...

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: clarkey01

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.

Well considering he started THIS thread I think enough has been said...

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.

Here you go again. I wasn't talking about X2 you idiot! We were debating CHIPSETs. You know, CHIPSETS, not CPUs. X2 is a CPU, not a chipset. You really are clueless, ain't ya?

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?

Yeah, you still haven't provided a single drop of "evidence" to support any of your flawed logic and claims. AMD and Intel both spend a lot of $ on R&D. So what is your point?

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.

ROFLMAO. AMD "holding back"? Yeah, right. Maybe that explains why X2 is vapor? Give us a break already. If AMD had it, they'd put it on the table. They don't have the cash to sit back and relax.

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.

That's right. Dell has shipped, and will ship, millions (more) rigs with Prescott as well as Pentium D. Meanwhile, the AMD zealots will still be fighting over that "elusive" top-end X2 that finally sinks Intel. LOL!

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

Obviously you missed the humor and/or sarcasm. At any rate, most people do fill in their rigs page here. Kinda makes one wonder why you haven't...It really makes you look like an idiot criticizing someone else's rig(s) when you don't even list yours.

 

[PetNorth]

Clarkey and Aenslead, an advice: don't waste your time with troll...

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: PetNorth
Clarkey and Aenslead, an advice: don't waste your time with troll...

POT->KETTLE->BLACK

Aren't you the little twitwad who tried to tell me I "couldn't" get a Pentium 4 EE 840 with my new Dimension 9100?

Go back to your little cave now.

 

[Capt Caveman]

It's Friday everyone. Be Happy, Don't Worry! Enough of the bickering. And that's an order!

 

[PetNorth]

http://www1.us.dell.com/content/product...spx/dimen?c=us&cs=RC956904&l=en&s=hied

DimensionTM 9100
Up to NEW Intel® Pentium® D Processor 840 (3.2GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 800MHz FSB) with Dual Core Technology.


http://www1.us.dell.com/content/product...imen_9100?c=us&cs=RC956904&l=en&s=hied

KEY FEATURES:

Processor: NEW Intel® Pentium® 4 dual core Processor with Hyper-Threading Technology up to 840 (3.2GHz, 2MB L2 cache, 800MHz FSB).


http://premier.dell.com/portal/start.as...ci=E1584&customer_id=RC956904&~tgt=cfg

System Options

Dell Dimension 9100

* Pentium® 4 Processor 630 with HT Technology (3GHz, 800FSB)
* Pentium® D Processor 820 with Dual Core Technology (2.80GHz, 800FSB) [ Add $92.00 ]
* Pentium® D Processor 830 with Dual Core Technology (3GHz, 800FSB) [ Add $248.40 ]
* Pentium® D Processor 840 with Dual Core Technology (3.20GHz, 800FSB) [ Add $469.20 ]


forget me troll...


PS: right Capt Caveman

 

[Aenslead]

After all, he does make honor to his nickname... as biased as can be towards Intel, just like the real Pabster. (Tomas Pabst, from Tom's Hardware, if you where wondering. Nicked "Pabster" by the ppl at the Inquirer).

Zebo: Good advice.

 

[blackllotus]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Yeah, you still haven't provided a single drop of "evidence" to support any of your flawed logic and claims. AMD and Intel both spend a lot of $ on R&D. So what is your point?

Well, anandtech's benchmarks show that AMD cpu's perform better at almost everything, and are even better for the price. Intel cpu's really only perform better in one area, and then again they don't dominate. I think what people are trying to get across is that Prescott is actually slower than the Northwood core (ie: it is really a step backwards as they put it).

Originally posted by: Pabster
ROFLMAO. AMD "holding back"? Yeah, right. Maybe that explains why X2 is vapor? Give us a break already. If AMD had it, they'd put it on the table. They don't have the cash to sit back and relax.

I'm not sure what you mean by "vapor". The X2 exists because anandtech has benchmarks for it:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=3

Originally posted by: Pabster
At any rate, most people do fill in their rigs page here. Kinda makes one wonder why you haven't...It really makes you look like an idiot criticizing someone else's rig(s) when you don't even list yours.

