AMSMAN
Topic Author
Posts: 975
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 6:24 pm

Intel Or Amd?

Tue Feb 12, 2002 6:39 pm

Who do you prefer? Give your reasons...lets get a good thread goin here...

Personaly Intel is my choice!!

AMSMAN
Aer Lingus, Proud to be Irish.
 
Dasa
Posts: 730
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 9:25 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Tue Feb 12, 2002 6:46 pm

Always AMD... cheaper and faster... the only reasons needed!


______________________________
Das.A
 
paulc
Posts: 1440
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2001 10:42 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Tue Feb 12, 2002 9:01 pm

AMD for me also - cheaper, faster
English First, British Second, european Never!
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Tue Feb 12, 2002 9:08 pm

MOTOROLA/IBM!!  Big thumbs up
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Tue Feb 12, 2002 9:26 pm

Okay, reasons pro PowerPC:
+ much more torque, so less RPM required  Wink/being sarcastic
+ well-suited to emulate other machines (even multiple ones)
+ greater choice of OSes (all PC + MacOS(X) + LinuxPPC)
+ only CPU to support Unix with proper user interface
+ low power dissipation (excellent battery life for portables!)

contra:
- my G3 needs a G5 replacement! Big grin
 
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Tue Feb 12, 2002 11:26 pm

AMD is cheaper and more powerful, but the problem is the heat.
AMD anyway for me.
 
BWIrwy4
Posts: 877
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2001 1:41 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 4:47 am

Intel for me. No heat problem, and its just as powerful as an AMD
 
DELL_dude
Posts: 318
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2001 2:58 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 5:15 am

P4 2.2ghz 512k L2 cache

with AMD you get what you pay for. a cheap product at a cheap price. Intel is reliable..why do you think Intel is used in servers and not AMD? that's just MHO.
 
SInGAPORE_AIR
Posts: 11619
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 7:21 am

AMD.

I was having a dilemma as to what to get. the P4 2Ghz or the AMS XP1900+. I got the latter, mainly because the computer co. didn't have any more P4s  Laugh out loud

Anyway, it gives better performace (fact) than the 2Ghz, even the XP1700 gives better performance thatn the 2Ghz.

So, if you want good quality at a low price, go AMD. If you have snobby computer friends, go for Intel. If you want the fastest speed, go for the Intel 2.2Ghz (NOT the 2Ghz). That is the fastest around at the moment. It used to be my XP1900+ but you know what the computer world is like.
Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
 
david b.
Posts: 2894
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 7:18 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 8:17 am

Say, do dell equipt their machines with AMD? Or is that an option? Big grin
Teenage-know-it-alls should be shot on sight
 
ukair
Posts: 261
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 11:36 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 9:02 am


Dell equip with Intel.

 
Eric505
Posts: 565
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 1999 11:18 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 9:12 am

I think AMD is faster, atleast thats what the computer guy said. You never know, he could be kidding me. Anyway I have a 1.6 ghz Athlon Compaq Presario and it serves me well.
Alcohol is the anesthesia by which we endure the operation of life
 
sharpnfuzzy
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2001 2:24 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 11:20 am

only AMD for me. With intel you pay 2x as much for 1/2 the performance, well it's not a half... but you get the idea.

Me and a friend ran 2 cpu and multimedia tests using Sisoft Sandra 2001te Pro, and my 1Ghz tBird smoked his 1.2Ghz P3. WE have practiaclly the same setups 256mb pc133 ram, 20 gig hds, sblive, geforce2 cards....

I had screenshots of the tests but i can't find them right now.. i'll post them here if i do
 
174thfwff
Posts: 2831
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:47 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 11:25 am

Dell Dude, do you know what your talking about???

Every computer I build...I think I built over 200 now, has had an amd processer. From the K6 to the Athlon, they are my choice.

Plus take a look at http://www.tomshardware.com. They will show you what processer is better!
Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Staten, Uptown, what now? Lets make it happen.
 
Mark2102
Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 1:32 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 1:56 pm

Always Intel. Never had an AMD. I have the 2.0ghz P4 HP and I think it is the best thing ever. It is fast! I think you pay a little more for Intel but get more quality from Intel.

