The reason why Intel is better than AMD

[openwheelformula1]

I'd have to disagree on a couple things. AMD's problem is its production. Cost/Profit is much higher for AMD then Intel. To debate on how cheap two systems can get after rebates and discounts is pointless. You can't haggle on a BMW M6, but you can certainly haggle on a Porche 911. MSRP is more relevant.

AMD just don't have the low end dual cores to compete at the moment. There is not point to lower the multi on Manchesters and sell for less when the demand is high enough. The demand only remains high if the product is competitive, otherwise the price will drop significantly. The Smithfields were not selling as well they Intel had hoped hence the extra inventory and the price must drop. I wouldn't say Intel has the "price leader" until April's price drop, and that's assuming AMD's price remains. Just because Intel has lower priced CPUs that are less capable doesn't mean they are the price leader. Hyudai Rio then becomes the price leader compared to Toyota. How well the product perform matters.

Another note, of course Intel is doing ok, they have 75% of the market share and the blessing of the general public. The netburst products would have to literally catch on fire for Intel to be "not ok". I think mid-range is where AMD truely shines, especially power consumption. In this segment, AMD simply outperforms and costs less. Low and ultra high end is where things get tighter.

 

[Bobthelost]

Originally posted by: hans007
also i'd like to mention amd isnt exactly doing great on wattage going forwards as it is. the fx60 and 950 (and i'd presume 955ee since its only 60mhz more than a 950) draw about 3 watts difference at load for a comparable system (accofding to gamepc.com's fx60 review). the idle difference i believe is something like 40 watts because the enhance speedstep on the b1 revision of the 9xx series doesnt work (but it will on c1 revision).

I looked for that review and found it. The numbers for the FX-60 look similar to the others quoted for a system, around 230W at full load.
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=fx60&page=3
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2668

However the anandtech review compares the FX-60 to the model up the 955, which is around 40W higher than the numbers given for the 950.

Then there's the Tom's review of the FX-60
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/01/10/...on_fx_60_dual_core_assault/page19.html

I don't trust the numbers there too mcuh, as the FX-60 supposedly draws less power than the 4800X2. But the trend is very obvious, that the 955 draws notably more power than it's AMD equivalent.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: dmens
Goddamn you're thickheaded mark. Most people don't overclock. If someone is not willing to pay more than $200 for a dual, they'll get a cheapo 805, because they don't care about performance at that price. Get over it. Your exotic computing habits and budget is nowhere close to average. Here's a hint, personal anecdotes like "mark post generator: I can afford to blow $2k/month on boxen to run folding 24/7, hence people who buy intel are idiots" are retarded.

Oh btw, I recall posting the math, but I'll do it again: 100W differential 24/7 = $8.86 a month (PGE rate, Feb 06), and that is a pretty generous overestimate of the draw difference on full load. And since people who buy 805/820 don't do full load 24/7, the real cost difference is basically zilch.

If you hate the 820 so much, just get rid of it and spare everyone your self-evident posts about how bad the 8xx is, because everyone already ****** knows.

Nice personal digs ahole. My point has nothing to do with my own spending habits, just that the 802/820 are not good value, or bang/buck or performance, just cheap, hot, and suck power.

Yes, if somebody doesn;t want to spend $290 for something decent, then they will get the 820 or 805 since thats all the budget calls for.

Just because a Yugo is cheap, doesn;t mean I would recommend anyone buy one. You get what you pay for sometimes...

 

[FelixDeCat]

Todays INTC profit warning didnt help, but I believe they will rise again. Competition is always a good thing for everybody. Nobody can argue with that. :lips:

 

[dmens]

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Nice personal digs ahole. My point has nothing to do with my own spending habits, just that the 802/820 are not good value, or bang/buck or performance, just cheap, hot, and suck power.

Yes, if somebody doesn;t want to spend $290 for something decent, then they will get the 820 or 805 since thats all the budget calls for.

Just because a Yugo is cheap, doesn;t mean I would recommend anyone buy one. You get what you pay for sometimes...

