Poll: AMD/VIA vs. Intel/Intel for Stability ?

[PCResources]

DeathroweR:

Well, first of all, you seem to be a more sensible person than i thought... The RB solution i mentioned wasn't supposed to be cheap, not at this point anyway.

The multiple Ahlon platform that i mentioned was one designed by my company and would be too expensive for regular use, the AMD MP chipset will be of good use for you though.

Intel/Intel setups are generally stable, but so are the AMD/VIA setups that my company deliver, the thing is, it you choose the right components, any setup will be stable... I have built and delivered stable Cyrix setups.

The testing most sites do consists of a simple 1-3 day benchmark test, my tests lasts for 8 weeks, with thousands of boards, not one that was delivered specifically for testing.

Patrick Palm

Am speaking for PC Resources

 

[martysweb]

All I know is I was a Intel freek but if you want a gaming system you cant beat a Abit KT7 RAID with a 1.1 or 1.2 gig AMD chip.Im running a 1.1 gig AMD chip and im sold so long Intel...

 

[Modus]

Leo V,

<< MSI Pro2-A is the slowest KT133 motherboard in just about everything, due to an apparent bug in VIA's new Southbridge. It's actually >3% slower than the older, cheaper Pro2, how terrific. >>

No, no, no. Tom is jumping to conclusions here. All we know is that the K7T-Pro-2a is 3% slower than the Pro-2. So what? There could be a million reasons for that. The 686B vs 686A southbridge is the least of the worries.

A three per cent variance between different motherboards is actually quite common. It's certainly not noticable by human eyes. Given MSI's track record with AMD boards, I'm sure we'll see a BIOS update soon to boost performance. I'd hazard a guess that the Pro-2A BIOS disables 4-way memory interleaving by default, which the Pro-2 possibly enables (I know newer BIOS revisions support it). The 686B south bridge is not involved in the slightest.

<< Thanks, VIA! I'm really glad I paid for your incompetence again! It's swell to release a defective follow-up product, just as Anandtech gives Editor's Choice to the Pro2A's predecessor. . . I'm going to go punch a wall >>

Oh brother. Are you seriously upset over a three percent performance difference. Upset enough to call the product defective? Upset enough to punch a wall? I would sure hate to have to work for you.

DeathThroweR,

<< About you bringing up ANY RDRAM platforms - WHO in good mental health would use them? >>

Exactly my point. You were trying to agree with a blanket statement that Intel's chipsets were better than VIA's, when clearly Intel has had more than its own share of &quot;erratum&quot; to deal with.

<< About my &quot;bug&quot; comment - tell me what chipset would make the system freeze while intalling DX after loading their own (4in1) drivers. >>

I don't know what you're rambling about here. Not the VIA K*133, that's for sure.

<< About Apollo Pro 266 review - are you telling me that it's P3's fault that VIA-based DDR board consistently underperforms an Intel SDR board? lol >>

No, McFly, I'm telling you that it's not VIA's fault that the P3 is, like the Athlon, not designed to demand the huge memory bandwidth DDR and RDRAM provide. And as for the Pro266 underperforming the i815, what do you expect when a company makes a chipset for its own CPU? The BX was the P3 performance king, too, as is the AMD 760 for the Thunderbird. That's life.

<< I would vote for AMD/AMD. >>

In a perfect world. . .

<< VIA has to concentrate on Cyrix platforms now >>

Yeah, I think my toaster needs an upgrade

Modus

 

[Pakman]

<< Oh gee, lets figure that one out. Hmm improper installation when its done by the end user, yeah just blame AMD and VIA for something the END USER did wrong. There are too many hardware websites that have basic and advance reviews and guides on how to properly install a heatsink. >>

Ok, so you do agree that AMD chips are a bit more harder to install than Intels right? Cause if you need a guide to &quot;properly&quot; install a HSF on an AMD processor, it's because it's a bit harder to install an AMD HSF. So, that means Intel wins the &quot;ease of setup&quot; requirement. Point for Intel.


<< But yet you haven't giving me a numerical figure yet, and i am still waiting untill you can do that you have no way of stating that amd/via set ups are not stable. >>

Listen up man, this is the last time I'm gonna say this. I agree with you that AMD/VIA setup is stable. I LOVE my AMD rig! It's the best system I've ever owned. I NEVER said an AMD/VIA system was unstable. Go back and read all the previous posts. I'm just tired of people going around saying so and so brand is the best because this is what I own, or this is what I build for my customers and friends. The fact still remains that Intel/Intel systems are still easier to setup than AMD/VIA.

