January 10th, 2002 03:48 PM
The latest in the ongoing AMD Intel struggle
Here is a review of the latest CPUs from AMD and Intel. Benchmarks and stats are also available:
January 10th, 2002 04:39 PM
In your opinion, which processor would you chose and why?
If I could afford it I'd take the Pentium 4... It's slightly faster but I read in an article that the difference is so small consumers wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
January 10th, 2002 04:50 PM
I prefer AMD. In my experience my AMD's always has out performed my Intels with the same proccessor speed. Amd's are cheaper but they have more power in my opinion. Thats only my opinion
[gloworange]\"A hacker is someone who has a passion for technology, someone who is possessed by a desire to figure out how things work.\" [/gloworange]
January 10th, 2002 05:11 PM
I will have to say that I would take amd, the XP 2000 is doing a fine job keeping up with with the intel at a lower clock rate and half of the cost, If inel thinks that I would recommend a $1000 Cnd processor to someone they must be on some cheap smack.
January 10th, 2002 05:18 PM
I would chose AMD. Intel pent 4 is a great, fast processer. The only reason I would chose AMD is because INTEL and Microsoft are in "coewhots" (<- bad spelling) with each other and I hate microsoft personelly.
January 10th, 2002 06:26 PM
remote....I think AMD is the best $ value. Although the new benchmark marketing scheme they use reminds me of the old Cyrix days..remember how they sold chips as p180 and p200 when the actual clock speed was 120 and 150 resp.?
January 10th, 2002 06:33 PM
AMD all the way!
<CHANTS> AMD AMD AMD AMD! </CHANTS>
Seriously, AMD's got a better product. Not missing shipping dates, not having floating point errors in high-end procs, lower cost, and they're not concentrating on the 2 ghz goal. They know that clock cycles is where the work's being done and they're trying to let people know that. Intel seems to think their name + image will sell and for diehard intel fans, that's fine. But if anyone thinks their intel machine will out-perform mine on every level, think again. I've got an Epox 8KHA w/ the AMD XP 1800+ w/ 512 mb PC2100 DDR ram and it screams like a demon..
Give it a shot. AMD won't let you down. Intel's had the market for the longest time and they've been riding on their name.
And what's up with Intel and their proprietary memory? RAMBUS my ass, talk about expensive and you *have* to use a motherboard that's made for it, with no other upgrade path, like SDRAM w/ DDR support or whatnot.
We the willing, led by the unknowing, have been doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have done so much with so little for so long that we are now qualified to do just about anything with almost nothing.
January 10th, 2002 07:27 PM
You all have very good and reasonable arguements.. I may get the new AMD but untill then I'm stuck with the factory default. (Intel) If I knew Intel and M$ were in "coewhots". I wouldn't have stated my previous opinion. Don't wery bout the speling. I cant spel ether.. thats probly the reson fer the spel cheker.
<CHANTS> AMD AMD AMD AMD! </CHANTS>
January 10th, 2002 07:59 PM
The difference between Cyrix and AMD though is that Cyrix wouldn't even tell you that their slow ass processor wasn't really a 200. AMD XP I think has made a greater approach to show, hey this is a 1266 even though its called an AMD 1500 XP.
I could be a little off on that example because I am too lazy to look up the facts, that and I don't think they made an AMD 1500 XP.
You\'re either a 0 or a 1, alive or dead
January 10th, 2002 11:15 PM
If you don't want to take the time to read the article here is the conclusion of the whole matter:
Nevertheless, in the performance tests, the results of both competitors were neck-on-neck, and in order to capture the nuances of the individual performances, we used a large set of different benchmark tests. In spite of Intel's 533 MHz advantage in clock speed we saw a rather close outcome.
AMD still rules because of price.