rofl, performance is just one aspect, boards and chips are allways more expensive when u go the Intel way plus it consumes more power. But if u like it...ill stay ignorant and dont buy the crap.
rofl, performance is just one aspect, boards and chips are allways more expensive when u go the Intel way plus it consumes more power. But if u like it...ill stay ignorant and dont buy the crap.
Boards always more expensive? Cheapest nForce 4 I can find in the UK is £70. I'm not sure what the comparable Intel chipset is, but you can get a 915/925 for the same or less, Radeon XPress 200 for the same.
There's almost nil availability of 945 and 955 chipsets at the moment, so I can't compare those.
Other chipset mfrs have even cheaper chipsets for both platforms. It all depends on who you want to go with, you can get cheap stuff for either CPU, and you can get expensive stuff as well.
The heat issue is valid though.
CPU cost isn't, AMD prices seem to be pretty similar to Intel prices nowadays. 3000+ is about the same as a 3.0GHz Intel chip.
Would you say the pentium D is a better performer then the X2 ?if your are then good luck, if you are not and agree it is a better performer, then no matter how much ppl diss it, even if it is OTT atleast they have a reason (less performance, poor design, more heat).
It'd be different if it were on par with the X2, but it just isnt, so for the ppl calling it lame (maybe a bit heavy bashing) but they have a point, some what
hey guys... let's sum everything up and end this stupid discussion
intel sucks... their CPU... their lame design.. and their employees...
amd rulez.... new core design... innovation.... doesn't have employees jumping all around forums saying how good their designs are.......
let's all admit... AMD is the onli one who actually designed a dual core....
yeah.. intel has one... but even VIA with their decades back Cyrix can put 2 cores into 1...
intel sucks... their CPU... their lame design.. and their employees...
amd rulez.... new core design... innovation.... doesn't have employees jumping all around forums saying how good their designs are.......
let's all admit... AMD is the onli one who actually designed a dual core....
yeah.. intel has one... but even VIA with their decades back Cyrix can put 2 cores into 1...
Good idea, starting with the removal of idiots like yourself who have absolutely nothing to add to the discussion.
Off the PC now, before mommy discovers you got around Net Nanny filtering again.
I have to interject....A dual core from what I was led to believe was 2 cores housed in 1 physical package...It certainly meets that criteria...I never heard of anything stipulating direct connection between the cores....2 cores is dual core....
I think this is rather nit-picky and only fuel for another X2 bonfire.....
I think this is rather nit-picky and only fuel for another X2 bonfire.....
Jeff7181
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2002
- 18,368
- 11
- 81
You're right Duvie... the maturity here has dropped to around the high school level. You have people claiming one is better than the other, some of which can't tell you why because they don't know why, they just heard it was. You have people who know what they're talking about, but aren't quite mature enough to correct the ignorant in a way that doesn't scream of an inferiority complex. You have the lurkers who just read this and chuckle. Then you have people like me who happen to be in a pissy mood and feel like stirring the pot a little bit, in hopes that it makes everyone realize how silly they appear.
*EDIT* I forgot another group, but they kinda fit in with some of the others... the people who want to argue about the definition of words or terms in an attempt to change others' opinions.
*EDIT* I forgot another group, but they kinda fit in with some of the others... the people who want to argue about the definition of words or terms in an attempt to change others' opinions.
I agree and I think we need to start reigning in the X2 fanfare...It is obvious it is better then INtel's offering in terms of performance and that is pretty much all that needs to be said.....INtel has a better low end pricing....AMD has better upgradeability with current sockets and can be had for many existing amd users for cost of a cpu only...Even cheap INtel 820 will need a new board at least and thus the 30-60% it is behind in performance makes it not attractive to many price/performance ppl....
Nuff said!!! All the rest is speculation, user bias, and as here semantics.....
