Stability: AMD or Intel?

[wyrd]

I realize that your first reaction is going to be "great, another intel vs amd thread." That isn't directly my intention. I've found plenty of threads relating to performance, but found none relating to stability (specifically mobos). So if my concerns below were covered already, I apologize. The last thing I want to do is post yet "another intel vs amd thread."

Okay, here we go...

If you've read my other thread, you're aware that I've been banging my head against the wall for the last week or so trying to find a good socket 754 athlon 64 mobo (at least one that I'm pleased with, anyway). From what I've been reading, just about all of them have some sort of problem or another. I can face facts; I'm a newb and I want hassle free. Is it just a dream? Is it possible?

Today I turned an eye on to intel (socket 478 mobos) to see what they had to offer. From my short time of investigation, they certainly seem to be a heck of a lot more stable than athlon. Now when I say stable, I don't mean just in terms of performance. I'm talking out of the box, plug-n-play, no problems at all. Slap together a system like building a house with legos. Are my perceptions of intel based mobos flawed?

I'm the newb here, so I'm looking to the "professionals" for their opinion. I realize for gaming performance athlon 64 is the only way to go. I'm not ignorant to that fact, even I know how to read simple benchmarks, which is why I looked at AMD in the first place. There's also the fact that you can build systems cheaper, and since I'm on a <$1000 budget, I looked at AMD. Let's also not forget that the athlon 64 chips run cooler than the intel northwoods (prescott heating doesn't sit well with me, I want something that runs at a decent temp).

.. but, when it comes down to it, is it worth giving up that little bit of performance and that little extra cost for a newb to be able to build a hassle free computer? Or again, do I need to wake up to reality? I guess what I'm getting at is, is intel the way to go for the newb builder, or am I always going to run into motherboard stability issues no matter which way I go?

I thank everyone ahead of time in their advice, and once again dealing with my newbie questions.

 

[danger47]

I sure hope you get some good answers because that's exactly the kind of questions I want answered too.

I'm a newbie at this too and want to find out what's best for what I want, and I love gaming.

Best of luck to you

 

[SimsFreak]

All motherboards will have problems. Just make sure that BIOS is always updated and should have less problems then what you would on revision 1. It's really up to you which is better. We can argue back and forth about AMD being better or Intel being better, but it comes down the to motherboard manufactuor, since you are talking stable then you need to ask which motherboard company is stable. But with all build it yourself projects you just need to find a good motherboard type, if you are going AMD 64 then go with nforce 3.

Just my suggestions don't flame me for it.

 

[tommy2000]

I think this is a pretty fair question these days. I just posted a thread on my experience with the AMD 64 based Gigabyte K8NS Pro ( http://forums.anandtech.com/me...7934&amp;enterthread=y )...to sum it up, I needed a system where stability was the prime driver. I ended up going with an Intel D865PERL, which has been rock solid for me, and for several other folks I know that own that board.

As far as newbie advice, with the K8NS Pro, I failed my first rule of motherboard buying: Research, then more research. Had I just done a quick Google, I would have found several threads filled with both happy and sad owners of this board. That would have been a yellow or red flag, and I probably would have steered clear of that board.

So, there's places like this forum to search, online vendors like Newegg and Tiger Direct that post reviews of mobos. A number of sites do a shootout of various motherboards for a given chip, you can find lots of those testing against the Athlon 64. ALso, most of the manufacturers let you download the manuals, that's a good way to research the mobo.

IMHO, the jury is still out on the Athlon 64. I'm sure it's a fine chip, and it seems to have gathered a great degree of favor with enthusiasts and major vendors. I run one with an Asus mobo (K8V SE), and have had no problems with it at all. It's very fast, and supports my daily computer stuff just fine.

That circles back though to the system I mentioned at the beginning where stability was the prime objective. My first rule of mobo buying is research, and that led to countless reviews and postings about the later versions of the Intel P4 coupled with the Intel based motherboards. The general overarching comment was "solid motherboard, not a good tweaker setup though". Fine by me, I really needed stability over all else. And I got it completely.

I'm not a bigot towards either processor, I like them both. IMHO again, the AMD market movement is towards the Athlon 64. So, I'd expect to see less to no focus from the motherboard manufacturers on the Athlon XP family, and instead them concentrating their R&amp;D $$'s on the Athlon 64. Judging by the commentary throughout this forum and others, some number of people are experiencing the growing pains associated with new hardware...to run an Athlon 64, you're most likely using a motherboard that has a new CPU, new northbridge/southbridge chipset, higher speed RAM. All this, and the drive/necessity to get their products to market quickly.

Long winded reply short: My opinion is that for something very stable, and well priced these days, check the Intel D865PERL and P4 combination. Not an overclockers dream, but easy to set up, great deals on both the mobo and CPU. A good place to start.

Good luck and enjoy!

