Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why is it always "I have a problem with my AMD"

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 10, 2002 7:04:13 PM

If we take all the post where help is needed,in 95% there is an AMD machine involved.
Dead XP,won't boot,Via...blalal.

I admit that i'm an INTEL fan,but i wonder how can others blame INTEL for being the dark side,the devil and so on.
I prefer the dark with a P4 ,than the light with an XP.
Sorry,but i want a problem free system.

More about : problem amd

December 10, 2002 7:13:35 PM

That's because some people simply don't know enough how to build a system.
AMDs are for enthusiasts, if you're not one or at least have had experience in setting CPUs and HSFs, you deserve what you get.
Basically what that means is there are too many with no knowledge when setting the AMD CPUs, and BAM. Doesn't mean you'll get problems. Hell, all new chipsets for the AMD platform are nearly bug-free, so please, the problem free system is also as possible on an AMD, proof with me having a KT266A with an SB Live and an AXP 1600+.

--
The THGC Photo Album project,<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&..." target="_new">CLICK HERE!</A>
Related resources
a b à CPUs
December 10, 2002 8:18:03 PM

It's usually the fault of crappy chipsets, crappy BIOS, and both pointing toward VIA. The AMD/VIA combination has always been for ragged edge morons, the kind of people who would have strapped 102 "d" model rocket engines to a bicycle rather than buy a moped, simply because it's "faster and cheaper" even though it only last a few seconds. A few inteligent people have been behind AMD technology (very few) and waited all this time for good chipsets to emerge (now produced by SiS and nVidia). So there is no longer a good reason to avoid AMD systems, but you still have to be knowledgeable about the parts before you go about building them.

There were always the newbies of course where these things don't apply, they fell into the AMD/VIA trap not knowing better. On the other side of things, a newby buying and Intel CPU system might have ended up with an Intel motherboard, an almost flawless choice for reliability.

BTW, I've built lots of AMD K6-2 systems on Intel TX chipset boards, no problems whatsoever. It's always been about the chipset, not the CPU.

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>
December 10, 2002 9:14:30 PM

I have an Nforce 2 motherboard and no issues. Buy brand name stuff often people by cheap stuff then get problems and Say WTF. Don't by crap, and get someone who knows what they are doing to build u a system.

That includes good memory!

as eden says you buy crap you deserve what u get.

My specs
http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=16172
December 10, 2002 9:20:28 PM

Quote:
BTW, I've built lots of AMD K6-2 systems on Intel TX chipset boards, no problems whatsoever. It's always been about the chipset, not the CPU.

AMD K6-2 500 + Soyo 5EMA+ 1.0 w/VIA chipset has actually worked pretty well for me. It's never been a fast system though. It was assembled by the vendor I got it from.
December 10, 2002 9:22:14 PM

So I see there's many complains about this post going on.. but yeah... AMD is perfectly fine, unless you dont know how to handle it =P

Here's a proof that I got no problem at all with my Duron.

Windows XP 12has been running 1wk 1day 5hrs 58mins Memory Usage: 190/512MB (37.11%) Processor: 1-AMD Duron, 999MHz, 64KB (0% Load) HDD Free Space: (C: 31578MB/55.88GB) (D: 1913MB/4.88GB) (E: 147MB/1.58GB) (F: CDROM)
December 10, 2002 9:23:32 PM

So I see there's many complains about this post going on.. but yeah... AMD is perfectly fine, unless you dont know how to handle it =P

Here's a proof that I got no problem at all with my Duron.

Windows XP 12has been running 1wk 1day 5hrs 58mins Memory Usage: 190/512MB (37.11%) Processor: 1-AMD Duron, 999MHz, 64KB (0% Load) HDD Free Space: (C: 31578MB/55.88GB) (D: 1913MB/4.88GB) (E: 147MB/1.58GB) (F: CDROM)

Now as you can see.. I kept it running for a week now, and it didnt crash or anything.
I should give it a good night rest today.. hehe.
December 10, 2002 9:28:08 PM

Quote:
Dead XP,won't boot,Via...blalal.