Mark
 
Confuscius
Posts: 3568
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 12:29 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 2:03 pm

I like AMD for the value. However, Intel has better chipset support in my opinion.
Ain't I a stinker?
 
Joona
Posts: 1214
Joined: Sun May 06, 2001 2:02 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 2:06 pm

With intel you pay 2x as much for 1/2 the performance

Exactly. I've seen tens of tests showing clearly how slower AMDs have beaten faster Intels.

but get more quality from Intel

More quality? Just how do you define quality? My Duron 850 MHz runs at 1012 MHz with no problems at all. Do you think it has quality enough? I'd say it's very good quality as it still works  Big thumbs up

It's the brand (Intel) which costs.

PS. My Duron "1012" MHz beats my friend's P3 1.2GHz or whatever it is. 1.2 GHz and Intel at least  Big thumbs up

AMD is almost just as fast as the Intel, in some cases even faster, and it costs only half of Intel's respective processor.

I will never buy an Intel anymore. There's just no point in bying Intel. Of course if I were working in a compnay and had a computer there, I'd take Intel for it's reliability. For home use, AMD is many times better than Intel.

Joona
1740 days idle. Beat that.
 
SInGAPORE_AIR
Posts: 11619
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 4:56 pm

I think quality is just something embedded in us. We assume iNtel is better because it's been around longer, and because even if we don't admit it, it is more expensive, however much.

One can say that the P4 2GHZ is fast, however only specific tests will say that it's faster than the AMD XP1900.

If I had a P4 2Ghz and a XP1900, how would I be able to notice the different? No way, unless I had a tester thingie.
Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
 
AMSMAN
Topic Author
Posts: 975
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 6:24 pm

RE: David B's Question

Wed Feb 13, 2002 6:41 pm

Im not sure about Dell, but I know IBM have transitioned completely away from AMD to Intel!!!

AMSMAN
Aer Lingus, Proud to be Irish.
 
BWIrwy4
Posts: 877
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2001 1:41 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 6:58 pm

Dell is all Intel
 
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 7:08 pm

AMD cpus are not "faster", they are more powerful
on a clock per clock basis (much more).
 
174thfwff
Posts: 2831
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 12:47 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Wed Feb 13, 2002 8:22 pm

that's because Intel gave them a mega savings.
All prebuilt computers besides Sun Workstations suck major poo.
Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, Staten, Uptown, what now? Lets make it happen.
 
Dasa
Posts: 730
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 9:25 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Thu Feb 14, 2002 3:12 pm

174thwff, my thoughts exactly.... I will always stay away from Intel.. overpriced and underpowered. When i budgeted my computer with an Intel processor of similar speed, my budget came a good 300 dollars over the AMD Duron processor, which made all the difference.


____________________________
Das.A
 
CPDC10-30
Posts: 4681
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 4:30 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Thu Feb 14, 2002 3:42 pm

Quite honestly, the best system performance I have ever had is with a Motorola processor..an Apple Macintosh IIfx, running System 6.0.7. When first introduced in 1990, it was priced around $10,000...now you can pick them up on eBay for $30 or so...which I intend to do very soon  Smile

The processor was a (mind numbing at the time) 40Mhz Motorola 68030 with a FPU. The IIfx also had unique features such as SCSI DMA and a proprietary (unfortunatley) type of RAM which were all way ahead of their time. There were two processors just to handle floppy drives Also, it had a 40mhz main bus, how often have you seen a main bus running at the same speed as the processor clock? Almost never.

System performance was simply amazing with System 6...I remember it took only about 15 seconds for boot-up. Performance was blunted a bit with System 7 but still very fast.

I have been disillusioned with Apple's product quality and strategy since 1995 and work on PCs now, but am now starting to make a collection of older hardware. The older models have truly stood the test of time and show remarkable build quality and usability.



