Just to clear up a few misconceptions:
1) Intel chipsets are
not measurably more stable than VIA or AMD chipsets.
No test has ever established that. Actually, running CC Winstone 2000 or Q3A in a continuous loop -- as Anand does for his stability tests -- shows that modern VIA motherboards and chipsets are extremely stable, provided the correct drivers are installed and the latest BIOS is resident (a necessity for any recent hardware). As far as stability is concerned, I don't think there's a better testament to the strength of the VIA/AMD platform than the fact that Anand is using Thunderbird/KT133 systems to run these very forums.
And remember that the BX chipset is almost three years old -- an eternity in computer hardware. The BX chipset
should be extremely stable, simply because it has had so long for motherboard implementations to mature. The fact that it continues to show excellent stability after three years of high usage in the computer industry simply tells us that Intel didn't screw it up.
2) AMD systems do
not require special RAM.
I build my cutomers' Athlon/Duron systems with nothing but the cheapest generic PC133. AMD has no special requirements for RAM other than Intel's PC100 specifications.
As far as the power supply issue is concerned, it takes very little effort to glance at AMD's recommended list and find a case with an aproved PSU. In fact, the price difference between a case with a quality power supply and a generic case can be so small, even Intel systems would benefit from the added voltage and current stablility.
For proper cooling, both AMD and Intel have certain heatsink/fan guidelines, and these must be followed like any other operating specification. They have little effect on the final price of a system.
3) VIA chipsets are
not significantly slower.
Check out the
http://firingsquad.gamers.com/hardware/chipsetshootout/default.asp at Firing Squad. Notice that only the wildly overclocked BX chipset is able to beat the VIA 133A by a significant margin. In fact, the 133A is actually faster than the i815e and BX133 in certain tests. And of course, let's not forget the pitiful performance of the "rich man's" i820/RDRAM platform, which continues to prove Intel's fallability in the chipset arena. Actually, the performance differences between these platforms are rarely more than 5% either way, making a speed comparison somewhat pointless.
Erasmus-X,
<<If you are looking at your next upgrade from cost-effective perspective, it makes little sense to buy a new motherboard and possibly a new power supply to accomodate that Duron>>
That goes without saying. To turn the argument around, it would be even more idiotic for some one to upgrade a system from a Duron 600 to a P3/866. So the important thing when comparing CPU's is their price/performance ratio when used in a
new system.
Modus
Facebook
Twitter