Intel or AMD

[padawan]

I could not agree more. If the Intel guys would just once admit that the mighty Intel lost the speed crown, if only for a year or so, I'd be happy. I hate it when these arguements become a huge bashing Intel/AMD battle. Both chips are fast, some of us can agree about that. Others would have you believe that owning an AMD chip will give you some sexually transmitted disease and cause your hair to fall out.

I am not a huge, diehard AMD fan, but at this point in time, I prefer them. I used to be a huge Celery fan, back when they were the budget speed kings.

In the end, I always feel like I have to push the AMD issue that much harder because I would hate a new user to read some of the stuff in this thread, and assume it is all gospel (like benchmarks are a lie). Like Alfie said, two years ago, if Intel was winning in the 3DMark99 benchmark, it was because they had a superior CPU. Now that AMD can beat Intel, the benchmarks are unreliable.

We should just sticky this thread so another one does not start in a couple of weeks.

[HAL9000]

Hmmm... seems to me, Mhz isn't everything, but it sure was when AMD took the title to 1Ghz. So, lets reverse it, speed isn't everything either. I can make a VW do 200Mph, do you wanna drive it? Or would you rather be in a race built vehicle that tops at 180Mph?

[GangstaAngel]

good analogy Hal....off the subject guys....my tech teacher has given me a project....i have to even something technology wise that would benefit mankind in the next 20 years. I was thinking a motherboard with onboard Ultra Lite SCSI hard, video, sound, lan, all that other good stuff....all you would ned is case, monitor, and cd-rom. Price is a factor, but not necessarily. If i ever created a board with "everything" on it. And created my own "perfect" chipset, would you guys buy it if it was priced around US 500.00 ????

[HAL9000]

Like I suggested before, this is what really gets to me.

The average Intel user;

-Proud of what he/she owns
-Doesn't care about benchmarks
-Keeps his system for a long period of time (IMHO, the longrun better value)
-States why they prefer Intel
-Usually agrees AMD makes a mighty fine chip, but lacks a good chipset

The average AMD user;

-Required to bash all Intel users with quotes of and lack of performance and post links to benchmarks
-Must brag about AMD this and AMD that.
-Must shoot down anyone looking to build an Intel until they choose AMD.
-Insists that Intel is garbage
-Insists that "hundreds" can be saved (at one time yes, but no longer)
-Actually spends more in the longrun changing motherboards and CPU's to stay on top.

Not saying that EVERY Intel and AMD user is this way, but check the posts over and over again, and check the averages, you see much of the above to be true.

[NickLuto]

How come you guys are trying to convince other people what the best is? Shouldnt the definition of the best be in every person individually?
I like AMD and Intel. They are both cool. I'll just leave it at that.

Nick

[HAL9000]

I agree. I never said I "don't" like AMD, I have said I prefer Intel. I have always said I don't like the lack of a good chipset. If you look at just the CPU, I don't think either builds a better CPU. Each has their strengths, each their weakness.

[Michael]

Here's how my post about my K6/3 system was responded to. The sad fact is all I did was compare my K6/3 to an intel in terms of STABILITY. NOT SPEED, NOT OC'ing, etc, etc. But the poster chose to berate and insult me ad nauseum. In reality my post was factual, while the response was born out of some misplaced resentment that any AMD could match an Intel. Words were put in my mouth and the tone was enough to make me consider never using this board again. Hal, I have just the opposite perception of how the Intel and AMD folks have conducted themselves in this thread. It certainly has brought out the best and the worst in people, and in some people that I held in high esteem regardless of their cpu preference. I and many other AMD devotees have tempered their remarks and given Intel due credit as being a stable and proven product (as have many Intel users in their perception of AMD). I think you're trying to win an argument that cannot be won. At any rate, this is my last post in this thread, and I'll think very carefully of ever contributing to any posts that ask: "Intel or AMD"....it's just not worth taking an unjustified bashing such as this:

First up, Michael:
You stated that you would put your K6-III up against a similarily clocked Intel system. Well pal, I want a piece of that action!
The system I would use is a lowly Celeron 300a @ 450/500mhz on a BX class system board. All else being the same, I would make you eat your words and have your K6-III beg for a quick mercifull death.
Can you say the following?
I can install *any* vidcard without compatability?
I can install *any* soundcard without incompatability?
I can use most any power supply?
I can overclock 100%?