No problem, always a pleasure to ****** with a thick-headed elitist. You're the kind of guy who owns a ferrari, recommends it to a broke college student, then turns his nose and sneers when the student buys a civic.

Try and come up with some insighful posts sometime instead of regurgitating the same old garbage day after day, and use something *other* than your spending habits to justify your points (because you do that all the time). Nobody cares if you use your dual opteron to fold or encode porn 24/7; because it doesn't prove any damn thing.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: dmens

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Nice personal digs ahole. My point has nothing to do with my own spending habits, just that the 802/820 are not good value, or bang/buck or performance, just cheap, hot, and suck power.

Yes, if somebody doesn;t want to spend $290 for something decent, then they will get the 820 or 805 since thats all the budget calls for.

Just because a Yugo is cheap, doesn;t mean I would recommend anyone buy one. You get what you pay for sometimes...

No problem, always a pleasure to ****** with a thick-headed elitist. You're the kind of guy who owns a ferrari, recommends it to a broke college student, then turns his nose and sneers when the student buys a civic.

Try and come up with some insighful posts sometime instead of regurgitating the same old garbage day after day, and use something *other* than your spending habits to justify your points (because you do that all the time). Nobody cares if you use your dual opteron to fold or encode porn 24/7; because it doesn't prove any damn thing.

There's no getting around the fact that until you hit the price of an x2 3800 and a cheap 939 motherboard, you can't get an amd dual core chip; so if you need good multitasking for less than that price, an 805 or 8/920, or a P4 with HT is your best choice.

Once you hit that price, buying intel is not a good idea right now. Buying intel for a machine primarily intended for gaming is similarly a poor decision, at any price, because at any price you can do better with AMD.

It's too bad the 805 and other lowend intel solutions do not have good speedstep functionality, because they would be a great solution for multipuppose computers, htpcs that are regularly used as desktops at the same time, etc.

As it stands, there is a definite hole in the market for a medium-performance dual core chip that doesn't double as a spaceheater; overall the 805 is the best of a bad lot for filling this role.

 

[carlosd]

The 805 is crap, too bad if you don't have enough money for the X2 3800+, in this case you get what you pay for there is nothing more to say. The X3800+ is absolutely superior in every aspect to the 805 wich is really a piece of crap.

 

[dmens]

too bad if you don't have enough money for the X2 3800+

See what I mean LOL

 

[DrMrLordX]

Originally posted by: Acanthus


yeah that $3 a month is killer.

First off, it could easily wind up being more than $3/month in expenses when running an 805, especially if you're overclocking.

Intel's own data shows the TDP of the 805 to be the same as the 820, though I suspect the 805 uses less actual power than the 820. Or so I'd hope.

But I've seen a number of cost estimates of running an 820 at stock vs an x2 3800+, and you could easily wind up paying an extra $100-$200 per year on the 820 if you run it frequently and keep it at load. Considering the fact that the 820 is going to take longer to complete lenghty complex tasks(video encoding, for example), it's going to stay at load longer than the 3800+.

Even if you're only seeing maybe $3-$5 per month in extra electric bills($10+ is entirely possible), you're still burning anywhere from $36-$60 extra per year just to own the "cheap" processor.

I typically build cheap PCs for myself. I also typically hold on to them for a loooong time, which many "casual" users also do. My last two systems each lasted me 4 years before I did a full-system upgrade.

Over the course of 4 years, assuming a minimum cost/month of $3 in extra power expenses($36/year), it costs me an extra $144 to own the Pentium D 805 over the life of the system. That brings the processor cost up from $142(Newegg price) to $286. I can get an X2 3800+ for $295. Why in the hell would I get the Pentium D 805? Is it so hard to see how putting down $295 now for greater efficiency AND better performance is a good move?

The only people who could reasonably get away with owning the 805 D are people who upgrade frequently which is NOT the hallmark of grandma and grampa who just want to surf the web.

I repeat, the 805 D IS NOT A GOOD DEAL.