Well one reason is that visitors to this board are mostly AMD users. Although this year there's been a dramatic shift of enthusiasts toward Northwoods. Anyway, the main reason you keep seeing these topics batted around on THG are the two main downsides to the Athlon platform as compared to Intel:

1. Poor chipsets. After three years, the Athlon *still* doesn't have a chipset as rock solid and feature-rich as Intel's. None of them are suitable for professional applications. Let's see:
VIA KTxxx - don't make me laugh
AMD 760 - way outdated
SiS - usually on crappy motherboards
ALi - slow
nVidia - new and unproven compared to Intel chipsets

2. Excessive heat. In everyday use like gaming, Athlons get much closer to their "maximum thermal dissipation" values than non-HT P4s do, because P4s are far more aggressive in clock gating idle transistors. Now with hyperthreading, heat on the Intel CPUs is a bigger issue because less of those transistors are sitting around twiddling their thumbs.

Ritesh
December 10, 2002 9:35:20 PM

A lot of people are running AMD chips.
I am not sure about this forum but early this year I posted a poll, "What are you using AMD or Intel", on Anand's forum and I think the results were something like 3 to 1 (AMD vs Intel).

I am beginning to see "My P4 system is unstable, not running, making funny noises, etc" threads on Anand's, Tom's, etc, forums which reflects the P4's popularity.

"Just the facts ma'am"<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Siddhartha on 12/13/02 05:43 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
December 10, 2002 9:45:31 PM

I would imagine that a lot of Intel users own Dells/Gateways and don't use places like this. They'd just call up the company's tech support hotline instead. Which isn't to say there aren't lots of knowledgable Intel users out there as well.
December 10, 2002 11:45:36 PM

3 AMD systems built
1 Intel system built

No problems with either.

Going to end up building another AMD system this x-mas.

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/ApJ/" target="_new">Forum Assassin</A></font color=red>
December 11, 2002 12:12:22 AM

If you look at the global computer population, most sales of intel machines are dells, gateways, compacs etcetcetc. If they need help they go to the company.

It just happens that a large proportion of AMD systems are generic "beige box" products, often tinkered with by the user. Users who typically dont know what they are going.

AMD systems also don't like morons. I'm convinced of this. You do something stupid with an AMD system, you pay the price. Try the same with an intel system and it will proably keep going. Upon reflection this isnt too bad. :smile:





<A HREF="http://www.ihatetelstra.com" target="_new">http://www.ihatetelstra.com&lt;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.telstraexposed.com" target="_new">http://www.telstraexposed.com&lt;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.antitelstra.com" target="_new">http://www.antitelstra.com&lt;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.whirlpool.net.au" target="_new">http://www.whirlpool.net.au&lt;/A>
December 11, 2002 12:15:17 AM

If you look at the global computer population, most sales of intel machines are dells, gateways, compacs etcetcetc. If they need help they go to the company.

It just happens that a large proportion of AMD systems are generic "beige box" products, often tinkered with by the user. Users who typically dont know what they are going.

AMD systems also don't like morons. I'm convinced of this. You do something stupid with an AMD system, you pay the price. Try the same with an intel system and it will proably keep going. Upon reflection this isnt too bad. :smile:

Stability is what you make of it. Do your homework, get the right bits, do a competent job and your system will be stable.
Ive had 3 intel rigs and 1 evolving AMD one.
Stability wise the AMD system has been the most stable of them all, mostly due to win2k.




<A HREF="http://www.ihatetelstra.com" target="_new">http://www.ihatetelstra.com&lt;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.telstraexposed.com" target="_new">http://www.telstraexposed.com&lt;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.antitelstra.com" target="_new">http://www.antitelstra.com&lt;/A>
<A HREF="http://www.whirlpool.net.au" target="_new">http://www.whirlpool.net.au&lt;/A>
December 11, 2002 12:20:30 AM

I have had 3 AMD systems in the past 3 years. A K6-2 500 an Athlon Thunderbird 1.4Gig. And now an Athlon 2100+. All running on VIA Chipsets. The K6-2 The Aladden chipset the T-Bird ViA KT133 and the Thunderbird KT333 and all are still running ROCK Stable. So if I can couple 3 AMD systems with 3 VIA chipsets and have them rock stable then it shows that there is NO problems with AMD chips. And when you take into account the percentage of users on this forum AND other forums I watch then intel in reality has more problems than AMD on their own chipsets even.
My 2 cents.
AREA_51
December 11, 2002 1:33:34 AM

AFAIC the nForce 2 is the most feature-rich chipset out there, definitly not Intel.
In fact Intel has not been too keen on features in the past, and you'd need SiS to give you something.