You sir are using the MVP chipset. The BX class system board is documented to have nearly 50% faster memory moves, 33% faster PCI/AGP transfer rates.
The BX class chipset based system boards have *no* compatability issues, what-so-ever....period.
So...wrap that puppy up, you are going to have a real bad hair day!


Again, all I did was compare stability to an Intel, and nothing else....NOTHING!!! To say that AMD'ers do nothing but bash Intel while Intel users laud the merits of AMD I think has been disproven by the above post.

[HAL9000]

OK, I don't want to start a flame war as these threads get bad enough as it is. Read my final statement in my post

Not saying that EVERY Intel and AMD user is this way, but check the posts over and over again, and check the averages, you see much of the above to be true.

NOW go do a search here and on other message boards for somebody building an AMD. Where are the flaming attacks from Intel users. Far and few between. Should we begin to?

NOW go do a search here and on other message boards for somebody building an Intel system. Post after post attacking the person to build an AMD system.

I will repeat myself; Not saying that EVERY Intel and AMD user is this way, but check the posts.

OK, before, I stirred the pot, Toaster joined me. We have both apologized for stirring the pot. I guess it's time I let them have their victory and abstain from this thread


I should also add, do a search here. A while back when P4 was in its infancy, I did recommend a person go for an AMD system if they were looking for systems above 1.0Ghz. P4 was not an economical choice at that time.

[Alfie]

In defense of the K6 III,the k6 III cpu could easily beat any Intel cpu with a similar mhz rating in all 2d applications,it's failure came in 3d applications, where Intel won.
It was a shame that a fine cpu and design was so quickly shot down because one couldn't play a game as fast as on a Intel system,benchmarks being the deciding factor.
As to compatibilty,I've never had a problem with any video card,sound card,etc.
If one is to single out a few exceptions(recent issue with Soundblaster,for example)then we know this is a flame war and not a discussion.
It seems the users of both systems have taken sides,one bashing the other.
If we realize that at one time both companies were best of buddies,fed off each other(AMD built Intel cpus at one time)and then overnight Intel closed the door on AMD,abandoning their gentlemen's agreement,we can understand the hurt feelings on AMD's part,but it seems this anomosity has carried over to the user's of the two companies!

[padawan]

I tend to agree with Micheal here. Some of the comments are getting out of hand, and the insults are a little harsh.

Also, I doubt every single Intel chip will get a 100% overclock, so to state that as a reason to buy Intel is merely more propaganda. A 100% overclock is a very rare occurance, and if all Intel CPUs did it, there is no doubt where my money would be spent.

BTW, HAL I don't think Micheal is talking about you, but some others have made very generalized statements about All AMD users are this or that..., making it seem almost like a class war. So much for a friendly debate. Like I've always said, I'll run some benchmarks on my AMD system, and compare them to any like Intel system, with screenshots if needed. But again, benchmarks have been deemed unreliable by some, so it's a mute point.

I doubt anyone could ever change some people's mind, but I hate the impression that some of the Intel users would have new users believe. If we looked back in the forums about 2 years, I'm sure most of the AMD people used to be Intel fans, I know I was. I was a die-hard Celery users, but the K7 was a break through for me, and thousands of others. I'm sure Intel will make a comeback, and the P4 is starting to look like a good platform once again. We'll see what happens over the next year, but until then, let's try to be civil in our discussions, and not be so blindly loyal to one brand that wild claims are spewed across the forum, making us all look bad.

[Toaster]

Hello folks,

Michael:
I did take your post out of context and I apologize.
I was having a bad hair day at the time any my fuse was short.
I misread your post and relpied in haste.
Please accept my apology.

Other members:
The above applies to you as well.

I made no attempt to "insult" but I can understand how it could be percieved as such.

Padawan:
True, AMD made the 1ghz mark first. However, when AMD does this its a breakthrough. Intel beat and passed the 2ghz barrier and this bears no notice?
AMD CPUs are thermally unprotected, but this is ok?
AMD can't build a decent chipset for "their" flagship CPU, this is OK?
You ask for credit where credit is due. Well, just AMD gets credit huh?
Now, this is the Bias that we ALL see, day in, day out.

[padawan]

I never said AMD was great for hitting 1GHz first. It was just a monumental moment in PC history. I'm not sure why the 2GHz barrier is no big deal, maybe it's just because of the"arms race" between AMD and Intel. Remember back when a 33MHz increase was great? Now we are seeing 100-200MHz jump every couple of months.

AMD thermal protection sucks, I've said it before, and I'll say it again. But Intel's RAMBUS sucked. Both companies have flaws, Intel has done recalls, AMD has the chipped core issue, I'm sure there are 100 different things we can list, but it is not the point. Which CPU is better depends on how you define better. If an AMD chip is faster on a VIA chipset, so be it. VIA seems to be doing ok, considering the advances made in the last 2 years. Sure, the BX chipset was nice, but it is old. VIA might release chipsets a little early, that is the only problem I can see. That's why we keep getting "A" versions of all the VIA chipsets. But, Intel has released some crappy chipsets, too. Maybe the fact that we are seeing changes and advances in the industry on almost a daily basis is the problem. Back when the BX chipset was around, things stayed the same for years.

The AMD chipset thing is completely wrong. AMD did release a stable, fast chipset for their flagship, the 760. AMD does not want to build chipsets. They have said it publicly time and again. If they need to, they will (as was the case with the 760 chipset). I don't see that as a fault. They don't want to be in that market at this time, so what? For you to say they can't is an out and out lie, very misleading. Unless you have an AMD 760 board around for testing, don't make statements like that. I do, and it runs great, very fast, and very stable. Anandtech has some very good 760 articles, too, if I am too biased for your taste. Check HardOCP, too. Don't take my word for it.

[Computer Hobbyist]

Originally posted by padawan The AMD chipset thing is completely wrong. AMD did release a stable, fast chipset for their flagship, the 760. AMD does not want to build chipsets. They have said it publicly time and again. If they need to, they will (as was the case with the 760 chipset). I don't see that as a fault. They don't want to be in that market at this time, so what? For you to say they can't is an out and out lie, very misleading.

Anybody who has read anything about the history of the Athlon knows that AMD came out with the 760 chipset in order to showcase the Athlon, and that it was better than VIA's first releases. (Some would say it still is better.) And anybody who has done any reading at all knows AMD didn't, and still doesn't, want to be in the chipset business. All of that is old news. However, to call somebody a liar is the kind of comment I find distasteful. I am logging out of this tread.

CH

[padawan]

To be completely honest, I am getting tired of hearing the same things said over and over, when the facts are wrong. All I wanted was people to know the truth, and not some opinions of one person. Know what you are saying before you post something as facts, that is my point. I've had enough of this thread as well. I'm all for a friendly debate, but I get sooo tired of hearing the same BS everytime this topic comes up, and it really makes me angry. I don't like the idea of rumors and opinions being pawned as facts on this board, where people come to learn. If something is an opinion, state it. Don't declare it as a fact.

[Michael]

Toaster: Apology totally accepted. Now do us all a favor and close this thread, ok? I think this has to be the mother of all "AMD vs. Intel" threads, and I for one am not particularly proud of that.

Remember the "old days" before we went to this format? The flame wars were rampant. Now, this has turned into one of the most civil and considerate boards in existance thanks to the excellent judgement of the moderators, but this thread has far exceeded, in my opinion, PcMechs criteria for what is allowed and what isn't.

Again, thanks for being big enough to apologize, it's restored my faith in this board.