Tom

 

[Boonesmi]

both intel and amd boards are extreemly stable

a few years back when kt133 and kt133a based boards were popular amd boards has some slight stability problems, but thats a thing of the past

any new setup will be totally stable (assuming you use quaility parts and set it up correctly)




when you read about people with stability problems its almost always either user error or defective parts or low quality parts (ie. a cheapo powersupply)

 

[Spikesoldier]

any motherboard can be a crap-shoot.

if you desire stability, you wouldn't be overclocking.

that said, a server grade motherboard from tyan or supermicro would be your best bet, where money is no object and the only goal is stability.

you always have a chance of getting a bad motherboard, but im sure that those vendors stress test their motherboards before going out for sale.

i name tyan and supermicro, because they are big players in the server sector, where uptime can be worth many times the cost of the system.

 

[Nessism]

I just put a A64 system into service but frankly, if you want a higher probability of "plug and go" stability, I suggest a more mature platform. My system is running fine now (MSI K8N Neo FSR) but it was a pain to get up and running - IDE controlers are quirky and the A64 seems to be picky regarding memory.

As far as gaming performance goes, just about any modern system will work fine resulting in the video card being the limiting factor regarding frame rates.

Bottom line, go with a mature Intel P4 system with the 865/875 chipset if you are worried about the build. It's hard to beat AMD for performance per dollar though; best bang for the buck seems to be the older XP processor line with a nForce 2 chipset motherboard. Oh, and stick with a major brand board manufacture like Asus, for a well sorted out board regardless of which platform you choose.

Just my opinion of course.

Ed

 

[mechBgon]

I maintain about 80 computers at work, as well as help out here at the Forums a bit. My observation: if you want stability, the #1 concern isn't the hardware, it's the software. Are you going to go installing five media players? Are you going to install four browsers? Are you going to install every shiny piece of bait you stumble across? Are you going to let everyone and anyone use the computer with Administrator-level privileges? Then forget stability.

At work, our systems include Intel on Intel, Intel on VIA, AMD on nForce 220D, AMD on nForce2 Ultra400, AMD on nForce3 250Gb AMD on KT333, and Intel on Serverworks. The only BSODs in the last ~8 months that I can recall were due to outright hard-disk failures. Naturally, the systems are locked down so that employees can't install software or alter important system stuff.

That's how stable your system can be if you run it clean and secure. If you want to focus on a hardware aspect of stability, make sure you get a beefy, quality-brand power supply and some high-quality RAM, and pay attention to what a mobo maker's real-world reputation is here at the Forums.

 

[Childs]

I'll go the otherway and say watch out for high end Prescott cpus and Intel 848, 865, and Via PT880 chipsets. I got a combo from Frys last week with a 3.2E and ECS 848 board. Didn't work at all. Did some reasearch and it seemed it only supported Prescott CPUs up to 2.8Ghz. Well, I only have AMD64 CPUs so I had to return the motherboard. Replaced it with a FIC P4-865PEPRO. It said it supported Prescott CPUs right on the box. Same problem, would post but you couldn't do anything more than that. You needed a bios update, and you had to do it with a non Prescott CPU. Couldn't even boot from a floopy to update the bios. Did more research and found it also needed to be updated with a non Prescott up to work with a 3.2E. OK, fine, fvck ECS and fvck FIC. Returned it and got an MSI PT880 Neo FSR, and exchanged the CPU for another 3.2E just in case. Same fvcking thing! Said it supported Prescott on the box, but needed a bios update. When to MSI forums and there are tons of issues about it. SO i returned it for a MSI PT880 Neo LSR, and it supposedly ships with a newer bios. Everything seemed to work fine for about 24 hours, then the fvcking USB died, and a reboot later I couldn't get past POST. The message was something like CMOS Settings Wrong, hit F1 to continue. So I go into the BIOS and save, but next reboot the same thing. Luckyly Frys had an A64 3000+ combo sale with an MSI K8N for only $30, so I returned that Prescott POS combo and got the AMD64. It was up and running in 30 minutes, and has been running Prime95 ever since, even while I'm typing this message. This is the 3rd A64 system I have in my place (last one is for my aunt), and all of them have been rock solid running on KT800 and NF3-250 motherboards. The other two have been running 24/7 for about 3 months, one with two PVR250s recording everything on cable and one as a dedicated download/game machine.

Now, before the A64s I had a P4 2.8c and 2.6c, and I had no problems with those, as well as Barton 2500+s. None of those gave me problems, but the higher speed Prescotts were a nightmare. I suppose I could have gotten an 875 motherboard, but that would have ruined the original deal and this is for my aunt, so she just needed something fast and stable. I also have no reason to believe that an 875 would have been any better, because the 865, 848, and 880 boards say on the box that they support Prescotts and EE up to 3.4Ghz too!

 

[Zebo]

Reason you read problems is A) 90% of users here use AMD B) these users run boards out of stock design by overclcoking so natually problems will pop up.

The stability arguments are complete FUD. Intels had to recall whole chipsets..820..aletrwood..grantsdale etc/ AMD has'nt ever. Nor have thier partners AFAIK. I would say AMD is way more stable than Intel now because most of the work of chipset is offloaded into CPU now with onboard mem controller. But I don't like to spread FUD without statistics.