Again I think Crash is just voicing an opinion and targetting people like me, the said morons, who are running a perfectly stable VIA KT266A system. Why when we prove them it is stable, they still continue to shut their heads, is beyond me.

And for Makaveli, I didn't mean you buy crap you get what you deserve, I said you handle stuff badly, you deserve what you get. You wanna build an AMD system, you better know how to handle the CPU and HSF installation, and know where the FAN Power plug goes, not like some who wrongfully burned theirs for such reasons. Besides, I think all new mobos have thermal protection shut-off, so basically AMD is closely approaching Intel's secure platform.

--
The THGC Photo Album project,<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&..." target="_new">CLICK HERE!</A>
December 11, 2002 2:51:17 AM

I always hear so much crap about the Amd/Via myth. Because that is what it is, a myth. I have built multiple setups for myself and others with that combonation of components over the years and so far my number of problems = 0. I even built some servers for a small town ISP running mission critical programs and they have had NO downtime since the system came online.

Is your system stable enough you'd run your own life support on it? ---mine is. Soyo KT333 + AXP 1900+
December 11, 2002 3:10:20 AM

This is actually where enthusiastes who recommend building your own system backfires. Everyone who doesn't know what they're doing looks around for advice on what to build with. With the recent (within the past year or so) growth of AMD's popularity, you have tons of fanboys screaming nothing but AMD. And so, you have all these clueless people attempting to build Athlon-based systems and screwing up. I suspect it's not really a matter of people having more problem with Athlon-based systems but rather, more clueless people build Athlon-based systems than P4-based systems. And of course, if a certain percentage of all system builders have problems, you're going to hear more Athlon-related problems.

"We are Microsoft, resistance is futile." - Bill Gates, 2015.
December 11, 2002 3:57:02 AM

LOL. Love your sig.
Yes i would run my life support on my PC... provided i kept my bloody family off it and it DIDN'T run on the mains power where i came from LOL

Ive had some issues with Via boards, but really nothing drastic. 99% of my problems arise due to
A. Overclocking excesses.
B. Windoze working its usual magic.
C. Family cauzing mayhem.
D. Dodgy mains power (Fixed by getting a 500VA UPS)
E. Me messing with it unnecessarily and pushing the wrong button.

The only real VIA specific problems ive ever had on my via boards (2 x KT133A, 1 x KT333) are:
A. Bad set of 4in1 drivers (4.28) made all my devices SCSI. Burner wouldnt burn. Update to (4.29) fixed it.
B. Slight SB live crackle in winamp when accessing lots of files in explorer. Fixed with the official latency patch.
C. Modem IRQ issue on my second KT133A board (more of a specific board issue & how windows manages IRQ's. Fixed by moving it 1 slot down)


<b>My Idea of a DOS attack is to stop posting helpful information at Toms Hardware.</b> :smile:
December 11, 2002 4:32:50 AM

My athlon 1G + GIGA 7ZXR give me no problem.
It much faster than many P4s!
December 11, 2002 4:40:08 AM

I've built several systems using amd/via parts. I think part of the problem with via is compatibility with parts. I had a huge problem with my original asus board, runnin a athlon k7 700, *can't remember the chipset offhand*, with the viaagp.sys file, wouldn't boot with my matrox g400 video card drivers installed. I had to get a copy of the file from toms hardware and replace it. Is this a matrox or via problem? who knows, probably via. Ive heard of lots of driver conflicts with creative/via also. Bottom line concerning via chipsets, do your reasearch before you invest lots of money in a system that's based on a via chipset for potential problems/solutions
December 11, 2002 7:50:28 AM

The AMD/VIA thing is exactly why I don't run any systems with a SB card. My old A7A266 with an ALi chipset hated that SB card I had in there, so I'm thinking the fault lies mostly with Creative on that one. From KT266A on, the chipsets have been fixed so there is no longer any data corruption when transfering large files (a problem exaggerated by using a SB card, might I add). I have top notch stability, decent overclocking (I am limited now by my locked CPU), and as long as I don't run crap-tacular software (most file sharing programs come to mind), everything is golden. Add to that WinXP Pro, and it's good (if things freeze on the desktop, usually ending the Explorer process will fix things up real nice, and WinXP will start it right back up... probably an NT thing).

