...

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Aw, give it up. These AMD zealots wouldn't admit the truth if it bit 'em in the arse.

Anyone who argues the stability of Intel chipsets is an idiot. Period.

Anyone who argues the stability of AMD/VIA chipsets is an idiot. Period

If you want to dig into thier past then lets all remember the old FPU bug. Intel?s old problem of not being able to divide or add correctly ?You mean 2.00000000 + 2.000000000 doesn't equal 3.999998456??

The fact you own a prescott says it all. I have no problem with Intel ( own a 2.8, 3.0 Ghz northwoods), but why prescott ? you must have got it for encoding or multitasking ? I hope its over 3.4 Ghz, beacuse I would brand anyone who bought a preshott over a northwood @ that speed dumb.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: clarkey01
Anyone who argues the stability of AMD/VIA chipsets is an idiot. Period

ROFLMAO. You really want me to bring up the VIA chipset issues (and the resulting debate?) Dig back a little bit. VIA chipsets suck arse.

If you want to dig into thier past then lets all remember the old FPU bug. Intel?s old problem of not being able to divide or add correctly ?You mean 2.00000000 + 2.000000000 doesn't equal 3.999998456??

And that was what, Pentium Pro? Let's keep the focus in the modern era.

The fact you own a prescott says it all. I have no problem with Intel ( own a 2.8, 3.0 Ghz northwoods), but why prescott ? you must have got it for encoding or multitasking ? I hope its over 3.4 Ghz, beacuse I would brand anyone who bought a preshott over a northwood @ that speed dumb.

LOL. Doesn't say much for your intelligence, does it? FWIW no it is a 630 Prescott. And guess what? I'm thrilled with it. And yes, I do a lot of video-related work. And multitasking.

Stop back when you have some facts for us. Just calling Prescott "dumb" shows your true colors.

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: clarkey01
Anyone who argues the stability of AMD/VIA chipsets is an idiot. Period

ROFLMAO. You really want me to bring up the VIA chipset issues (and the resulting debate?) Dig back a little bit. VIA chipsets suck arse.

If you want to dig into thier past then lets all remember the old FPU bug. Intel?s old problem of not being able to divide or add correctly ?You mean 2.00000000 + 2.000000000 doesn't equal 3.999998456??

And that was what, Pentium Pro? Let's keep the focus in the modern era.

The fact you own a prescott says it all. I have no problem with Intel ( own a 2.8, 3.0 Ghz northwoods), but why prescott ? you must have got it for encoding or multitasking ? I hope its over 3.4 Ghz, beacuse I would brand anyone who bought a preshott over a northwood @ that speed dumb.

LOL. Doesn't say much for your intelligence, does it? FWIW no it is a 630 Prescott. And guess what? I'm thrilled with it. And yes, I do a lot of video-related work. And multitasking.

Stop back when you have some facts for us. Just calling Prescott "dumb" shows your true colors.

Thats fine...But I'd rather have in your view an more unstable platform in the shape on an X2 If zebo was hear he'd hand your ass to you but I cant be arsed arguing with you. encoding is split 50/50 with the single cores (939's) and with the X2's your stable intel platforms gets pwnd. As for prescott for being dumb, I can think of zero reason apart from multitasking for the purpose of this chip, and X2 has just taken that away. For a chip over 2 years in development which came out hotter, slower clock for clock and didnt make the projected 5 Ghz target speed I dont see it as a "clever" chip.

 

[Capt Caveman]

I thought this little argument was about Chipsets, not CPUs. I think we all know the X2 is great. But it doesn't make the single-core Intel 6xx cpu's terrible or as you would crap, sucks arse, etc.

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
I thought this little argument was about Chipsets, not CPUs. I think we all know the X2 is great. But it doesn't make the single-core Intel 6xx cpu's terrible or as you would crap, sucks arse, etc.

The unstable BS about AMD chipsets is more what Im getting at. But yeah I did have a dig

 

[Aenslead]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Aw, give it up. These Intel zealots wouldn't admit the truth if it bit 'em in the arse.

Anyone who argues the stability of any chipset for AMD is an idiot. Period.

Fixed!

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Aenslead

Originally posted by: Pabster
Aw, give it up. These Intel zealots wouldn't admit the truth if it bit 'em in the arse.

Anyone who argues the stability of any chipset for AMD is an idiot. Period.

Fixed!