Thats evil like (post count is "666")
Dont equate winning by volume of sales cause most (like me) say winning is the best performing chip.....Intel could still sell more chips even if there cpus were double the deficits they are now....That is not saying much!!! ppl are idiots for the most part, and are easily manipulated into mhz means everything, and whatever that salesman says....AMD doesn't advertise so who is going to tell joe public there is anything else other then Intel??? I mean ppl who buy PCworld or other computer hardware mags are very small amount so unless techno junkies like us start spreading the word like 10-100 times more then we do now it would never make a difference.
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
You didn't read my comments did you? If you know how to research and shop, you can get a single-core AMD or Intel, mobo and ram at similar prices. And yes, Intel's consume more power but that's one reason I use a Seasonic S12 psu. Blanket statements like "Intel desktop CPUs suck these days" shows your lack of objectiveness. I bet you've never even used an Intel 6xx cpu and compared it to an A64. You - "No, but it's Intel so it's crap!" LMAO.
here in germany the cheapest Venice 939 3000+ tray is selling for 110 Euros. Good boards like the DFI Ultra-D cost 115,-. If u dont wanna oc, even a $80 board will do the job. Now, if u can pls show me an Intel system, that offers similiar or better performance, features, price, power consumption (with an Intel rig u can add 20$ a year to ur electricity bills), oc`ing-opportunities.....
Capt Caveman
Lifer
- Jan 30, 2005
- 34,543
- 651
- 126
Heh. Are you implying that a measly $20 a year in electricity is enough to convince someone one way or the other? You can do better than that.
I have been wondering about this.... If the pin-out is indeed different on the Pentium D / 945P and 955X, how would the 5XX and 6XX series processors be compatible? (Which they are)
EDIT: I have also read that DFI has a BIOS release for their i865PE LGA775 board that includes the following changes:
Major Reasons of Change:
1. Added C1E BIOS control.
2. Support EM64T CPU.
3. Support Dual Core CPU.
4. Enhance the support of SATA/SATAII HDDs.
The downside is the obvious one - they cost more to make.
Arguing about "true" dual core is silly - arguments like that are usually reserved for the last gasp of defending an inferior product to the death in the face of all evidence. Noone is suggesting that X2 is a worse performing solution than Pentium-D so why care about it ?
The proof of the superiority of a given method of application is in the end result - if X2 had two totally separate cores glued on at right angles, communicating by carrier pigeon, I doubt many people would care as long as it had good performance.
Bottom line : Does it matter? will it affect Intel sales or performance? No. Will affect AMD? No. Does it affect me or you ? No.
Jesus I don?t know why everyone's getting menstrual about it, I?m more bothered over the Apple/Intel shake up and what ramifications that has for us if any.
Jesus I don?t know why everyone's getting menstrual about it, I?m more bothered over the Apple/Intel shake up and what ramifications that has for us if any.
Will it affect Intel sales? Yes it will. Now Intel is dubbed the first to release dual core and you know what that means. The first are always considered better by the comp illiterate, so they'll go buy it. That's probably why Intel took this route overall - to show that they are not behind the times. And this will affect AMD. But it probably won't affect us.
How does the argument over if it's a real dual core or not affect sales ? you know it doesnt hold any water. In terms of tech at the present moment they are behind, Intel didnt take this route by choice , they had to. Smithfield was a rush job, do you think the top brass at Intel thought that the best they could do was to put two prescott's next to each other ? they rushed when they saw AMD on the rise with thiers ( AMD had been talking about dual cores since 2000, work began on the K8/spin off k9 in 1999).
I'll wait for Yonah, and before we get screams of "just you wait" dont forget its not like AMD dont know how make a decent dual core product either, and an X2 @ 2.4 Ghz wont be going against Yonah.
ppl keeping putting the current X2 against yonah.......
1. Yonah isnt out yet.
2. Why is a present day product being measured against a product that wont be out for another year ? .
3. Taylor ? AMD's next dual core.See roadmaps.
1. Yonah isnt out yet.
2. Why is a present day product being measured against a product that wont be out for another year ? .
3. Taylor ? AMD's next dual core.See roadmaps.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter