it overclocked to 2.54ghz using intel's stock fan. So i have no need to go out and purchase another fan. You know what? It's faster then the t-bred 2200+. That t-bred is 250 bucks. So much for price/performance."
Fanboy arguments are now, "you dont need all that performance anyway". "I just send email and surf the web, so a sub-par, underperforming processor suits me fine". (all quotes are summarized and slightly exagerated) All documented right here on THG Community forums for your reading pleasure! hehe
Chipsets, software, and component conflicts are what really makes the AMD procs look bad...So it makes AMD guilty by association. Youre getting these chipsets, softwares, and component conflicts along w/ your AMD systems. Although it seems that VIA really has gotten their act together lately, theres still that instability myth that follows 'em around. Reputation doesnt just erupt out of nowhere......it's earned.
Yes it is, and that is why Intel needs blue men and aliens flying around, because Intels reputation is not peachy either. AMD simply doesn't have the budget to pay men to dress up in blue suits and dance around playing plastic pipes, and if they did, I would stop buying AMD alltogether and move to a hut in the middle of nowhere and die alone. I personally have never had a problem with an AMD system of my own or of any of my customers. You can have equal stability problems with an Intel as AMD, it all depends on everything you surround your CPU with. And since you allways have options now due to the fact AMD opened them up too you, then your not stuck with VIA nor any other chipset. Just allways keep your mind open, no matter what you buy, because AMD let you have a better price for it.
What's wrong with advertising? I don't understand that argument about the blue men and junk. What's that have to do w/ the processor? Or your decision not to purchase one. If you don't buy or sell Intel CPUs because of a commercial instead of making your decision from a technical angle....well, that just seems a lil off. Intel is Intel because they manufactured a quality product LONG before PCs were a common household item, not because of a commercial w/ some blue people. So your argument that Intel "needs" advertising is only true to maintain an already established name in PComputing. I don't see anything wrong w/ that, After all, it's a company that employs a lot of people, and to keep those people paid, they need to sell processors. Maybe AMD should take a page out of Intels book and start selling processors to everyone instead of the fanboys that were mentioned in the THG article.
<i>"For 192 i bought a 2.0A ghz and i have it overclocked to 2.54ghz using intel's stock fan. So i have no need to go out and purchase another fan. You know what? It's faster then the t-bred 2200+. That t-bred is 250 bucks. So much for price/performance."</i>
AMD cpu's offer better price/performance for users who run their cpu's at default speeds which is about 99% of the computer user population. If you run your cpu at stock speed then the better purchase should be AMD but if you're an overclocker then definitely go Intel. It's pretty simple.
As for the stability issues; I've never personally had any problems with my AMD setups. I've had the same Athlon700 running with VIA chipset for over 2 years now without any problems. This is just a theory of mine but I'm guessing there are significantly more stability/compatibility complaints with Intel computers, but most of those complaints aren't ever seen on hardware forums like this because most users take their problems to the tech support teams at the big OEM companies like Dell or Compaq/HP.