:thumbsup:

 

[Aenslead]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
I also meant the 925x and 925xe chipsets. And premium? The Intel Nvidia NF4 chipset is almost double the price of a 955x. Also, folks have been having horrible problems with Intel NF4 boards. Heck, they can't even support dual core. And why do motherboard makers like Abit and Gigabyte have to add audio chipset/cards with Nvidia chipsets? Intel chipsets can also handle faster memory speeds. Check OC and XS systems, you won't find anyone that hasn't been pleased with the quality, performance and stability of the Intel chipsets from the last year. You might be thinking of the past and AMD only. I'm talking about now.

Yes, I am aware of those problems, but lets not get off the subject.

The deal here was that someone mentions an Intel plataform is simply better than any AMD plataform because of the chipsets from Intel.

I disagree entirely, because I have seen chipsets for AMD plataform working flawlessly since the introduction of the nForce 2 and the KT333 chipsets. There have been no more complains on stability issues whatsoever for AMD systems.

In other words, and trying real hard not to be biased, I find it hard to chose an Intel solution over an AMD one; maybe the chipset was an important decision 5 or 4 years ago; I must say I personaly loved the i845 line. They where good performers and very stable, but now, even SiS and ULi chipset solutions are too.

The chipset is not an issue anymore. Even for all-in-one solutions, that is, integrated everything, solutions from SiS and VIA come just as good as any from Intel.

 

[Aenslead]

Also, please be kind to nVidia. After all, its their first try on an Intel plataform. They usually get it right by the second time. Happened with Skt A, happened with Skt754.

 

[Rock Hydra]

As much as I would love to buy an Intel, I am not impressed with their showings. So, this time I'm going to buy an AMD. My first in about 10 years, and I don't think I'll be disappointed.

 

[Aenslead]

Originally posted by: RockHydra11
As much as I would love to buy an Intel, I am not impressed with their showings. So, this time I'm going to buy an AMD. My first in about 10 years, and I don't think I'll be disappointed.

Yes. You go out now and do that.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: clarkey01
Thats fine...But I'd rather have in your view an more unstable platform in the shape on an X2 If zebo was hear he'd hand your ass to you but I cant be arsed arguing with you. encoding is split 50/50 with the single cores (939's) and with the X2's your stable intel platforms gets pwnd. As for prescott for being dumb, I can think of zero reason apart from multitasking for the purpose of this chip, and X2 has just taken that away. For a chip over 2 years in development which came out hotter, slower clock for clock and didnt make the projected 5 Ghz target speed I dont see it as a "clever" chip.

1. Zebo is hiding. Probably fixing up his new Prescott!
2. We're talking CHIPSET here, not CPU. Do you know the difference?
3. You still have ZERO evidence of Prescott being dumb. Can you say Fanboy?
4. Well AMD planned on being higher than 2.4GHz too. Or was it 5000+? LOL
5. What you think isn't "clever" really makes no difference, does it?

Obviously you don't like Prescott, that's fine. But until you provide some evidence to back up your claims -- besides "it's dumb" -- everyone sees you for what you really are.

P.S. I notice you don't have your profile enabled or your system rig(s) listed. Any particular reason for that? Maybe that old INTEL system you are using?

 

[blackllotus]

Intel and AMD processors each have their advantages and disadvantages. This is quite visible when scanning the benchmarks here at anandtech.

When comparing high end processors from each company the results are rather mixed. AMD tends to be stronger in more situations than Intel, but Intel gives AMD a beating in some of the benchmarks.

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2429&p=2

For the price, AMD also tends to be a better deal.

http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2249&p=4

As was said before, Intel is stronger in certain multitasking and audio related functions, while AMD tends to be stronger at most other things. However, looking at the benchmarks of the high-end processors from both companies shows that in many cases there are not large performance differences between the two companies.

I tend to prefer AMD since their processors tend to be cheaper, and excel at gaming (http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2330&p=2), but one of my friends has a good Intel processor (p4 not sure which type) and his system is very decent (atleast compared to my system which is pretty old).

 

[Aenslead]

Originally posted by: Pabster


P.S. I notice you don't have your profile enabled or your system rig(s) listed. Any particular reason for that? Maybe that old INTEL system you are using?

1. Zebo is hiding. Probably fixing up his new Prescott!
He does have a job, you know...? unlike you...

2. We're talking CHIPSET here, not CPU. Do you know the difference?
He is still mentioning the plataform. You KNOW what a plataform is, right?

3. You still have ZERO evidence of Prescott being dumb. Can you say Fanboy?
Its not "dumb", but its a certain step back from the Northwood core, and that's a fact. Step backs are not good, you know?

4. Well AMD planned on being higher than 2.4GHz too. Or was it 5000+? LOL
Yes, they did, hence, we have FX 55, at 2.6Ghz. No P4 @ 4.0Ghz, though...

