AMD cries foul!

[hot_ice]

Wow...33 to 3 in favour of AMD. I was thinking AMD would be favoured amongst us AO users, but was thinking something like 70% or something, never knew it would be leaning to AMD so heavily.

At our home, we always had Intel CPU's. I didn't really hear about AMD until I was about 15 or something (4 years ago - roughly). Anywho, I use to buy PC's from DELL and GATEWAY (very good PC's in my opinion), but ever since I became more familiar with computer hardware and how it works, how it's connected, etc, I've always favoured AMD.

About half a year ago, I decided to stop my trend in buying branded PC's from DELL and GATEWAY and decided I'll take the challenge and put one together myself. I couldn't believe the price difference between Intel and AMD - AMD's CPU's were about half the price for similar clock speeds - I couldn't understand why people would buy Intel's if they were more expensive, unless AMD's performed badly.

So, I chucked the system all together (suprisingly easy for my first time) and 6 months down the track I have no regrets - AMD is sensational and I doubt I'll go back to buying Intel. I've read that AMD's overheat easily and you can't leave em on too long (heard that somewhere, don't know where), but it was obviously all crap, as I've left my PC on for weeks on end and it performs like a dream!!

AMD all the way I say!!



Ciao,
Greg

[imaginedsanity]

About eight months ago I read an article claiming that an AMD running at half the "speed" (MHZ) of an intel processor could actually outperform the intel (ie...800 mhz AMD outperforms intel 1.6ghz) As you can imagine I was sceptical, so I found out for myself. I own a Duron myself, and had the opportunity to work on a brand new Dell pentium 1.7ghz. After being on used to my own computer, I felt like I was crawling on the pentium. It's hard to believe, but it's true....AMDs kick pentium ass.

[Vorlin]

Benchmarks should be taken with a grain of salt. AMD vs. Intel (I go for AMD everytime), NT vs Linux (remember that benchmark? NT tweaked vs. RH right out of the box? Yeah, that's fair.), NVidia vs. ATI...

We should remember two things. 1) If, in any of the aforementioned, any one of the two go away entirely, the other owns the market and that means they can make the prices whatever they want. PRIME example is Intel. If it weren't for AMD (and other happenings along the way), we'd still be on P2 400mhz machines and paying an assload at that. 2) Competition breeds better products. AMD, I think, makes a better product. Not just because they're AMD but because they know and have been trying to get the word out that the megahertz theory is just that. A theory. Intel's repeatedly used the market's ignorance of what really goes on by putting "400 mhz FSB!" and "It makes your internet scream!" on their boxes and ads...

First off, 400 mhz FSB is only 2 x 200 FSB pipelined and second, when does a proc have ANYTHING to do with the internet (which is NOT an application)? Educate the endusers, give them a choice. Me, I'll go with AMD every time and I'm one of the most hardcore gamers out there. I'd never use an Intel for gaming, ever.

And overall, the G4 by Apple beats the pants off Intel and AMD. Why? Because it's a 128-bit processor which means it pumps more per clock cycle. (well, more than that but it's the rough gist)

[devil_dog]

AMD rulez....
till this feb, ive built lots of intel based systems....but it was then when i built an athalon xp 1700+ based system for myself....and after that there has been no looking back.....
ive pursuaded all my clients to go for AMD.....

[Terr]

I think the Tom's Hardware article also mentions that AMD did not cry foul when sysmark originally had a bunch of AMD-favoring stuff in there for no practical reason. I don't think it's as clear cut as 'Big Bad Intel is being Mean to Good AMD'.