[Demosthenes]

I love these Hal and Toaster vs. the world debates. You would think they would get monotonous after a while, but it is always interesting to see the same arguments thrown about time and again. Not that there is anything wrong with that, saying the samething over and over is how I did my bookreports as a young lad. That and someone always comes away from these discussions crying. For shame. :)

Darwinists alway say: "The only proof against evolution is its opponents." I wonder if the same holds true for AMD and Intel.

Respectfully,

Demosthenes

[LawyerRon]

Quote by CH:
"I am logging out of this tread."

Me too, but for another reason; I refuse to argue when I'm not getting paid for it.

[whr2206]

demosthenes- lol yeah I agree hal9000 and toaster are always vs. the amd users. IM an amd user, but prefer intel. I just get cnfused what they are arguing about, and I cant contribute, owell.

[Demosthenes]

Oh, I love Intel, but I have to agree with padawan. He has held a very convincing argument from the get go which no one has (or even can) counter. Intel has had a fine product, but the computer market is highly volatile. Of course AMD has copied Intel technology, how can you not? Both use common technology; PCI, ISA, AGP, this cannot be helped. Would you buy a home computer that did not use PCI? It is like writing consumer products for Windows. They are there, they are big, and if you want money your product better be Windows compatible. Also, if Intel tech is good, why did AMD not lease out RAMBUS, too? Personally, I think they should both purge PCI and AGP to create new standards. ISA is old as dirt and PCI is just drying mud, soon to be dirt.

Still, though they borrow technology, it cannot be ignored that AMD took some initiative with the Athlon. People have these fierce loyalties to semiconductors for whatever perverted reason they have, but you have to know when to bail. I have known many people who buy a stock and are so proud of it, they share it with everyone else. Then, that stock falls, but since that person has had it for so long, or is so attached to it, they refuse to let it go. They want to "weather the storm" with it, like they married the stock or something. This is not until death do you part. Still, some people will not admit their faults. I am one such person, though I have never married a stock.

I ran Intels until my Athlon. I thought AMD and Cyrix were absolute crap. Then my friend bought the first release of the Athlon 1GHz and a GeForce card. Both really caught on. When I set down to build my next glorified calculator, the thought of a Pentium4 never entered my mind. It was between a Coppermine and a Thunderbird. I chose the Thunderbird, because contrary to debate, price is definitely a factor. Even right now, the cost of a PIII Coppermine is more than a Thunderbird, and that is at any speed you want to choose for either processor. But later, when I upgraded my PII 450, I went with a Celeron 850. The Celeron and Duron were roughly the same price, but I wanted to avoid the VIA way for this particular upgrade and did not want to pay for the AMD way. So, I found a nice, cheap i815 board and the final cost was hardly anymore than a Duron solution. So, this is a roundabout way of saying, I agree with padawan, do what you want, but at least give AMD some credit.

Respectfully,

Demosthenes

[HAL9000]

Originally posted by Demosthenes Also, if Intel tech is good, why did AMD not lease out RAMBUS, too?

AMD does hold a license for RAMBUS too. They're covering their back just in case DDR doesn't cut it with future processors.

[Demosthenes]

Toché, did not know that, but a nice maneuver none the less.
Why are there no AMD RAMBUS solutions?
This is more curiosity now than sticking it to you.

I gather they bought the license while it still sucked as to play it safe and keep from paying elevated prices when it caught on. Real shame about Rambus. Good in theory and paper, but they just could not sell the idea at the prices they wanted. In the end, it is not the best technology that always wins. Marketing runs well more of the computing business than most techies are willing to admit.

Respectfully,

Demosthenes

[HAL9000]

Yes indeed, it's a very intelligent move, but I think even more intelligent is to let Intel play the market, take the heat for it if it fails, but only look like a copycat if it succeeds which is why I would assume that there is currently no AMD RAMBUS solution. You can bet that if RDRAM becomes the winning solution, AMD will drop DDR like a dirty shirt and jump on the wagon. If DDR becomes the winning solution, then Intel looks like they made a huge mistake and are forced into AMD's memory of choice.