I wouldn't say that. What does his rig have to do with your rig? If he thinks you made a mistake by buying Prescott (or whatever) then he has every right to say so. My system is two years old, so its nothing to brag about, but that shouldn't be used against me, not everyone has money to buy new systems every year.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: blackllotus
Well, anandtech's benchmarks show that AMD cpu's perform better at almost everything, and are even better for the price. Intel cpu's really only perform better in one area, and then again they don't dominate. I think what people are trying to get across is that Prescott is actually slower than the Northwood core (ie: it is really a step backwards as they put it).

The opinion that it is a "step backwards" is just that. Opinion. There's no fact.

I'm not sure what you mean by "vapor". The X2 exists because anandtech has benchmarks for it:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=3

Show me where I can order a rig with an X2. Something shipping in the near future, please.

I wouldn't say that. What does his rig have to do with your rig? If he thinks you made a mistake by buying Prescott (or whatever) then he has every right to say so. My system is two years old, so its nothing to brag about, but that shouldn't be used against me, not everyone has money to buy new systems every year.

...And I have every right to call him an idiot for spewing opinion rather than fact.

PS, PetNorth, I'll be posting a CPU-Z screenshot from new Dimension 9100 so you can see it is an EE 840. Then you'll run back to the cave where you came from. Obviously they've removed the EE 840 now as an option, probably to save them for the much more expensive (and profitable) XPS Gen 5 rigs. I placed my order the first day (few hours even) it was available.

 

[TGS]

Originally posted by: Pabster

The opinion that it is a "step backwards" is just that. Opinion. There's no fact.


Show me where I can order a rig with an X2. Something shipping in the near future, please.



...And I have every right to call him an idiot for spewing opinion rather than fact.

PS, PetNorth, I'll be posting a CPU-Z screenshot from new Dimension 9100 so you can see it is an EE 840. Then you'll run back to the cave where you came from. Obviously they've removed the EE 840 now as an option, probably to save them for the much more expensive (and profitable) XPS Gen 5 rigs. I placed my order the first day (few hours even) it was available.

There something to be said about The CEO of Intel getting on his knees and apologizing for the Pentium Architecture and not being able to deliver 4 GHz chips as promised. That speaks volumes of the Failure that prescott IS. Not was, IS, admittely so by the CEO of Intel.

For some reason I'm seeing any CEs from AMD doing anything like this.


Well obviously you can't get a Rig with X2 because it's prior to the release date. Though if you have money to burn... Search and you will find AMD dual core has been available for a while. We could always just really get off topic and ask where is the Intel Server Dual-core solution...

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: TGS
There something to be said about The CEO of Intel getting on his knees and apologizing for the Pentium Architecture and not being able to deliver 4 GHz chips as promised. That speaks volumes of the Failure that prescott IS. Not was, IS, admittely so by the CEO of Intel.

LOL. Where is the quote from Barrett that Prescott "is a failure"? I didn't think so. Saying "We're sorry we didn't release a 4GHz P4" and "Prescott is a failure" are two entirely different things. Wise up.

For some reason I'm seeing any CEs from AMD doing anything like this.

No, then again, we don't really see AMD ever doing much of anything. The only exception in recent history is Ruiz's proclaimation that AMD will garner 33% of the market in the next 2 years. I'm not even gonna start on that one.

Well obviously you can't get a Rig with X2 because it's prior to the release date. Though if you have money to burn... Search and you will find AMD dual core has been available for a while. We could always just really get off topic and ask where is the Intel Server Dual-core solution...

Let's get this straight. We're talking P4 vs X2 -- these are DESKTOP processors. You bring up $4000 dual Opteron rigs for comparison? Get a grip! We're not discussing servers here.
Of course AMD has had dual Opteron chips floating around for quite some time now, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with this discussion.

 

[TGS]

Originally posted by: Pabster

LOL. Where is the quote from Barrett that Prescott "is a failure"? I didn't think so. Saying "We're sorry we didn't release a 4GHz P4" and "Prescott is a failure" are two entirely different things. Wise up.

Sigh, and what chip do you think they planned on hitting 4 GHz with... I can assure it WASN'T northwood. Prescott was supposed to be the 90nm chip that would keep the Netburst process strolling along as they scaled up the frequency.

No, then again, we don't really see AMD ever doing much of anything. The only exception in recent history is Ruiz's proclaimation that AMD will garner 33% of the market in the next 2 years. I'm not even gonna start on that one.