Just to let you all know, AMD is #1 on my list...This is what I recommend all my friends/associates to buy. I would buy an AMD over Intel right now. But I have no brand loyalty like some people do. However, Intel still wins this poll because of the fact that it's easier to setup. Note I said nothing about stability.


<< Have you ever Built an AMD/VIA system? If not then you need not apply to this thread. >>

Yes I have. As a matter of fact, I've built many of both systems. Read my Sig. From your sig, it looks like you've never built a recent Intel system. So maybe this thread doesn't apply to you!

-Peace-

 

[BigLance]

Hey PC Resources, look at the results so far- you told me that you knew more than me... I said that the people here would agree that Intel is more stable than an AMD platform. And if you look, more people agree that Intel is more stable than AMD. The &quot;About the Same&quot; has no effect on AMD or Intel because its half and half, so unless your blind you can see that Intel was chosen as the more stable platform - just like I said in the other post.

 

[Modus]

Pakman,

<<Ok, so you do agree that AMD chips are a bit more harder to install than Intels right? Cause if you need a guide to &quot;properly&quot; install a HSF on an AMD processor, it's because it's a bit harder to install an AMD HSF. So, that means Intel wins the &quot;ease of setup&quot; requirement. Point for Intel.>>

Oh, please. You do NOT need a guide to install a heatsink on an AMD chip. You do EXACTLY as you would for an Intel chip:

1.A) For AMD CPU's, remove any plastic or tape covering the bottom of the heatsink and apply a think layer of thermal compound if no heat transfer pad is present. Apply the same amount of compound to the surface of the chip core.

1.B) For Intel CPU's, remove any plastic or tape covering the bottom of the heatsink and apply a thin, even layer of thermal compound if no heat transfer pad is present. Apply the same amount of compound to the surface of the chip core.

2.A) For AMD CPU's, ensure that you have an appropriate heatsink/fan combo designed to fit the particular socket you are trying to install it on. Ensure that the CPU manufacturer approves this unit.

2.B) For Intel CPU's, ensure that you have an appropriate heatsink/fan combo designed to fit the particular socket you are trying to install it on. Ensure that the CPU manufacturer approves this unit.

3.A) For AMD CPU's, first clip the short end of the heatsink on, then delicately push it down flat.

3.B) For Intel CPU's, first clip the short end of the heatsink on, then delicately push it down flat.

4.A) For AMD CPU's: Now, perhaps using a flathead screwdriver with its end covered in tape, push the second, longer clip down over its notch on the socket. Excercise caution here as it is very easy to slip and scratch the traces on the motherboard when doing the longer clip due to its high tension. (That's actually the most common mistake by far, and that's why you should tape the screwdriver up first.)

4.B) For Intel CPU's: Now, perhaps using a flathead screwdriver with its end covered in tape, push the second, longer clip down over its notch on the socket. Excercise caution here as it is very easy to slip and scratch the traces on the motherboard when doing the longer clip due to its high tension. (That's actually the most common mistake by far, and that's why you should tape the screwdriver up first.)

5.A) For AMD CPU's: Be careful not to sit on your CPU or go into a murderous rage if you have difficulty. This will probably crush the core.

5.B) For Intel CPU's: Be careful not to sit on your CPU or go into a murderous rage if you have difficulty. This will probably crush the core.

So.

Can you tell me one thing in this guide that doesn't apply to either brand?

Modus

 

[Modus]

BigLance,

<< I said that the people here would agree that Intel is more stable than an AMD platform. And if you look, more people agree that Intel is more stable than AMD. >>

You're a hoot. I would have expected you to quietly slip away when it was obvious that your witless little plan failed and reason prevailed; apparently, your stupidity isn't so easily appeased. . .

Go look at the poll. Do it right now.

OK, thanks. Now, the blatant lie in your above statement was &quot;more people agree that Intel is more stable than AMD&quot;. In fact, only 36.69% of people think that. The vast majority of educated AnandTech users -- 63.31% -- believe (correctly) that Intel is NOT more stable.

You were always wrong by the facts.

Now you're wrong by majority vote.

What's left for you to humiliate yourself with?

Take a hike.

Modus

 

[BigLance]

Kiss my ass Modus,

The point I was trying to make is that more people voted for Intel than then did for AMD, regardless of the Both option...

 

[Dulanic]

<< In reality, there are only three vital patches for VIA chipsets (the 4-in-1 Service Pack and IDE Busmaster Driver, and the AMD Win2K AGP Registry key) >>



Actually this is inncorect, there are only 2 things you need... one in Win98. VIA 4in1, the busmaster drivers are inculded. For Win2K there is a MS patch because MS didnt correctly support the AGP on VIA chipsets.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/downloads/recommended/q261606/default.asp

And before someone says its a VIA problem which its not....



