Chipset Challenge

[Zebo]

Why do Intel Intel zealots when thier ridiculus price to performance ratio is pointed out like to say Intel chipsets are superior? Worse yet is this FUD has permeated the into realm of "common knowledge" when I see n00bs paroting the myth.

Once and for all I'd like to get to the bottom of this myth.

Are systems based on Intel processors and their chipsets inherently more stable than those based on AMD processors and their chipsets?

If so document why. I'm looking for proof of Blue Screens, incompatablities, or other system instability. I've read literally thousands of reviews and not once has AnandTech, Toms, Hard or anyone else criticized the stability or reliability of a AMD platforms/chipsets. In fact they praise it almost always...Anand even uses AMD servers. So what's the deal?

FUD or for real?

 

[nick1985]

see sig.

 

[Budman]

VIA :thumbsdown::disgust::evil:

 

[Cawchy87]

Originally posted by: nick1985
see sig.

not sure how much proof that brings with it. kinda looks like a few fanboi comments but whatever.

 

[mechBgon]

Our work fleet has about 80 systems running Win2000Pro SP4 on the following chipsets:

PentiumII on 440BX (snails)
CeleronII on i810 (senile, demented snails)
CeleronII on VIA (noticably faster than the i810-based ones and not demented/senile either)
Pentium3 on i810e (acceptable for light office work)
AthlonXP on nForce 220D (pretty fast)

and some black sheep, including one Athlon64 on K8T800 :evil:

The fact is, aside from the weirdly-senile Cel2's on i810, they all work pretty darn stable when you consider that they've got some extremely aggressive antivirus software on them. BSODs are essentially unheard-of, and those that have occurred usually signal a hard-drive problem. With the dirty electricity that building has, it's not much of a surprise to be losing some hard drives. Sometimes the senile Cel2's on i810 simply stop responding... windows stay stuck where they are, you can move the mouse, but you can't do anything and a reset is the only option.

Granted, we don't have people installing spyware, gamez, applic4tionz, or three competing browsers or media players on them. That has to help

 

[sao123]

via chips have a highly documented history of unstable chipsets primarily because of the 4 in 1 driver set (i htink the problem is agp related).


Also, I believe that the intel chipsets have a higher bandwidth between the north and south bridge controllers than p4 equivolents from sis and via.

Now not to say that intel chipsets are better than amd (via and nforce) chipsets for amd.
intel chipsets are better for intel processors than sis or via.

via amd chipsets are better than intels chipsets. Hypertransport makes the bridge between the north and south brdige 4x what intels is.

 

[yadda]

Zebo this can create an argument for either side:

2 systems are AMD. Great value. Run a little hotter than Intel.

My newest I just built 1 month ago is a P4 2.8C. I like both for different reasons.

Y

 

[CraigRT]

I think this was a myth of the 90's... no longer the case.

 

[Jiggz]

Chipsets and CPU's are like opinions, it's purely subjective! So arguments are not required. Just keep your opinions to yourself and enjoy your chipsets and cpu's. If you voice your opinions then you are inviting arguments. Personally I've used both cpu's and chipsets on both sides and I'll say I've sticked to the more affordable and most stable ones.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: sao123
via chips have a highly documented history of unstable chipsets primarily because of the 4 in 1 driver set (i htink the problem is agp related).


Also, I believe that the intel chipsets have a higher bandwidth between the north and south bridge controllers than p4 equivolents from sis and via.

Now not to say that intel chipsets are better than amd (via and nforce) chipsets for amd.
intel chipsets are better for intel processors than sis or via.

via amd chipsets are better than intels chipsets. Hypertransport makes the bridge between the north and south brdige 4x what intels is.

This is false....Way back when det 3's were released 4x agp stopped working on KTxxx This issue was obviously on Nvidias side since both det 2 and 4's worked with the same cards.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: yadda
Zebo this can create an argument for either side:

2 systems are AMD. Great value. Run a little hotter than Intel.

My newest I just built 1 month ago is a P4 2.8C. I like both for different reasons.

Y

Not anymore! The P4 3.4 disappates 110Watts of heat and it's competitor the 3400+ is almost half that at 81W.

 

[n0cmonkey]

I think Intel's drivers are typically better than VIA's. I don't have experience with nVidia, so I'll just growl menacingly in their direction *grr*. AMD's chipsets (I've owned 2), have been pretty good to me, so no complaints. I've also had good luck with VIA recently.

 

[JetBlack69]

73.6% != almost half

EDIT: On topic, I have a intel 440bx chipset running a 1.3Ghz Celeron with no problems. I have an NForce2 running with no problems. I also have an VIA K8T800 running with no problems.

The only thing I remember is that VIA K133 (?) didn't run well with creative sound blaster cards.

 

[Varun]

Back in the day, when the 440BX was king, it was pretty hard to say that Intel did not have the best chipset. The early Athlons were strong chips, but held back by the VIA chipsets in my opinion. Today, things have changed. Intel makes great chipsets, but so does Nvidia, and VIA (let's leave SIS out of this for the time being)

The first PC I bought was an Acer (yuck) with a K6 233 running on some form of integrated motherboard (I think it was SIS). The PC still runs flawlessly today at the in-laws. The first PC I built was a K6-III 450 on a Via MVP3 chipset. It was ok, but there was some crashing and such during gaming.

My next PC I built was an Athlon 800 Thunderbird running on a KT133 board. This was a very stable machine, except it would not run with my MX300 sound card (Aureal Vortex 2). I'm not sure if this was a Via thing or the fact that Aureal was going under and there was no new drivers for it.

My current PC is an XP1800+ running on an Asus A7V333. This computer is rock solid. The only time it ever crashed was when I had a bad stick of RAM.



I have heard nothing but praise for the Nforce 2 and up boards. Via has treated me really well for years, and seem to be getting more and more stable as time goes on. I believe that, once, Intel had the best chipsets, but right now they are middle of the road with all of the rest.

 

[sao123]

Another reasonpeople claim intel has better chipsets....


Way much earlier....intel chipsets were supported by other operating systems. The 440 Bx was the king because Many Linux Distros, + Beos (anyone remember this?) could not run off of certain via, cyrix & sis chipsets, but they all ran on the 440.

I do remember the issue where certain via chipsets in combination with coppermine P3's would not work well with creative labs sounds cards. Especially in the 694x & kt133 chipsets. I had this problem on both tyan & soyo motherboards. I think there was even a busmastering problem in the 4 in 1 driver set for win 9x/me on those same boards.