Some day, THG-willing, I shall obtain the coveted "Old Hand" title.
December 11, 2002 12:05:37 PM

Quote:
VIA KTxxx - don't make me laugh

Don't make me laugh, too. Except KX133/KT133/KT266 every VIA chipset is more than enough stable for a home user. Feature wise, they are not worse than Intel.
Quote:
AMD 760 - way outdated

They are not making chipsets for one year, so it doesn't matter if their chipsets are outdated or not. AMD 760 chipsets were performance leader and up-to-date for a long time. And stability is 100% equal of Intel chipsets. And again, Intel is not better in terms of features.
Quote:
SiS - usually on crappy motherboards

Also good mobos available for SiS 745. MSI 745 Ultra, ASUS A7S33 etc. Again, feature wise they are equal to Intel.
Quote:
ALi - slow

Who wants to use it?
Quote:
nVidia - new and unproven compared to Intel chipsets

nForce(1) has bee around for one year. They ware rock solid. nForce(2) is no exception. And I dare to tell, Intel chipsets are as stable as nVidia chipsets. Isn't it true that you consider a new Intel chipset isgood, because they have made good chipsets before? So why you can't think nForce(2) good as nForce(1) was good? And features, every chipset manufacturer is still to touch nForce chipsets in terms of feature. Which Intel chipset have such good audio like nForce(1 and 2)> Does they have Dual LAN, Fireware support?

Quote:
Excessive heat. In everyday use like gaming, Athlons get much closer to their "maximum thermal dissipation" values than non-HT P4s do,

I am using an ultra cheap alluminium HSF with no case fan with my Duron 1 Ghz. At ambient temp. of 30C to 35C, it becomes max. 55C hot after 2-3 hours of gaming. Far away from the 90C deadline. My friend's AXP 1800+ also doesn't get hotter than 55C w/ similar cheap cooler, no case fan and same ambient temp.

Let us know <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new"> What File compression format you use? </A>
December 11, 2002 12:10:21 PM

I always love how people just figure it <i>must</i> be Creative Labs that caused the incompatability problems. It couldn't possibly be the Sound Blasters were pressing the PCI capabilities somewhat close to the limits of the early PCI specifications and most <i>cheap</i> motherboards with a crap PCI bus just simply couldn't handle actually being pushed that hard, even if it still <i>was</i> within spec. (Where as <i>quality</i> motherboards had absolutely no problems with any cards that pushed the specs to their very limits and often even work perfectly fine if the PCI bus was OCed.) No, it <i>must</i> be a Creative Labs problem. It's not like high-speed SCSI cards (and even a number of IDE controllers) didn't also cause the same problems in these crappy motherboards with cheap-arsed chipsets.

While we're on the issue of cheap-arsed motherboards having problems actually fulfulling specifications to the letter, let's also bring up the reason that I don't trust VIA: Which is that there were some <i>serious</i> problems with VIA chipset mobos and video cards (such as the Matrox G400) that actually <i>reserved and used</i> main system memory regularly. God forbid someone actually design an AGP card that <i>used</i> that part of the functionality designed into the AGP specification. <i>And</i> this was greatly compounded by VIA's absolute inability to write good Win2K drivers to even try to correct the problem for a good six months after the problem was discovered.

Yeah. It's all the fault of companies like Creative Labs, Adaptec, Matrox, etc. Companies that produce quality products and market not only to home users but to serious workstation and server systems where quality is an absolute necessity. It couldn't <i>possibly</i> be the cheap-arsed budget-oriented corner-cutting 3rd party chipset vendors (and the mobo manufacturers that utilize them) like ALI and VIA who not only can't even follow specifications to the letter, but also hire monkeys for firmware/software engineers.