<< This vulnerability is caused by incomplete support for the VIA chipset in the Windows 2000 AGP drivers. >>

Right from MS.

 

[PCResources]

<< Hey PC Resources, look at the results so far- you told me that you knew more than me... I said that the people here would agree that Intel is more stable than an AMD platform. And if you look, more people agree that Intel is more stable than AMD >>



No you did not make that statement, you said that EVERYONE would agree that Intel is the more stable platform... This is not the case, as Modus stated, only 36.6% believe that the Intel platform is MORE stable than the AMD platform...

I understand that there is little that i can do to change your mind, and you do have the right to state your opinions, however, if you are going to state those opinions as facts you better know what you are talking about, a few systems built by you does not make you an expert...

I do know more about AMD, Intel, VIA and stability than you, which is not very strange at all, i have been in this business for 15 years now and i have tested so many systems...

If you have a problem with your AMD/VIA setup, ok, just do not state that it is unreliable, if it were, then why on earth can other people get it to work??

Patrick Palm

Am speaking for PC Resources

 

[Dulanic]

<< Kiss my ass Modus,

The point I was trying to make is that more people voted for Intel than then did for AMD, regardless of the Both option... >>



Well thats funny, all of a sudden you change your point of view. You said Intel was more stable.... and more then 65% of people disagree with your statement. They all say they are equal or AMD is more stable.

I may like AMD but I will tell you this.... thoose that voted Intel are either not experienced with AMD, zealots, or by chance may have had a bad experience, caused by user error, crappy generic parts, or a bad part (Bad parts happen with any company, though its rarely a CPU thats bad, the MB, Ram or other things is more likely)

The people who voted for AMD are the exact same thing, zealots, or bad experience.

It doesn't suprise me Intel has a few more votes then AMD..... everyone here has used Intel at one time or another, the same is not true for AMD.

Every experienced person here is telling you they are the same, but you disagree based on your one experience. Id take their word over every person here who voted AMD or Intel based on their &quot;belief&quot;.

 

[Pakman]

Modus,

The heatsink issue was just one of the issues that AMD people had problems with. You don't hear about many problems with Intel and their heatsinks. I hear horror stories all the time about how they burned up their Thunderbird or crushed their core because of the heatsink. I didn't get into any other issues like the power supplies and such. The setup process is exactly the same on both systems and I know that. It's just that with AMD, you just have to do a bit more research to get the correct components... thus, making it harder to setup initially. Intel still wins for ease of setup and is equal in stability.

 

[Dulanic]

<< The heatsink issue was just one of the issues that AMD people had problems with. You don't hear about many problems with Intel and their heatsinks. I hear horror stories all the time about how they burned up their Thunderbird or crushed their core because of the heatsink. I didn't get into any other issues like the power supplies and such. The setup process is exactly the same on both systems and I know that. It's just that with AMD, you just have to do a bit more research to get the correct components... thus, making it harder to setup initially. Intel still wins for ease of setup and is equal in stability. >>



And Ive read a few statements on &quot;I ran it without a heatsink to see if it worked&quot;. Chalk it up to stupid user. Its not hard, find a heatsink made FOR SocketA. AMD is not as picky as you think, yes the EV6 bus is a bit more sensative to noise from the PSU, which is why a older crappy PSU may not work... in 95% of cases a 250W will work FINE, but if its old and generic it may let alot of noise through the lines. The RAM issue is MOSTLY with people running memory over spec, although really crappy memory can also cause problems.... thats why I say just buy crucial, good memory, good price. Its a very small price to pay, a bus that is a LITTLE more sensative to very crappy components, for a DDR bus.

 

[BigLance]

Dulanic,

You do speak of some truth, most of the people that voted one way or the other probably did have a bad experiance. Both platforms are good, I already mentioned this.. especially when you DO take in to consideration how much bang for the buck you get with AMD. But I think more people have had some &quot;issues&quot; with AMD, that was how this whole thing got started... I know this Poll isn't going to change any minds about what people are going to run, but It does show I had a point when I argued that Intel has its place- especially when paired with an Intel Motherboard (Like someone else bought up, many hardware sites have stated that an Intel/Intel/Intel (CPU/MOBO/Chipset) platform is very stable.) That is what I bought (and was beaten down for buying) and that is why I did it...

 

[Degenerate]

I am not saying anything about the stability of both but with CLEAR MATHS!!
you can see that more people voted for INTEL than AMD!! Can't you see that???? The &quot;about the same section means undecided as in not decided!!

Am i wrong?? did i miss anything, i'll be very delightted to know.

