My friend is a hardware RACIST !!! What to do?

[VBboy]

My friend won't even consider buying a non-Intel CPU or non-nVidia videocard. He is something of a simpleton and a racist, I guess

He only owned one real videocard (GeForce2 MX) so he cannot possibly have any real-world experience with ATI. Similarly, he never had a non-Intel CPU to complain about, so what gives?

How can I smack some sense into my confused, prejudiced, brand name-caring friend?

P.S. He would rather PAY MORE and/or get SLOWER HARDWARE, but not get an ATI- or nVidia-branded product. Is he just insane?
P.P.S. Even when AMD Athlon was cheaper and faster (in many cases) than the P4, he would still rather get the Intel's chip.

More: He always buys the most expensive motherboards ($160+) although we all know that great mobos now can be had for as little $100, or $120 if you're willing.

 

[fatbaby]

well whats wrong with intel and nvidia?

 

[Xenon14]

Show him some benchmarks, tomshardware.com has like top 15 or so video cards all in one review. check out past reviews on anandtech.com or tomshardware.com print it out and stick it to his face.

 

[VBboy]

Originally posted by: fatbaby
well whats wrong with intel and nvidia?

Nothing, but at this moment ATI Radeon 9700 Pro is THE fastest consumer-level videocard, but he would rather get the older 4600 just because of the nVidia brand! Likewise, he would rather overpay to get an Intel CPU (along the lines of 2.4 GHz performance).

You have to consider all the options before making an (educated) buying decision

 

[CZroe]

I have some horrific ATI and AMD stories, but AMD now has nForce and no Pentium-Rated K5/6 and ATI has ART-X behind their last product's success so I'm certainly not going to avoid either

I'll continue avoiding Via/Cyrix and SiS products though

 

[VBboy]

Originally posted by: Xenon14
Show him some benchmarks, tomshardware.com has like top 15 or so video cards all in one review. check out past reviews on anandtech.com or tomshardware.com print it out and stick it to his face.

I showed him many benchmarks, but he still decided to order a P4 CPU although at the desired performance level, AMD Athlon XP is cheaper. Maybe I scared him with my hot old Athlon T-bird?

 

[chizow]

Friends don't let friends become Fanbois.

This message was brought to you by the Anti-Fanboi Coalition

 

[VBboy]

I kind of wanted to avoid AMD as well, after my initial boiling-hot Athlon T-bird, but the new chips don't have such heat-related issues, and the performance has increased as well...

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Likewise, he would rather overpay to get an Intel CPU (along the lines of 2.4 GHz performance).

Note to VBboy:
Athlon XP 2400+ Retail - $197
Pentium 4 2.4 GHz Retail - $192

both from Newegg.com

 

[VBboy]

Originally posted by: RaynorWolfcastle

Likewise, he would rather overpay to get an Intel CPU (along the lines of 2.4 GHz performance).

Note to VBboy:
Athlon XP 2400+ Retail - $197
Pentium 4 2.4 GHz Retail - $192

both from Newegg.com

Right, but the Athlon XP 2400+ provides up to 15% better performance in rendering and gaming, according to several Anandtech benchmarks... (Anandtech) But let's not turn this into a CPU war It's still a general question of considering an alternative brand.

 

[ozone13]

:shrug: I'll never buy AMD again after all the problems I've had with the original Athlons. I know they've gotten better since then, but why go with an uknown when I can go with something I KNOW works.....and works great?

 

[VBboy]

Speaking of Cyrix: I bought an AMD and would buy a Cyrix (C3 for the quiet, low-heat PC) despite the fact that the original Cyrix "686" SUCKED, and so did the AMD K5.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Originally posted by: VBboy
Right, but the Athlon XP 2400+ provides up to 15% better performance in rendering and gaming, according to several Anandtech benchmarks... (Anandtech) But let's not turn this into a CPU war It's still a general question of considering an alternative brand.

it really depends on what you do with the processor... take a look at the benchmarks and you'll see that the P4 wins some benches, the Athon wins some, but mosts are close enough that you wouldn't notice a difference in actual use. counter-point

I agree with what you're saying but at the price point he's looking at Intel and AMD are pretty much neck and neck in performance... so if he likes Intel, let him stick with Intel

 

[CZroe]

Compatability was the worst factor. The K5's and Cyrix's of the day prompted "AMD versions" of several applications.

AMD claimed similar performance, but even the fastest K6-2 was the bottlenext in iny "modern" ame. I remember trying a V5 5000 PCI on a K6-2 550... ~10FPS in Q3:TA!

 

[Pariah]

Right, but the Athlon XP 2400+ provides up to 15% better performance in rendering and gaming, according to several Anandtech benchmarks...

Might want to take a look at this:

THG 3.06 review

Make sure you look at the 533bus version which is the one for 192. Not sure what's wrong with Anand's review, but in this one the P4 wins every useful benchmark and by pretty large margins most of the time.

As for your friend, who cares? It's his money, if he wants to spend it on Intel and Nvidia, let him. It's computer hardware not some life influencing decision.

Edit:

I just looked at the Anand link, and I have no idea why you posted that as data to back up your claims as even Anand said those benchmarks look bogus:

"We're quite skeptical of the viewperf results not only because they don't agree with any of our other numbers from this review but mainly because the 3ds max test does not agree with our real-world 3ds max tests from earlier in this review. We've included the numbers anyways for your own use and interpretation:"

 

[VBboy]

Originally posted by: Pariah As for your friend, who cares? It's his money, if he wants to spend it on Intel and Nvidia, let him. It's computer hardware not some life influencing decision.