5. What you think isn't "clever" really makes no difference, does it?
It does to 90% of this forum...

Obviously you don't like Prescott, that's fine.

Does anyone? Besides you, of course... who... as far as I can see, can't do anything but to lamely try to justify your bad purchase of a Preshott... or so I can tell by your signature. Its like the gay guy who dresses up in mexican pink shouting "here I am!! Look! Look!".

 

[Capt Caveman]

Not to continue this bickering but he does have a 630 which is what the Prescotts shoud have been in the beginning. When oc'd to 4ghz, they are very nice cpus. And at load, my 640 is at 46c. Not very hot IMHO.

 

[Tarrant64]

Sorry to be late to the post. So let me try to understand this. I have already chosen to go the X2 path when I can afford it. But is this the reasoning you trying to make at some points?

For most us A64 users we will just need to be purchasing a new processor, the X2. The cheapest one being around ~$500+. And supposedly, this is all we will have to buy. Keeping in mind this outperforms the higher end Dual Intel processors.

For most Intel users, they will be purchasing a new processor, ~$250+, mobo, ~$250(i'm guessing their really expensive), and who knows. Graphics and memory as well? An additional $400 maybe? Total costs 'possibly' reaching $1000+.

I know prices are prolly off but just trying to get the sum of it.

So either way you look at it, the A64 will have an 'easier' and 'cheaper' upgrade path. Correct? So it's not looking at the price of the CPU just alone, but the cost of the entire upgrade/performance. Right?

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Tarrant64
Sorry to be late to the post. So let me try to understand this. I have already chosen to go the X2 path when I can afford it. But is this the reasoning you trying to make at some points?

For most us A64 users we will just need to be purchasing a new processor, the X2. The cheapest one being around ~$500+. And supposedly, this is all we will have to buy. Keeping in mind this outperforms the higher end Dual Intel processors.

For most Intel users, they will be purchasing a new processor, ~$250+, mobo, ~$250(i'm guessing their really expensive), and who knows. Graphics and memory as well? An additional $400 maybe? Total costs 'possibly' reaching $1000+.

I know prices are prolly off but just trying to get the sum of it.

So either way you look at it, the A64 will have an 'easier' and 'cheaper' upgrade path. Correct? So it's not looking at the price of the CPU just alone, but the cost of the entire upgrade/performance. Right?

Yes. Except many Intel fans dispute the hardware costs. I think if you already have a 939 pin motherboard, yes its a cheaper upgrade. Main thing to keep in mind, if you run multi-threaded software, the X2 is much faster. If you like a cooler running processor that takes a lot less electricity ($), the X2 is for you.....

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Tarrant64
Sorry to be late to the post. So let me try to understand this. I have already chosen to go the X2 path when I can afford it. But is this the reasoning you trying to make at some points?

For most us A64 users we will just need to be purchasing a new processor, the X2. The cheapest one being around ~$500+. And supposedly, this is all we will have to buy. Keeping in mind this outperforms the higher end Dual Intel processors.

For most Intel users, they will be purchasing a new processor, ~$250+, mobo, ~$250(i'm guessing their really expensive), and who knows. Graphics and memory as well? An additional $400 maybe? Total costs 'possibly' reaching $1000+.

I know prices are prolly off but just trying to get the sum of it.

So either way you look at it, the A64 will have an 'easier' and 'cheaper' upgrade path. Correct? So it's not looking at the price of the CPU just alone, but the cost of the entire upgrade/performance. Right?

I think most people that would go Intel dual-core are folks that are already on the LGA775 platform. For me to upgrade to a 830 after selling my 640, we're talking $100.

If a current Intel user wasn't using a LGA775 board, going with a X2 might be a better choice as they might be able to reuse their memory and video card.

But don't speak about things if you're just going to guess, a 945 board can be bought at newegg right now for less than $140. And only people using a 939 will be all set, 754 folks and Socket A(AMD currently still produces 50% XP cpus) will have to upgrade more.

Everyone will have a different upgrade path and some folks, both AMDs and Intels, will have expensive upgrades and some will have less expensive ones.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Aenslead

He does have a job, you know...? unlike you...

Yeah, having a job sucks, doesn't it? Especially AT AMD Fanboy Extraordinaire!

He is still mentioning the plataform. You KNOW what a plataform is, right?

Wrong. We started debating CHIPSET stability and all of a sudden the "but X2 rules all" crap started in again. The usual.

Its not "dumb", but its a certain step back from the Northwood core, and that's a fact. Step backs are not good, you know?