Yeah I'm sure releasing a Dual-core solution before Intel was just small potatoes. Everyone knows that the Intel dual-core is two single cores slapped together to save face. AMDs plan appears to have been development of A64/Opteron for multi-core sinces the beginning.

Let's get this straight. We're talking P4 vs X2 -- these are DESKTOP processors. You bring up $4000 dual Opteron rigs for comparison? Get a grip! We're not discussing servers here.
Of course AMD has had dual Opteron chips floating around for quite some time now, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with this discussion.

Yes I said we could get off topic, and say lets talk about chips that aren't available yet. If you go to Intels website it says, mid 2005 Before dual-core server chips will even be out for wide spread testing, let alone available to purchase through partner channels. Shocker, AMD will have both server and desktop chips available within the next month.

And again...

Of course AMD has had dual Opteron chips floating around for quite some time now, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with this discussion.

Do you know what the difference between an opteron, and an A64 chip?

Besides, it's obvious that you are just trolling. I'll let you resume your soapbox position and talk to yourself.

:beer:

 

[Chode Messiah]

Originally posted by: TGS

Originally posted by: Pabster

LOL. Where is the quote from Barrett that Prescott "is a failure"? I didn't think so. Saying "We're sorry we didn't release a 4GHz P4" and "Prescott is a failure" are two entirely different things. Wise up.

Sigh, and what chip do you think they planned on hitting 4 GHz with... I can assure it WASN'T northwood. Prescott was supposed to be the 90nm chip that would keep the Netburst process strolling along as they scaled up the frequency.

No, then again, we don't really see AMD ever doing much of anything. The only exception in recent history is Ruiz's proclaimation that AMD will garner 33% of the market in the next 2 years. I'm not even gonna start on that one.

Yeah I'm sure releasing a Dual-core solution before Intel was just small potatoes. Everyone knows that the Intel dual-core is two single cores slapped together to save face. AMDs plan appears to have been development of A64/Opteron for multi-core sinces the beginning.

Let's get this straight. We're talking P4 vs X2 -- these are DESKTOP processors. You bring up $4000 dual Opteron rigs for comparison? Get a grip! We're not discussing servers here.
Of course AMD has had dual Opteron chips floating around for quite some time now, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with this discussion.

Yes I said we could get off topic, and say lets talk about chips that aren't available yet. If you go to Intels website it says, mid 2005 Before dual-core server chips will even be out for wide spread testing, let alone available to purchase through partner channels. Shocker, AMD will have both server and desktop chips available within the next month.

And again...

Of course AMD has had dual Opteron chips floating around for quite some time now, which has absolutely NOTHING to do with this discussion.

Do you know what the difference between an opteron, and an A64 chip?

Besides, it's obvious that you are just trolling. I'll let you resume your soapbox position and talk to yourself.

:beer:

The Troll got Burned!!! AMD will have their full dual-core processor line out by the end of this month. Intel, on the other hand, is having problems keeping their poorly developed dual-core chip in stock, which can't compare to a nice 6XX cpu (not the greatest chip though). Prescott was a poor design choice. If they didn't lengthen pipes and make the prescott core more innefficient, then Intel would dominate. An X2 will pwn any Intel any day of the week. Quit trolling and admit that Intel is CURRENTLY losing the cpu battle to AMD.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: TGS
Sigh, and what chip do you think they planned on hitting 4 GHz with... I can assure it WASN'T northwood. Prescott was supposed to be the 90nm chip that would keep the Netburst process strolling along as they scaled up the frequency.

I called you out and you failed. You told us CEO Barrett had "admitted" that Prescott had been (or was) a failure. Now where is he saying that again? Or are you "translating" his words? ROFLMAO.

Yeah I'm sure releasing a Dual-core solution before Intel was just small potatoes. Everyone knows that the Intel dual-core is two single cores slapped together to save face. AMDs plan appears to have been development of A64/Opteron for multi-core sinces the beginning.

Once again you are going way off in to left field. This was never a discussion about SERVERS. We're not discussing Xeon or Opteron here. I never made a single point about either yet somehow you want to keep talking about it?

Yes I said we could get off topic, and say lets talk about chips that aren't available yet. If you go to Intels website it says, mid 2005 Before dual-core server chips will even be out for wide spread testing, let alone available to purchase through partner channels. Shocker, AMD will have both server and desktop chips available within the next month.

Heh. Here we go again. NO ONE IS TALKING DUAL-CORE SERVER CHIPS here. We're talking about DESKTOP processors. <sigh>

Do you know what the difference between an opteron, and an A64 chip?

Yeah, about $1000.

I never said a word about Opteron. Or A64. So where are you getting this crap from?

Besides, it's obvious that you are just trolling. I'll let you resume your soapbox position and talk to yourself.

POT->KETTLE->BLACK

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Chode Messiah

The Troll got Burned!!! AMD will have their full dual-core processor line out by the end of this month.

And guess what, freak? Intel ALREADY HAS their "full dual core" processors out. So get off your soapbox and crawl right back to your shvthole.

Intel, on the other hand, is having problems keeping their poorly developed dual-core chip in stock, which can't compare to a nice 6XX cpu (not the greatest chip though).

LOL. Intel is having problems? It's the other way around. AMD is having so much trouble trying to FAB enough X2 processors they've had to raise the price through the stratosphere to keep all you idiots off the case. Intel IS ALREADY SHIPPING DUAL CORE PROCESSORS. Got that? And am I to assume from your last sentence that you like Prescott? LOL.

Prescott was a poor design choice. If they didn't lengthen pipes and make the prescott core more innefficient, then Intel would dominate. An X2 will pwn any Intel any day of the week. Quit trolling and admit that Intel is CURRENTLY losing the cpu battle to AMD.

ROFLMAO. The only troll here is you. And since you obviously have no clue what you're talking about ... well, maybe with the advent of Google you could look up a few things ... go ahead and crawl back to your hole in the wall. AMD is losing the battle currently because they can't produce very many X2 chips, and the prices are so high that the geeks who actually want them can't afford 'em anyway! LOL.

 

[blackllotus]

Originally posted by: Pabster
And guess what, freak? Intel ALREADY HAS their "full dual core" processors out. So get off your soapbox and crawl right back to your shvthole.

True, but that doesn't mean anything. AMD's dual core processors perform better at almost everything.
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2410&p=3

Originally posted by: PabsterAMD is losing the battle currently because they can't produce very many X2 chips, and the prices are so high that the geeks who actually want them can't afford 'em anyway! LOL.

Could you provide a link that shows AMD is actually having problems?

Also, the prices on the X2 chips are not very high. While a decent X2 chip costs in the low 500s, the Pentium D 840 (the only Pentium D that can even compete with the X2) costs in the low 600s. The 820 and 830 cost between 280 and 350 (or around there), but their performance is dismal compared to the X2 (they are not worth getting over single core processors).

 

[Markfw]

Let see, you can get a dual-core Opteron 275 TODAY for $1299 at 2.2, and a 2.2 X2 next monday for $579. That isn;t $1000 difference. And I don;t have a server in by computer room, just a fast dual-cpu computer running windows 09, 2000 XP and XP64 (quad-boot), so you are wrong there. How many people does it take to shut you up Pabster ? And a while back when I got this duallie, I would have loved to get a dual-core instead (if it had PCI-X slots)

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Let see, you can get a dual-core Opteron 275 TODAY for $1299 at 2.2, and a 2.2 X2 next monday for $579. That isn;t $1000 difference. And I don;t have a server in by computer room, just a fast dual-cpu computer running windows 09, 2000 XP and XP64 (quad-boot), so you are wrong there.

WTF is all this server shvt coming from? NO ONE IS TALKING SERVERS HERE. So quit bringing up Opteron. We're not discussing Opteron. Jeez, AMD zealots really ARE stupid.

How many people does it take to shut you up Pabster ? And a while back when I got this duallie, I would have loved to get a dual-core instead (if it had PCI-X slots)

ROFLMAO. No one is gonna "shut me up", so uncross your fingers. I guess it has come to that, idiots praying for me to shut up. I'm still waiting for evidence of how Prescott is a "failure", et al. But I won't be holding my breath

 

[Markfw]

The opteron is just another processor QUITE OFTEN USED IN SERVERS but is just an Athlon64 with another HT channel ENABLED and requires registered memory.... So yes it DOES apply, unlike your comments.

 

[Zebo]

Hehe Pastster still trolling trollin trollin.. I'm doing a bit of trollin myself out of the bay starting tomorrow. You should get a real hobby Pappy cause you're no good at this one. Even toms, intel poster boy, says AMD chipsets are rock solid and intel are bug master deluxe. See above it's linked. Anand been using AMD servers for four years now as the sole platform for the web serving of its main site and forums he knows his stuff.

 

[Zebo]

Let Pappy boy buy Inhell and Dull, he like most will settle for second best -- cookie cutter junk when superiority is glaring him in the face. He's dumber than the average Joe cuz at least Joe is making an uniformed choice driven by popularity (markerting), Pappy has a map and still takes the wrong roads. Now *that's* pure stupidity and zealotry and maybe clinical retardation?

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
The opteron is just another processor QUITE OFTEN USED IN SERVERS but is just an Athlon64 with another HT channel ENABLED and requires registered memory.... So yes it DOES apply, unlike your comments.

<PLONK>

How many people buy $2500 processors for their desktops?

Good lord, the blind leading the blind around here.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Let Pappy boy buy Inhell and Dull, he like most will settle for second best -- cookie cutter junk when superiority is glaring him in the face. He's dumber than the average Joe cuz at least Joe is making an uniformed choice driven by popularity (markerting), Pappy has a map and still takes the wrong roads. Now *that's* pure stupidity and zealotry and maybe clinical retardation?

Ah yes, seems to be the AMD zealots' mantra. Intel and Dell are evil. And probably Microsoft too. Seems only AMD is on the "good" list. What about Apple? Now that Apple has annouced they're moving to INTEL processors in 2006. Then again, people who buy Apple are stupid enough to spend $4000 on a rig that could be beaten by a $250 AMD machine. I guess it never ends!

The reality is that while a few geeks will be drooling over a small stock of X2 chips (at outrageous prices) us Intel and Dell "Joes" will be enjoying our Intel dual-core rigs and laughing all the way to the bank.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Markfw900
The opteron is just another processor QUITE OFTEN USED IN SERVERS but is just an Athlon64 with another HT channel ENABLED and requires registered memory.... So yes it DOES apply, unlike your comments.

<PLONK>

How many people buy $2500 processors for their desktops?

Good lord, the blind leading the blind around here.

Idiot ! $300 up ! The ony $2500 Opteron is the cream of the crop 875 8-way Opteron at the highest speed... Boy, you r trolling skills need some improvment. I can get TWO dual core opterons at the highest speed for $2600.....

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: Markfw900
The opteron is just another processor QUITE OFTEN USED IN SERVERS but is just an Athlon64 with another HT channel ENABLED and requires registered memory.... So yes it DOES apply, unlike your comments.

<PLONK>

How many people buy $2500 processors for their desktops?

Good lord, the blind leading the blind around here.

I already handed out "idiot of the day" pabster but you may be in the running for the "weeks" title.....

there are many different opterons setups and at 2500 you must be looking at the 875 models....275 models for 4 way is about that much for 2 cpus for 4 cores...175 for dual core (basically an X2 1mb chip) can be had for in the 800 dollar range I believe....Now the 875s are 2600 a piece but it would be 8 core setups and just phenomenal power....


So pabster how did you get an 840 EE with the 9100 when you cant pick it in the customization section??? Did you talk to a CS person???

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Idiot ! $300 up ! The ony $2500 Opteron is the cream of the crop 875 8-way Opteron at the highest speed... Boy, you r trolling skills need some improvment. I can get TWO dual core opterons at the highest speed for $2600.....

LOL. So let me get this straight. You're gonna drop down $2600 for a couple dual core Opterons and $500 for a board. And a few hundred more for registered DIMMs. How many people are doing that for a DESKTOP PC? Get a grip!

And guess what? The people who are buying Opteron WANT the 8-way configuration. So the $2500 price tag (875's) is a realistic one. I don't think too many people would settle for the lowly 275 models.

YOUR trolling skills need improvement. AMD zealots are real good at thread jacking. The problem is that this thread was intended to discuss P4 vs X2, NOT SERVER-CLASS PROCESSORS. No one here was discussing Xeon or Opteron.