PS, Browntown, the benchmark I linked shows the x2 3800+ clobbering the Pentium D 830, NOT the 805. The x2 3800+ is literally not benchmarked against the 805 ANYWHERE. If you were to stick the 805 into that same benchmark I linked, it is reasonably possible that it would perform at about half the speed as the 3800+ when you take into account the reduction in clock speed and FSB/memory speed on the 805. But that's just an estimate.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX

Originally posted by: Acanthus


yeah that $3 a month is killer.

First off, it could easily wind up being more than $3/month in expenses when running an 805, especially if you're overclocking.

Intel's own data shows the TDP of the 805 to be the same as the 820, though I suspect the 805 uses less actual power than the 820. Or so I'd hope.

But I've seen a number of cost estimates of running an 820 at stock vs an x2 3800+, and you could easily wind up paying an extra $100-$200 per year on the 820 if you run it frequently and keep it at load. Considering the fact that the 820 is going to take longer to complete lenghty complex tasks(video encoding, for example), it's going to stay at load longer than the 3800+.

Even if you're only seeing maybe $3-$5 per month in extra electric bills($10+ is entirely possible), you're still burning anywhere from $36-$60 extra per year just to own the "cheap" processor.

I typically build cheap PCs for myself. I also typically hold on to them for a loooong time, which many "casual" users also do. My last two systems each lasted me 4 years before I did a full-system upgrade.

Over the course of 4 years, assuming a minimum cost/month of $3 in extra power expenses($36/year), it costs me an extra $144 to own the Pentium D 805 over the life of the system. That brings the processor cost up from $142(Newegg price) to $286. I can get an X2 3800+ for $295. Why in the hell would I get the Pentium D 805? Is it so hard to see how putting down $295 now for greater efficiency AND better performance is a good move?

The only people who could reasonably get away with owning the 805 D are people who upgrade frequently which is NOT the hallmark of grandma and grampa who just want to surf the web.

I repeat, the 805 D IS NOT A GOOD DEAL.

PS, Browntown, the benchmark I linked shows the x2 3800+ clobbering the Pentium D 830, NOT the 805. The x2 3800+ is literally not benchmarked against the 805 ANYWHERE. If you were to stick the 805 into that same benchmark I linked, it is reasonably possible that it would perform at about half the speed as the 3800+ when you take into account the reduction in clock speed and FSB/memory speed on the 805. But that's just an estimate.

If everyone wants to argue the whole $142 over the span of 4 years, you may as well stop watching TV, buy a cheap laptop, get an energy efficient car, replace your lightbulbs, get an efficient water heater, turn off the heat when you're not at home, unplug devices which aren't being used, blah blah blah. It'll save you much more than $142 over 4 years.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: DrMrLordX

Originally posted by: Acanthus


yeah that $3 a month is killer.

First off, it could easily wind up being more than $3/month in expenses when running an 805, especially if you're overclocking.

Intel's own data shows the TDP of the 805 to be the same as the 820, though I suspect the 805 uses less actual power than the 820. Or so I'd hope.

But I've seen a number of cost estimates of running an 820 at stock vs an x2 3800+, and you could easily wind up paying an extra $100-$200 per year on the 820 if you run it frequently and keep it at load. Considering the fact that the 820 is going to take longer to complete lenghty complex tasks(video encoding, for example), it's going to stay at load longer than the 3800+.

Even if you're only seeing maybe $3-$5 per month in extra electric bills($10+ is entirely possible), you're still burning anywhere from $36-$60 extra per year just to own the "cheap" processor.

I typically build cheap PCs for myself. I also typically hold on to them for a loooong time, which many "casual" users also do. My last two systems each lasted me 4 years before I did a full-system upgrade.

Over the course of 4 years, assuming a minimum cost/month of $3 in extra power expenses($36/year), it costs me an extra $144 to own the Pentium D 805 over the life of the system. That brings the processor cost up from $142(Newegg price) to $286. I can get an X2 3800+ for $295. Why in the hell would I get the Pentium D 805? Is it so hard to see how putting down $295 now for greater efficiency AND better performance is a good move?