Where are your "facts" to back up your claim? Prescott has 64-bit capability and enhanced thermal capabilities from Northwood. Now where are these elusive "facts" you are talking about? You need to learn how to distinguish FACT from FICTION (read: your opinion)

Yes, they did, hence, we have FX 55, at 2.6Ghz. No P4 @ 4.0Ghz, though...

That's funny, I see a lot of people running >4GHz with the P4 here

It does to 90% of this forum...

LOL you must be delusional. If you think anyone gives a rat's ass what you (or any of your cohorts) think about the price of tea in china, I suggest you check in to your nearest mental health facilities.

Does anyone? Besides you, of course... who... as far as I can see, can't do anything but to lamely try to justify your bad purchase of a Preshott... or so I can tell by your signature. Its like the gay guy who dresses up in mexican pink shouting "here I am!! Look! Look!".

Or the AMD fanboy who spews "but X2 rules all" as his reply to nearly any thread... Back to your hole in the wall, now. Your buddies are waiting for you.

 

[imported_brandon]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Aenslead

He does have a job, you know...? unlike you...

Yeah, having a job sucks, doesn't it? Especially AT AMD Fanboy Extraordinaire!

He is still mentioning the plataform. You KNOW what a plataform is, right?

Wrong. We started debating CHIPSET stability and all of a sudden the "but X2 rules all" crap started in again. The usual.

Its not "dumb", but its a certain step back from the Northwood core, and that's a fact. Step backs are not good, you know?

Where are your "facts" to back up your claim? Prescott has 64-bit capability and enhanced thermal capabilities from Northwood. Now where are these elusive "facts" you are talking about? You need to learn how to distinguish FACT from FICTION (read: your opinion)

Yes, they did, hence, we have FX 55, at 2.6Ghz. No P4 @ 4.0Ghz, though...

That's funny, I see a lot of people running >4GHz with the P4 here

It does to 90% of this forum...

LOL you must be delusional. If you think anyone gives a rat's ass what you (or any of your cohorts) think about the price of tea in china, I suggest you check in to your nearest mental health facilities.

Does anyone? Besides you, of course... who... as far as I can see, can't do anything but to lamely try to justify your bad purchase of a Preshott... or so I can tell by your signature. Its like the gay guy who dresses up in mexican pink shouting "here I am!! Look! Look!".

Or the AMD fanboy who spews "but X2 rules all" as his reply to nearly any thread... Back to your hole in the wall, now. Your buddies are waiting for you.

Let's see...

Prescott has a 31 stage pipeline, and it takes 3.6Ghz + to beat a Northwood at 3.4Ghz. It also runs very hot, even though it's on a 90nm process... Also, yeah, the 6xx series has 64bit, but when AMD had it first, everyone was like OMG 64bit is useless... Bad argument I'm afraid.

But, the Prescott does have it's advantages... It scales better than northwood, it has enhanced branch prediction, and it can use DDR2....

I'm no fanboy, my 1st computer was an Intel P3, back when Intel made exceptional desktop processors, until I bought an AthlonXP rig, and it was cheap & fast, so I decided to stick with AMD.

BTW, don't bring up Pentium M, I said desktop processors, not laptop.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: brandon
Let's see...

Prescott has a 31 stage pipeline, and it takes 3.6Ghz + to beat a Northwood at 3.4Ghz. It also runs very hot, even though it's on a 90nm process... Also, yeah, the 6xx series has 64bit, but when AMD had it first, everyone was like OMG 64bit is useless... Bad argument I'm afraid.

No one was making an "argument" one way or another. I was just stating the differences (some of them) between the Northwood and Prescott cores.

But, the Prescott does have it's advantages... It scales better than northwood, it has enhanced branch prediction, and it can use DDR2....

You forgot SSE3. And don't say "x2 has it too!" LOL

I'm no fanboy, my 1st computer was an Intel P3, back when Intel made exceptional desktop processors, until I bought an AthlonXP rig, and it was cheap & fast, so I decided to stick with AMD.

BTW, don't bring up Pentium M, I said desktop processors, not laptop.

Who brought up P-M? <sigh> Although I suspect this time next year or so we'll probably be debating a dual-core P-M desktop chip against some AMD chip. Time will tell

 

[imported_brandon]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: brandon
Let's see...

Prescott has a 31 stage pipeline, and it takes 3.6Ghz + to beat a Northwood at 3.4Ghz. It also runs very hot, even though it's on a 90nm process... Also, yeah, the 6xx series has 64bit, but when AMD had it first, everyone was like OMG 64bit is useless... Bad argument I'm afraid.

No one was making an "argument" one way or another. I was just stating the differences (some of them) between the Northwood and Prescott cores.

But, the Prescott does have it's advantages... It scales better than northwood, it has enhanced branch prediction, and it can use DDR2....

You forgot SSE3. And don't say "x2 has it too!" LOL

I'm no fanboy, my 1st computer was an Intel P3, back when Intel made exceptional desktop processors, until I bought an AthlonXP rig, and it was cheap & fast, so I decided to stick with AMD.

BTW, don't bring up Pentium M, I said desktop processors, not laptop.

Who brought up P-M? <sigh> Although I suspect this time next year or so we'll probably be debating a dual-core P-M desktop chip against some AMD chip. Time will tell

Yeah, time will tell. I really do hope Intel goes with the Pentium M for more than laptops.

 

[Aenslead]

Yeah, having a job sucks, doesn't it? Especially AT AMD Fanboy Extraordinaire!

Please tell me you where not trying to be funny, because it will make me sad.

Prescott downs, he asks... well, that's a dead horse beaten, alright, but people like you need constant refreshing: how about added latency, how about underperforming against the same clock Northwood?, how about added cost for a technology that HAD to be implemented (EIST) due to the power leakeage?, the increased noise due to the bigger fan needed to cool the core, aditional power requirements for the processor, and ... not to mention its late on the 64bit extensions (read: carbon copied from AMD64 set), and the failure to scale accordingly to the speed increase even if overclocked;

I know its sad that you are a niche person; hardly anyone could say that your system isn't nice, but no one else would even consider purchasing it when having an offer from AMD besides it.

Also, FX 55 is STOCK 2.6Ghz... not OCed, like your fancy 4Ghz P4s.

And give it up with the lame insults, already. Its sad to read them. If you cannot hold up a discussion based on solid statements, you won't be taken seriously!

Oh... wait... no one is taking you seriously anyways.

 

[Aenslead]

Why am I having this discussion with you anyways!? Its obvious you will not change your mind unless you actually try an A64 system; so that's that. I'm tired of this.

 

[clarkey01]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: clarkey01
Thats fine...But I'd rather have in your view an more unstable platform in the shape on an X2 If zebo was hear he'd hand your ass to you but I cant be arsed arguing with you. encoding is split 50/50 with the single cores (939's) and with the X2's your stable intel platforms gets pwnd. As for prescott for being dumb, I can think of zero reason apart from multitasking for the purpose of this chip, and X2 has just taken that away. For a chip over 2 years in development which came out hotter, slower clock for clock and didnt make the projected 5 Ghz target speed I dont see it as a "clever" chip.

1. Zebo is hiding. Probably fixing up his new Prescott!
2. We're talking CHIPSET here, not CPU. Do you know the difference?
3. You still have ZERO evidence of Prescott being dumb. Can you say Fanboy?
4. Well AMD planned on being higher than 2.4GHz too. Or was it 5000+? LOL
5. What you think isn't "clever" really makes no difference, does it?

Obviously you don't like Prescott, that's fine. But until you provide some evidence to back up your claims -- besides "it's dumb" -- everyone sees you for what you really are.

P.S. I notice you don't have your profile enabled or your system rig(s) listed. Any particular reason for that? Maybe that old INTEL system you are using?

1. I?m sure he has a well paid job to attend to and doesn?t spend all of his spare time telling noobs what?s good and what isn?t bless him.

2. You implied AMD chipsets were not as stable as Intel platforms, I highlighted that I was going over in your view to an unstable platform. In case you didn?t know X2 isn?t on any Intel platforms.

3. For a chip that cost millions in R&D, was late, came out hotter despite the new process, was slower clock for clock and fell well short of its projected 5 Ghz. Must I go on?

4. AMD are holding back, they see no need at the moment to send out a 4200+ (2.6 Ghz part) as webber said in an interview. If you have a roadmap to show of AMD hitting the 5000+ then please link. The fact AMD can take the p*ss with there model numbers just shows that there in the driving seat.

5.You have a point because dell will ship millions of systems with that BBQ in it. I think the majority of enthusiasts at the moment will go AMD, but each to their own. Multitasking/and some encoding aside, I know what chip id pick. As for being a fanboy, the fact I own two Intel systems kind of defeats that statement. An AMD fanboy would avoid Intel at all costs, I happen to think My 2.8C is great. But when AMD are calling all the shots in the performance ring and Intel can only answer with BBQ?s and marketing then you?re dam right I?m hector?s bitch.

And because I don?t fill in a sig with my system spec makes me an Intel user? your logic is flawed.