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new"><font color=red>Join</font color=red> <font color=blue>the</font color=blue> <font color=green>THGC</font color=green> <font color=orange>LAN</font color=orange> <font color=purple>Party</font color=purple>!</A>
December 11, 2002 12:21:34 PM

Quote:
AFAIC the nForce 2 is the most feature-rich chipset out there, definitly not Intel.

Well I meant feature-rich as in features that work properly, unlike VIA's feature implementations that often result in a nightmare of conflicts with other hardware. The nForce 2 may be better, we'll see with time.

Quote:
who are running a perfectly stable VIA KT266A system.

VIA's bad rep comes from the many people who have had problems with their chipsets, like me. The majority of people don't have problems, but it's the percentage that do that are pissed off at the company. I would say that perhaps 5-10% of enthusiasts with VIA chipsets encounter hardware conflicts, whereas only perhaps 0.5% of people with Intel chipsets do. That's a huge difference.

Ritesh
December 11, 2002 12:31:34 PM

Quote:
I always love how people just figure it must be Creative Labs that caused the incompatability problems. It couldn't possibly be the Sound Blasters were pressing the PCI capabilities somewhat close to the limits of the early PCI specifications and most cheap motherboards with a crap PCI bus just simply couldn't handle actually being pushed that hard, even if it still was within spec. (Where as quality motherboards had absolutely no problems with any cards that pushed the specs to their very limits and often even work perfectly fine if the PCI bus was OCed.) No, it must be a Creative Labs problem. It's not like high-speed SCSI cards (and even a number of IDE controllers) didn't also cause the same problems in these crappy motherboards with cheap-arsed chipsets.

While we're on the issue of cheap-arsed motherboards having problems actually fulfulling specifications to the letter, let's also bring up the reason that I don't trust VIA: Which is that there were some serious problems with VIA chipset mobos and video cards (such as the Matrox G400) that actually reserved and used main system memory regularly. God forbid someone actually design an AGP card that used that part of the functionality designed into the AGP specification. And this was greatly compounded by VIA's absolute inability to write good Win2K drivers to even try to correct the problem for a good six months after the problem was discovered.

Yeah. It's all the fault of companies like Creative Labs, Adaptec, Matrox, etc. Companies that produce quality products and market not only to home users but to serious workstation and server systems where quality is an absolute necessity. It couldn't possibly be the cheap-arsed budget-oriented corner-cutting 3rd party chipset vendors (and the mobo manufacturers that utilize them) like ALI and VIA who not only can't even follow specifications to the letter, but also hire monkeys for firmware/software engineers.

Agree 100%.
I wish i do 100 push'ups than repairing the Via based systems of my friends.It is very true that you need to be a real moroon to destroy an Intel system cause it takes a lot of "work",while with a VIA one just one step and "Fatal Error:Beggining memory dump" :D 
December 11, 2002 3:02:49 PM

I don't know, I've been building AMD systems for years for myself, friends and family, and I've never had a SINGLE problem with an AMD CPU.

"There's no such thing as gravity, the Earth just sucks."
December 11, 2002 4:02:36 PM

Hence why everyone is saying the chipsets blow goats. Trust me Intel and AMD make sure they have a micro code update before anyone finds out about a CPU related problem.

-Jeremy

<font color=blue>Just some advice from your friendly neighborhood blue man </font color=blue> :smile:
December 11, 2002 4:14:55 PM

Quote:
Again I think Crash is just voicing an opinion and targetting people like me, the said morons, who are running a perfectly stable VIA KT266A system. Why when we prove them it is stable, they still continue to shut their heads, is beyond me.

I am also running a perfectly stable system with a 1.4 GHz cpu and KT133A chipset. VIA can be stable, but they have had many problems in the past. Most of them don't affect the average user, but the amount of 4in1 driver updates is a good indication of the amount of fixes they have had to do. Now that I have a good choice of chipsets, I think that I would choose nVidia over VIA even if VIA is able to come out with something that performs 2-3% better than the nForce2. I do hear very few complaints with the KT333 and KT400 chipsets though. I think that VIA has had a bad past and people are very unforgiving. Myself included because my number one priority is stability. Second is performance.

So you don't need to be a moron to buy a VIA chipset, but you did need to be much more careful with their chipsets than any other. I am just happy that they aren't about the only choice anymore like they were when I bought my KT133A chipset. I have been happy with it so far, but now it is about time to upgrade.
December 11, 2002 6:46:05 PM

Just to voice my opinion....

I currently am running 3 intel setups, with 2 other AMD setups. Unfortunately, of all the downtime I have had with these systems, I have had more problems trying to upgrade the AMD systems. Not to say that once I got them fixed, they ran very well, if not on par with the intel systems.

I will, however, say that 75% of my problems with upgrades have occurred during the upgrade process, and most of those problems stemming from bios problems and incompatibilities

So, I guess what I am trying to say is that Intel does (IMO for the most part) takes that next step, by covering a few more of the bugs in testing, and that being the biggest difference between the systems I have. But then again, isn't it easy to do that if you make both the mobo AND the CPU?

Quick!!! Whats the number for 911?
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
December 11, 2002 6:49:21 PM

>I would say that perhaps 5-10% of enthusiasts with VIA
>chipsets encounter hardware conflicts, whereas only
>perhaps 0.5% of people with Intel chipsets do. That's a
>huge difference.

I agree with your point. I've owned among others, an LX, a BX board, a KT133A, a SiS735 and a KT333. The BX and the LX gave me about zero probs, the SiS735 was perhaps even better, most stable board I've owned. The KT133A (MSI) was a nightmare; nothing worked (powermanagement was a disaster, problems with USB@133 FSB, soundcard trouble,anything, you name it..). After that experience, I swore never to buy a VIA board again. By some coincidence howver, I ended up with my current KT333A board (Asus), and so far, Im am pleasantly suprised. Everything works, and I mean, everything (I've got a pretty loaded machine). Its rock stable, and miracelously, ACPI, standby, suspend-to-disk.. it all just works.

VIA's reputation may have been well deserved in the KT133 days, and in the (super) socket 7 time, but Im under the impression their current chipsets work just fine.


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
December 11, 2002 6:55:14 PM

i think the owner of via used to beat him up for is lunch money, or he ran over his puppy.

my computer is so fast, it completes an endless loop in less than 4 seconds!
December 11, 2002 6:55:53 PM

I actually took the deep breath risk when I got the KT266A mobo. I had heard of SB Live and VIA having probs, but I sure as hell knew it was time to get some performance nevertheless, and it did not hurt at all.
The fact some are still unforgiving shows only close-mindedness. If you cannot forgive AMD for screwing paper launches, even years after, YOU ARE the moron. (not targetted to you heh!)

--
The THGC Photo Album project,<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&..." target="_new">CLICK HERE!</A>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
December 11, 2002 7:03:38 PM

I'll just add my 2 cents to this.

Recently, there was a poll on Aces' messageboard; it showed more than 80% of the posters there owned AMD rigs. I do not think it will be so very different on this board, so thats already one major explanation: more users=more potential problems.

Intel has a much bigger marketshare, but mostly in the OEM market. OEM customers are not frequent posters on boards like these. The DIY market is AFAIK dominated by AMD. DIY systems are more prone to trouble than conservatively configurated and properly tested OEM systems.

This being said, Im sure AMD systems are a tad more cumbersome than Intel systems. Eg, properly installing a HSF isnt that easy for someone who has never done it. Do it wrong with a P4, and you may never notice (even though you might end up with a 400 MHz equivalent :) . Do it wrong on an AMD system with an older motherboard, and you have a serious problem.

Another reason, is that many AMD boards allow you to tweak just about anything. Tweak too much without knowing what your doing, and you are headed for trouble. Intel boards and BIOSes dont allow you to change anything, so they are pretty idiot proof.

Lastly, its probably true Intel chipsets are generally more mature, and better tested than some some chipsets build by VIA/SiS/.. Probably, but not certainly. Intel based systems are not exactly immune to trouble either.

All in all, if you know what you are doing, its perfectly possible (even easy) to build a trouble free, 100% stable AMD system. If you don't know what you are doing, the extra $$ you spend on an Intel (or OEM) machine, may very well be a wise investment.

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =
December 11, 2002 7:15:50 PM

He He!! "Idiot Proof". Boy did I get into trouble with that one at GM with the union as a designer. The "Political Correct" response is "Error Proof" as I was counseled by my Boss. Whew.

But I agree whole heatedly!!!

Skinny

Signature, I'm still learning & having fun doing it!!!!!!
December 11, 2002 8:27:45 PM

All I know slvr is that SB cards were the only constant across all my mainboard problems. I've owned anything from old P2 Intel chipsets to ALi Magik and KT333, and all had problems with various SB cards. Hence the reason I run a Game Theater XP. If I remember correctly, it was brought to the surface that SB cards do not share the PCI bus properly with other PCI cards, causing corruption of data. Nor do they share IRQs well, leading to other problems if you have a lot of add-on cards and/or the SB card in a the wrong PCI slot (God forbid if you mistakenly put it in the PCI slot that shares an IRQ with the AGP slot). My BSODs with my Asus A7A266 (not exactly a budget board maker) went away the second I swapped the SBLive card out for a Hercules Fortissimo II, and later a Hercules GTXP. Needless to say, after experiencing problems across three systems with various SBLive cards, all problems usually solved by removing the SBLive card and either using the on-board sound or a different brand card, I've come to the conclusion that the SBLive cards just don't play well with others. Audigy probably has changed that, but I don't need a card like that when my GTXP kicked the crap out of anything the Live series could come up with, for less money to.

And last... there are 4 big chipset makers in the world: Intel, SiS, Via, and ALi... and soon nVidia will add itself to that list. There are hundreds of periphrel makers out there... who should conform to who?

-SammyBoy

PS - I do know that the Live series had issues on most chipsets, but something about the VIA chipset really pissed it off... there was an aspect of fault for both companies, but considering that Creative Labs SBLive cards can be problematic across chipsets to varying degrees, I think it would be safe to assume that there are issues with its use of the PCI bus... mainly that the Live series was a bus hog, and would give headaches to other devices trying to use said bus. Like I said... it didn't play well with others.

Some day, THG-willing, I shall obtain the coveted "Old Hand" title.
December 11, 2002 8:35:12 PM

When you all speak of 100% stability, I hope you're refering to ZERO crashes over the lifetime of your system.

I've only had that with two systems ever.

AMD w/ SIS735 chipset w/ WinXP Pro (only ran WinXP Pro)
INTEL w/ BX chipset w/ WinXP Pro (crashed with 98,98se,ME)

Any other system with any other OS (not 2000, never ran it) crashed.

Whether it's the <font color=red>chipset</font color=red> (Mostly VIA), <font color=red>soundblaster</font color=red> (which was in every other system, and none of the above), or the <font color=red>OS</font color=red>, I don't care. They crashed, and sometimes several times a day.

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/ApJ/" target="_new">Forum Assassin</A></font color=red>
December 11, 2002 8:57:29 PM

Quote:
I actually took the deep breath risk when I got the KT266A mobo. I had heard of SB Live and VIA having probs, but I sure as hell knew it was time to get some performance nevertheless, and it did not hurt at all.

I wish that I would have waited a little longer before upgrading my system. DDR was just coming out and the KT266 didn't offer much more performance over KT133A with SDRAM and it cost much more. Right now I wish I wasn't still stuck with SDRAM though.

Anyway, I have never been against VIA. I have bought their chipsets and have never had any problems, but I have friends that have had problems. So while I am not against them, I have never really 'liked' them. I do like nVidia though. I also like ATI, but they don't have any chipsets.
Quote:
The fact some are still unforgiving shows only close-mindedness. If you cannot forgive AMD for screwing paper launches, even years after, YOU ARE the moron. (not targetted to you heh!)

screwing paper launches is less of an offense than screwing products. I have seen 4 Canon printers die in the past (none were mine). It made me much more cautious about buying a Canon printer for myself. I held my breath that it would work fine and so far I have been very happy, but we'll see how long it lasts... my fingers are crossed.

I think it is the same thing with VIA. People have had bad products in the past and it is hard to get over it and trust them again. Holding grudges for over a year doesn't make as much sense to me though because every product is different and almost no company is the same after a year.
December 11, 2002 9:08:25 PM

Quote:
When you all speak of 100% stability, I hope you're refering to ZERO crashes over the lifetime of your system.