The only people who could reasonably get away with owning the 805 D are people who upgrade frequently which is NOT the hallmark of grandma and grampa who just want to surf the web.

I repeat, the 805 D IS NOT A GOOD DEAL.

PS, Browntown, the benchmark I linked shows the x2 3800+ clobbering the Pentium D 830, NOT the 805. The x2 3800+ is literally not benchmarked against the 805 ANYWHERE. If you were to stick the 805 into that same benchmark I linked, it is reasonably possible that it would perform at about half the speed as the 3800+ when you take into account the reduction in clock speed and FSB/memory speed on the 805. But that's just an estimate.

People have done the math, it comes out to about $2-4 a month.

 

[FelixDeCat]

Originally posted by: carlosd
The 805 is crap, too bad if you don't have enough money for the X2 3800+, in this case you get what you pay for there is nothing more to say. The X3800+ is absolutely superior in every aspect to the 805 wich is really a piece of crap.

:roll:

 

[openwheelformula1]

Go Intel Go.

 

[Faxtor]

Check these benchmarks out between the Pentium D 805 and X2 3800 overclocked! This should stop all the senseless bickering.

Pentium D 805 vs X2 3800

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Faxtor
Check these benchmarks out between the Pentium D 805 and X2 3800 overclocked! This should stop all the senseless bickering.

Pentium D 805 vs X2 3800

You're right, it shows the 805 being closer to the x2 than expected.

 

[openwheelformula1]

ouch. He used a much better heatsink on the 805 as well.

 

[josh609]

Originally posted by: dmens

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Nice personal digs ahole. My point has nothing to do with my own spending habits, just that the 802/820 are not good value, or bang/buck or performance, just cheap, hot, and suck power.

Yes, if somebody doesn;t want to spend $290 for something decent, then they will get the 820 or 805 since thats all the budget calls for.

Just because a Yugo is cheap, doesn;t mean I would recommend anyone buy one. You get what you pay for sometimes...

No problem, always a pleasure to ****** with a thick-headed elitist. You're the kind of guy who owns a ferrari, recommends it to a broke college student, then turns his nose and sneers when the student buys a civic.

Try and come up with some insighful posts sometime instead of regurgitating the same old garbage day after day, and use something *other* than your spending habits to justify your points (because you do that all the time). Nobody cares if you use your dual opteron to fold or encode porn 24/7; because it doesn't prove any damn thing.

OK.....your a spaz. Your acting as if he insulted your mother, father, and your sister that has hairy armpits and smells like pee.

 

[Hard Ball]

Originally posted by: BrownTown
well its good to know that all your friends are rich, 'cause mine aren't,

Well, it's good to know that your friends get can turn on the electricity for free.

Come on, hook me up with some of that too, share the wealth.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: dmens

Originally posted by: Markfw900
Nice personal digs ahole. My point has nothing to do with my own spending habits, just that the 802/820 are not good value, or bang/buck or performance, just cheap, hot, and suck power.

Yes, if somebody doesn;t want to spend $290 for something decent, then they will get the 820 or 805 since thats all the budget calls for.

Just because a Yugo is cheap, doesn;t mean I would recommend anyone buy one. You get what you pay for sometimes...

No problem, always a pleasure to ****** with a thick-headed elitist. You're the kind of guy who owns a ferrari, recommends it to a broke college student, then turns his nose and sneers when the student buys a civic.

Try and come up with some insighful posts sometime instead of regurgitating the same old garbage day after day, and use something *other* than your spending habits to justify your points (because you do that all the time). Nobody cares if you use your dual opteron to fold or encode porn 24/7; because it doesn't prove any damn thing.

Boy, you must be 10 years old to keep coming up with the personal insults. I simply said that it is a last resort, if its all you can afford, and you get what you pay for sometimes, and you come up with all this crap.

Grow up. I actually used to respect your posts, but you sure blew that one.

Edit: In this thread Felixthecat actually has better feedback than you and thats really pathetic.