 

[Degenerate]

And the thing is that only 30.3% think that Amd is more stable with another 3party chip. If you disagree, why dont you tell amd and make a chip now? i sa their road map, not many of their own are there..

 

[BigLance]

Degenerate,

Yes !! You are right, this is what I have been trying to explain. They keep saying Intel lost and AMD one the Vote... and that just doesn't add up when you look at the results...

 

[Dulanic]

Why don't you read my previous post buddy. Everyone has used Intel... not everyone has used AMD, so thoose that havent used AMD... what do they vote.... Intel. They are even in stability, ask any experienced person who has assembled hundreds of PCs.

 

[BigLance]

Well I haven't assymbled hundreds, but I have done a few (15 or so).
AMD K5's, K6's, Athlons and of course Intels... and I still value Intel as more stable, and AMD as more bang for your buck... JMO.

 

[PCResources]

<< Yes !! You are right, this is what I have been trying to explain. They keep saying Intel lost and AMD one the Vote... and that just doesn't add up when you look at the results... >>



Who said anything about that?? I voted for &quot;about the same&quot; and the reason for that is obvious... I do not think that AMD/VIA is either more or less stable than the Intel platform, but you did state that it is MORE stable, so Intel didn't loose here, you did...

Your 15 systems, how many of them were AMD and how many were Intel, how many problems occured with the AMD systems and how many occured with the Intel systems? If i were to tell you that the failure rate of a solid AMD system with the correct components is less than 0.5% and that the failure rate of a solid Intel setup is about the same, how would you react??

Maybe it was a bad piece of HW that you used, maybe you did something wrong... I have owned a few cars in my days, the worst one was a BMW, lots of problems with that car, does that mean that all BMW cars are crappy? Does it mean that maybe there was something wrong with mine? And still, i didn't build it myself, i left that to the people who know how to do it right...

Patrick Palm

Am speaking for PC Resources

 

[Dulanic]

<< And the thing is that only 30.3% think that Amd is more stable with another 3party chip. If you disagree, why dont you tell amd and make a chip now? i sa their road map, not many of their own are there.. >>



Foolish boy, he said Intel is MORE stable in his last thread.... well by the poll over 60% dont think Intel is MORE stable.

 

[Modus]

Don't even bother. His mind is made up, don't try to confuse him with the facts. He's just an Intel zealot like all Intel zealots. It's a mindless brand loyalty that's difficult to overcome. Slavish devotion to a monopolist mega corporation doesn't come easy, and it doesn't leave easy.

So to sum up:

BigLance claimed the majority of people feel Intel is more stable than AMD.

The majority do not.

Big Lance was wrong. End of discussion.

Modus

 

[Pakman]

Modus,

I believe the majority of people do believe Intel to be the more stable system. Mainly because of lack of information and brand recognition. Whether it's the truth or not, people will still believe Intel processors are better and more stable until AMD has a larger user base with brand recognition. I have never seen an ad for AMD processors on TV. That's probably one of the reasons why their prices are so rock bottom.

 

[HomerFan]

in my mind stability = trouble-free.. with that in mind Intel totally.. here's why [and i realize i'm inviting flame o matic here but facts are facts]

Via chipset is not as stable as intel's chipset period.
Just look at all the posts about via problems here, and recommendations to find drivers that will fix problems.. crazy amount!
Amd is way too picky
Amd approved this, Amd approved that.. Wrong powersupply, wrong ram, wrong cooler, etc, etc, etc.. {when was the last time you saw INTEL APPROVED?} If Amd gets any more finicky you'll only be able to run an Amd processor with stability if your name is Fred.
Overheat much?
Post by post, site by site, Amd users are having more heat related concerns and problems over Intel by a huge margin.. heat in computers is bad kids.. Amd=heat and heat=bad therefore Amd=bad

Now before you go bashing me and calling me an Amd basher or an intel zealot or whatever - keep in mind, I myself own 2 Amd systems, so I'm not speaking without cause. I like them just fine, but had to jump through too many hoops to get them to run stable.. Bios flash, via4in1 drivers, insane amount of cooling.. Whereas my intel systems have all been buy product, install product, run it until it's so out of date it's a joke, buy new product.

 

[Peridium]

Through my experiences, I believe that an Intel/Intel solution would be the most stable. The reasoning for this is that Intel designs both the chipset and CPU to work well together. AMD on the other hand relies mainly upon VIA for chipset solutions. As you may of known, VIA has had stability and compatibility issues with their chipsets. In the past, the VIA system that I owned was far from being 100% stable whereas all the Intel systems were rock solid. Mind you, my opinions are based from past experience with AMD/VIA solution. Their current solutions may prove to be just as stable as any Intel one.