I don't know if I used that term or not, but my computer has crashed, but that was due to a video card being bad. Once that was swapped out it hasn't crashed since (about 7 months) and I haven't even had a program that I needed to use end task on. I use WinXP. So I would say that my computer is now 100% stable. Before swapping out the bad video card it was 40% stable, and before the video card went bad it was 100% stable. I used the video card to troubleshoot my friend's system and it must have been bumped in a wrong way or I was unfortunate with a static discharge.

Anyway, I don't think that 100% stability needs to refer to ZERO crashes over the lifetime of the system, but that is very cool that you have had two systems where that is true, but even your second example you mentioned that it DID crash with 98, 98se, and ME. Was that not part of the lifetime of the system?
December 11, 2002 9:16:05 PM

When validating our software and chipsets, Intel typically tests these products with over 500 games and 12 Operating Systems. We also include a variety of leading OEMs from around the world to participate in our validation testing, adding hundreds of thousands of hours of testing across a wide variety of applications, components, peripherals, and systems.

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
December 11, 2002 11:34:49 PM

Ya know i think it is funny how people with computer problems are so quick to blame the processor. In my opinion the problem lies with the other parts in the computer, but that is just me. The first and only computer i built was with a AMD processor. I have had zero problems with the processor, now i have had some minor probs with my ecs motherboard, nothing major mind you, but i didnt say (this dam amd processor). I am really looking foward to the barton and hammer, already figuring my tax refund, it is not that i dont like intel i just cant afford those dam things. Any way thats my 200 cents worth.

I CANT TAKE IT ANYMORE,,<--- comes out of the closet screaming i am an AMD bieocth fan boy..
December 11, 2002 11:54:33 PM

when it comes down to it. athlon systems simply are not as stable as Intels... especially when you combo a p4 with a genuine intel mb. I think it is more due to the chipsets than it is the actual processors.
"There is no dark or light side, only power and those too weak to seek it."<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by vegandago on 12/11/02 08:55 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
December 11, 2002 11:57:37 PM

follow up:

Not to say I'd buy a p4 over an XP. Yeah, right now I own a P4 but that is because Intel made me "an offer I couldn't refuse" p4-2.53 with d845pebt2 and winxp pro for $175.

If I was a regular consumer, I'd buy an Athlon hands-down simply for the performance vs price.

"There is no dark or light side, only power and those too weak to seek it."
December 12, 2002 12:09:50 AM

Quote:
Intel made me "an offer I couldn't refuse" p4-2.53 with d845pebt2 and winxp pro for $175.

Sweet deal.

<font color=blue>
--------------------------------------------------
Guns kill people just like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.
<font color=blue>
December 12, 2002 2:26:22 AM

A piece of hardware dying is an exception I suppose. I had a memory stick die once for example.

Another thing that can screw up the curve is installing garbage software like peer-peer, file sharing, and bonzai buddy. Or in my case Quicktime 3.0 by accident.

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/ApJ/" target="_new">Forum Assassin</A></font color=red>
December 12, 2002 3:51:59 AM

Ouch... is that better or worse than being 'AOL-ed' or 'Realplayered' :smile:

<b>My Idea of a DOS attack is to stop posting helpful information at Toms Hardware.</b> :smile:
December 12, 2002 4:34:32 AM

<font color=blue>
Quote:
garbage software like peer-peer

<font color=black>I am currently using kazaa lite. i share a massive amount of files but never leave it running unless I myslef am looking or downloading someting specific. I specifically do not share porn or items that are outright illegal. Is there a problem with this philosopy? what risk am i posing to the comp?

<font color=blue><i>On Company time... :cool:
December 12, 2002 4:50:31 AM

Quote:
When you all speak of 100% stability, I hope you're refering to ZERO crashes over the lifetime of your system.

I've only had that with two systems ever.

AMD w/ SIS735 chipset w/ WinXP Pro (only ran WinXP Pro)
INTEL w/ BX chipset w/ WinXP Pro (crashed with 98,98se,ME)

I think it had more to do with your OS than anything else.
NT based products (NT4.0,2000,XP) are light years ahead stability wise than their Win9x counterparts (95,98,98SE,ME).

<font color=green>Tbred or Northwood?? Or is an old Tbird good enough??</font color=green>
!