 

[dmens]

I simply said that it is a last resort, if its all you can afford, and you get what you pay for sometimes

Nice backoff there. Scroll up and read your own posts on how the 805 is crap, even when others pointed out its pricing and intended market (the point you are now trying to claim). If you're going to be elitist, at least be consistent. View this as some constructive criticism. I never respected your posts, and now you know why.

Have a good one.

 

[openwheelformula1]

lmao respect over the internet? Don't over promote yourself, it's enough that everyone knows you work for Intel. People here have great respect for Intel, don't lose it's face. Have a good one.

 

[buzzsaw13]

Originally posted by: dmens

I simply said that it is a last resort, if its all you can afford, and you get what you pay for sometimes

Nice backoff there. Scroll up and read your own posts on how the 805 is crap, even when others pointed out its pricing and intended market (the point you are now trying to claim). If you're going to be elitist, at least be consistent. View this as some constructive criticism. I never respected your posts, and now you know why.

Have a good one.

How is he trying to be an elitist? Where at all did he say that he could spend all the money he wanted on junk? You made a wild assumption of his lifestyle and now you've got nothing other than your stupid assumption to back up your argument.

 

[Brunnis]

Originally posted by: TuxDave
If everyone wants to argue the whole $142 over the span of 4 years, you may as well stop watching TV, buy a cheap laptop, get an energy efficient car, replace your lightbulbs, get an efficient water heater, turn off the heat when you're not at home, unplug devices which aren't being used, blah blah blah. It'll save you much more than $142 over 4 years.

Wow, you really missed the point on that one. The point he was trying to get across was this:

Why buy a slower and hotter CPU, if the total cost at the system's end of life will be the same as the faster and cooler one? It makes no sense at all.

I'm not saying that the 805 is the worst CPU ever. If it really costs 3-5 dollars extra a month, it isn't really a very good deal either, though.

 

[TuxDave]

Originally posted by: Brunnis

Originally posted by: TuxDave
If everyone wants to argue the whole $142 over the span of 4 years, you may as well stop watching TV, buy a cheap laptop, get an energy efficient car, replace your lightbulbs, get an efficient water heater, turn off the heat when you're not at home, unplug devices which aren't being used, blah blah blah. It'll save you much more than $142 over 4 years.

Wow, you really missed the point on that one. The point he was trying to get across was this:

Why buy a slower and hotter CPU, if the total cost at the system's end of life will be the same as the faster and cooler one? It makes no sense at all.

I'm not saying that the 805 is the worst CPU ever. If it really costs 3-5 dollars extra a month, it isn't really a very good deal either, though.

I just find it very strange how $3/month electricity cost make a large impact on a person's decision on a processor? Why now? Back when I was rocking around with a AMD T-bird that was god DAMN hot, no one cared about a $3/month excess on electricty cost. So the big question is 'why now'? How is it that we're more sensitive to this case of $3/month than to the other things that we decide on? That's the main point I'm trying to drive.

I'm curious how the math would turn out of we try to justify overclocking in general. You get a lower end chip to overclock BUT you may be paying more in electricity and whatever you need to cool it. So for my entertainment, how do those numbers work out?

And to end my rant, any financial gurus want to determine the present value of $3/month over four years? Ok, time to sleep.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Tux, it's an issue now because somehow, Intel's low-end dual core processor winds up chewing up more power while providing less performance than AMD's low-end dual-core processor. People, well some people anyway, tolerated the infamous "space heater" 1.4 ghz Thunderbirds because they smoked every P3 ever made AND the 1.4 and 1.6 ghz Williamette P4s. People paid the power bills willingly for the performance. Traditionally, low-end CPUs cost less to buy AND less to operate because they had low clock speeds. Thanks to the Prescott-era Netburst implementations, that has changed.

There is no reason to buy a "budget" processor with inferior performance if that proc is gonna hit you in the wallet over the life of the proc. Even at an estimated $2-$4 per month of electrical costs, it makes no sense to get an 805 over an x2-3800+, especially when budget PC-buyers often hold on to hardware for long periods of time. It's not unheard-of for people to own the same box and same hardware for years on end.