• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD or INTEL?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Azzy64
Originally posted by: Intelia
Originally posted by: Zebo
Intel can't win P/P, it's impossible for overclockers

X2 PR ratio is around 1.65:1 meaning you clock an X2 to 2800Mhz (read trivial) you need a D @ 4620Mhz to match (read impossible)
Click to expand...

Enlight of recent O/C of AMD's And intels Dual core releases and Intel latest decision to allow warranty parts O/C to manufactors there seems to be a flaw in your formula.
Click to expand...

In light of your recent posts, there seems to be a flaw in your brain.
Click to expand...

Please I am not GOD I have a right to an opion . Leave the garbage out of the post and just use the recent news to base our information on . Amd & Intel Fangirls should beable to post without these nasty remarks . These forms are fun and interesting and myself I find them to be very insightful. I have also noticed recently as more and more information is being released the Intel Fanboys are getting nasty. Hay Intel people back off your beginning to sound like AMD Fanboys a developement I personnly find disturbing.

Use the available information thats out there to do your talking and sit back and watch them skirm . Be better than they are!!!
 
Intel does not condone overclocking, at all.

Do not take this trolls advice and overclock expecting a warrenty. They will not cover it.
 
vote for ban ? This getting rediculous. Every post Intelia starts or replies to turns into a flame war, and spews nothing but garbage....
 
As previosly posted, this is discussion AMD or Intel NEVER ends. Some ind=sight as I have consulted for AMD.

1 Dresden just can't make "bad" chips, they polish the wafers better than Austin, TX and they slice the wafer and vue the "gate" thru an Electron Microscope. Silicon on Insulator is superior to the fab process used by Intel. (IBM, used to work for them also,is a partner in this process with AMD).

2 64-bit is ABSOLUTELY the best way to go, the entire process flow thru the "pipeline" is 64-bit, registers as well. Whats the bottom line ...... SPEED.

3 Both AMD and Intel are working with basic cores which are VERRRRY OLD, but the GOOD NEWS is that both have Faster and BETTER designs.

4 Big AMD fan right, sure, then why did I just buy a DELL system with P4 and Hyperthreading ????

PRICE !!!! INtel Marketing and Dells are GIGANTIC

5. FORGET BENCHMARKS !!!! Unless all you do with Your System is RUN Benchmarks All DAY ????

6 Prediction ..... Dual Core Single Chip AMD 64-BIT with Linux Running in one and Winblows in the other. A Micro-coded Hypervisor, (written by NANOTEK) controls the boot and interrupt stacks. OOOps some of this is Trade Secret .... Ah Well
 
intel could easily do SOI but its not worth the ROI. i love TLA's.

polish the wafers better? WTF LOL!

2 64-bit is ABSOLUTELY the best way to go, the entire process flow thru the "pipeline" is 64-bit, registers as well. Whats the bottom line ...... SPEED.
Click to expand...

last i checked, we had 128 bit registers. yikes, that is fast!!!!

before you fanboys wet yourselves over 64 bit, remember that the vast majority of software you run aren't even compiled for it.
 
Cache can only do so much. I have an Athlon 3500+ that outperforms the 4000+ and FX-53 in all areas at a certain core speed. Remember that overclocking on a locked multiplier gives you a higher bus speed. An extra 512k of cache can't beat a 1000Mhz FSB at the same core speed. In addition, RAM timings make a bigger difference on an AMD platform than the cache does. Pentium boys need not comment on things about which they know nothing. AMD fans relish the ability to squeeze performance out of their CPUs. My last CPU was a northwood 2.8Ghz @3.43Ghz. After my switch, I never looked back. Regardless of the core, the Intel architecture currently offers little, if any advantage over the AMD architecture. If made to, I could prove mathematically that the AMD architecture is superior. The AMD platform simply does more work per-clock cycle than does the Intel. Even Intel has admitted that core speed has no bearing on the performance of the CPU. Take a look at the Dothan; at least Intel got one thing right. I'm not trying to be hostile, I just see Xeons and Opterons working their hardest everyday, and I've come to realize certain things about the practicality of the Intel architecture. Try not to look at the sugeested equivalent when purchasing a new CPU, just look at the price to performance ratio. The choice is clear.
 
intel could easily do SOI but its not worth the ROI.
Click to expand...