After I get a IIfx, the next on my hit list are the SE/30 (another amazing performer) and the infamous backbreaking but rock-solid Mac Portable. And a Lisa would be nice too, but they're getting scarce  Smile


 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

CPDC10-30

Fri Feb 15, 2002 1:02 am

CPDC10-30: I have been disillusioned with Apple's product quality and strategy since 1995 and work on PCs now,

You might want to look again...  Wink/being sarcastic

AMD have indeed managed to squeeze a lot more juice out of the completely braindead x86 design than Intel themselves; That´s an admirable feat.

But even Intel has recognized the x86 is nearing the end of its useful life. (As evidenced by the (largely failed) attempt with the "Itanic" design.) Lengthening pipelines and increasing clock rates can only do so much.

The Motorola/IBM PowerPC, however, is a very different concept and a different story... Big grin
 
Guest

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Fri Feb 15, 2002 1:15 am

I have a Compaq Presario with an AMD Duron K6 600mHz, with 248mb RAM. Do you guys think I could upgrade to an AMD Athlon 1900? Or is there anything else worth upgrading to? How much $$?

My machine can take FS2002, but only out in the desert... In big cites it screeches to a halt if I don't pull all the sliders down Big grin
 
CPDC10-30
Posts: 4681
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2000 4:30 pm

RE: Klaus

Wed Feb 20, 2002 12:06 pm

I do keep looking and I'm not impressed. Apple now makes products that are nice and shiny and even stylish, but are not practical. Look at the iMac: where is the exapndibility in that design?
Apple needs to get back to the basics: a superior operating system and rugged, simple hardware that can be easially expanded. They don't have an advantage in terms of either now really.

Apple has become a niche player which is profitable, but far from the dominant force they were in business computing in the late 80s - early 90s. Can you believe that at one point they outsold all other PC manufacturers, including IBM?
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

CPDC10-30

Thu Feb 21, 2002 1:02 am

CPDC10-30: I do keep looking and I'm not impressed. Apple now makes products that are nice and shiny and even stylish, but are not practical. Look at the iMac: where is the exapndibility in that design?

It´s in the PowerMacs. The iMac is designed to be ultra-compact and full-featured for "normal" applications.

If you still need additional PCI slots or multiple high-res monitors (like I do), you´ll buy a PowerMac. Simple as that.

"Not practical"? I´m stunned! Especially when I compare with any WinTel PC I´ve used, upgraded or otherwise fiddled with over the years.

CPDC10-30: Apple needs to get back to the basics: a superior operating system

I´m writing this in OS X; I think it fits your request quite well. Everything you´d want from Linux, but without the pain!  Big thumbs up
(Quite the opposite, actually. It is what XP apparently attempts to achieve.)

CPDC10-30: and rugged, simple hardware that can be easially expanded. They don't have an advantage in terms of either now really.

Huh? Against whom, please? The iMac, PowerMac, iBook and PowerBook are top-notch designs; Build quality is very high. Expandability on the PowerMacs and Powerbooks is also excellent, while limited to USB and FireWire with the iMac and iBook. (All Macs are prepared for wireless networking with built-in antennas.)

CPDC10-30: Apple has become a niche player which is profitable, but far from the dominant force they were in business computing in the late 80s - early 90s.

So do you really want to wait until the last accountant has switched back to Apple?  Wink/being sarcastic

CPDC10-30: Can you believe that at one point they outsold all other PC manufacturers, including IBM?

Especially at a time when IBM was still exclusively making mainframes...  Wink/being sarcastic


I know how tough it is to switch platforms. But a switch from Windows to MacOS has the big advantage that there is a perfectly usable PC emulator (VirtualPC) on the Mac. Even I use it for customer projects. I´m just relieved to shut it down when I´m done...  Big thumbs up
 
FordLover
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2001 3:12 am

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Thu Feb 21, 2002 1:22 am

My old Compaq has an AMD, and I can't afford to replace it yet, so AMD for me! But honestly, I've never had a problem with it. On a side note, what ever happened to Cyrix (sp?), weren't they a player at one time? Now we just have Intel and AMD.
 
iflycoach
Posts: 973
Joined: Sat Aug 19, 2000 1:37 pm

RE: Intel Or Amd?

Thu Feb 21, 2002 12:02 pm

Bump

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], drew777 and 24 guests