Well, sometimes he makes similarly illogical decisions in real life... I'm afraid that if he is so attached to arbitrarily-chosen products, he may make some serious mistakes when it comes to more than just computer hardware... Such as marrying a girl just because she's sexy, rich, and loves him (ok, bad example )

 

[Wingznut]

I wonder if you'd have the same complaint if the guy insisted on using only AMD.

And after owning a Radeon 64mb VIVO and 8500, I'm in no hurry to use ATi again. Yes, I know that their drivers have gotten much better... I just don't feel like dealing with them now. (Does that make me a hardware racist? )

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Pariah

Right, but the Athlon XP 2400+ provides up to 15% better performance in rendering and gaming, according to several Anandtech benchmarks...

Edit:

I just looked at the Anand link, and I have no idea why you posted that as data to back up your claims as even Anand said those benchmarks look bogus:

"We're quite skeptical of the viewperf results not only because they don't agree with any of our other numbers from this review but mainly because the 3ds max test does not agree with our real-world 3ds max tests from earlier in this review. We've included the numbers anyways for your own use and interpretation:"

Not really, an Athlon XP 2400+ will dominate a 2.4GHz P4 (533MHz) in SPECviewperf 7.0 (just look at our motherboard benchmarks, THG's benchmarks and any other reviews around the net). I'm not sure what Anand meant by the statement you quoted though, that's something I should ask him. Btw, the Q3A benchmarks THG got were sorta odd compared to what we've been getting as well as other web sites I've compared against. I'm guessing it's the non-WHQL nForce2 drivers and the early A7N8X (nForce2) revision that's causing a noticable lag in 2400+ scores. The use of the 9700 Pro is also a factor, as it'll scale slightly differently than GeForce4 GPUs.

Anyway, besides SPECviewperf 7.0, a 2400+ will more or less stay dead even with a 2.4GHz P4 (533MHz FSB) CPU. Certain Lightwave apps are about the only thing a 2.4GHz P4 will pull ahead of the 2400+ in (that is, among apps that most average to advanced PC users will use. Obviously though, workstation, engineering, etc. apps show a bit more mixed results).

And just as a FYI to everyone, the cheapest price on an OEM 2400+ is currently $172 while an OEM 2.4B P4 is $178. The 2400+ has been slightly cheaper than the 2.4B P4 ever since it came out. There are tiny spurts where the 2.4B P4's are cheaper, that's certainly true, but on the whole the 2400+ is a bit cheaper most of the time (I check prices daily, so I know ).

All in all though, it's basically a dead heat to choose between a 2400+ system and a 2.4B P4 system. You might as well flip a coin, I would.

 

[TonyB]

If you're going to get an AMD 2400+ CPU and pair it up with anything BUT an NForce2 board, then you might as well forget it and get the 2.4B... My reason is this, if you dont get the nforce2 and unlock the CPU + pump that FSB as high as you can go, preferably 200FSB then whatever system you get will be crap compared to an Intel 2.4B @ 2.7+ overclock..... its as simple as that, and you really cant use the price/performance argument here because the two cpus are basically the same price +/- a couple dollars and are neck/neck in performance.

 

[spanky]

if he's got the money to burn, the leave him be. or if he just feels more comfy with his preference... that is his right.

 

[VBboy]

I don't know if he has an account here on Anandtech.. I will invite him to join this discussion. Maybe he will be able to shine some lite on this for me/us.

Keep them coming, especially general reasons to consider an alternative brand. For example, if you are a Pepsi lover, would you reject Coke without even trying it? Or would you reject a gay orgy without dipping your tip in first? (Sorry, I've had a few too many in me - beers, not tips!)

 

[newbiepcuser]

if he's got the money to burn, the leave him be. or if he just feels more comfy with his preference... that is his right.

His money, not yours. Let him be, then kick his arse in a game, cause its not the machine that makes the man its the person behind the keyboard and mouse.

 

[Mitzi]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

And after owning a Radeon 64mb VIVO and 8500, I'm in no hurry to use ATi again. Yes, I know that their drivers have gotten much better... I just don't feel like dealing with them now. (Does that make me a hardware racist? )

Exactly, my first and only experience with ATI was a 8500 and it sucked plain and simple. All I did was spent hours and hours tweaking just to get games to work right, in fact I spent so much time tweaking, I don't think I ever got a chance to actually play that many games with it. After 6 infuriating weeks, I sold the card (for half the price I bought it for) and got a GeForce. I don't care how much faster ATI cards may or may not be lately, I sure as hell don't care.

On the otherhand, I've been running a AMD cpu on a VIA based board for months now and I think its a great platform.

Perhaps you friend has had some bad experiences with AMD and ATI in the past and wants to avoid them. Its his money and his loss.

 

[Dreadogg]

Originally posted by: ozone13
:shrug: I'll never buy AMD again after all the problems I've had with the original Athlons. I know they've gotten better since then, but why go with an uknown when I can go with something I KNOW works.....and works great?

What are you gonna do when Intel has a bad year? Never buy a processor again?

 

[DX2Player]

Who cares, let him be a moron, and than smoke him with your equipment. Anyone who is that unflexable to change will ultimatly parish, at least Darwin thinks so.