Yup intels into phat profits at customers expense ... Who cares if it's hot, noisey and slow right? We intel, we big, we tell you whats good for you..

Yet another reason to buy AMD. Even with poor yeilds, less money made per CPU, I know I'm getting a deal since AMD is'nt😉
 
what does SOI have anything to do with that? do you even know what SOI is and the tradeoffs involved? guess not.

yeah, and AMD is not into "phat profits"... would you keep buying AMD even if they got their butts kicked in the future, which is a distinct possibility?
 
Future? Depends they offer anything competitive to AMD at a decent price.. I doubt it since they are all about short changing the consumer for phat profits. There are some exceptions, but in general you pay double for intel usually to pad those phat salaries officers make.. no thanks. I like when companies lose money. That means I win usually.

Oh yea SOI what do you want to know? Are you ignorant to the fact SOI significantly increases speed and reduces power consumption up to a factor of four? Tradeoffs? ya a few like expesive which Intel is unwilling to do for it's consumers instead giving them leaky hot loud marketing gimmicks.
 
Originally posted by: Zebo
Oh yea SOI what do you want to know? Are you ignorant to the fact SOI significantly increases speed and reduces power consumption up to a factor of four? Tradeoffs? ya a few like expesive which Intel is unwilling to do for it's consumers instead giving them leaky hot loud marketing gimmicks.
Click to expand...

Would you like to share how SOI accomplishes these results? I'll then share why I believe the improvements in power/performance in using SOI is diminishing.
 
Future? Depends they offer anything competitive to AMD at a decent price.. I doubt it since they are all about short changing the consumer for phat profits. There are some exceptions, but in general you pay double for intel usually to pad those phat salaries officers make.. no thanks. I like when companies lose money. That means I win usually.
Click to expand...

man, you are so naive. in the CPU business, the customer *always* gets the shaft, whether it be amd or intel.

Oh yea SOI what do you want to know? Are you ignorant to the fact SOI significantly increases speed and reduces power consumption up to a factor of four? Tradeoffs? ya a few like expesive which Intel is unwilling to do for it's consumers instead giving them leaky hot loud marketing gimmicks.
Click to expand...

fourfold reduction in power?!? wowee, thats amazing! if that were true, opteron and power5 would be drawing a lot less power, and intel would have done SOI a long time ago. the "significant" increase in speed is tiny, and it's not going to scale with process shrinks. also, it costs more and requres different circuit design techniques.
 
Well whatever path AMD has chossen, it seems to have paid off ( SOI etc)

Anyone want to argue that athlons dont run cooler, faster, and use less power ? Because thats what it comes down to, we can argue all day what could of been done by both sides , but I cant fault AMD at all at the moment.

I wont use Intel again until they offer 1, better performance in gaming/multitasking ( Vs X2), 2, Cost roughly the same or cheaper, 3, dont run hot, 4, use less power.

Until all four of those conditions are met, thne I have no reason to jump ship.Before I get the " Smithfield costs waaaaay less then an X2" Chek Zebo's Excel sheet and you'll soon get the picture.


Feel free to beat me up on this one boys (If you can).
 
Depends on what you're using your computer for, i.e.:

If you're especially a hardcore fps gamer, then the Athlon64's for you,

on the other hand, if you use your machine mostly for video editing and encoding, then the P4 would be the one to choose.
 
FWIW, with the Intel 6xx series, heat isn't much of an issue anymore. My 640 runs at 46c at load.

In regards to cost, to upgrade to an D 830, it'll only cost me $195. Not everyone needs to purchase new everything.

Sell old mobo +175
Sell old cpu +200
New mobo -220
New cpu -350
Cost to upgrade = 195 (for a D 820, the cost is less than $100)

It doesn't beat the performance of a X2 but for me, it's a low cost upgrade to dual core. And don't get me wrong, I also think about selling off everything and going X2 also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top