Who left AMD and came back?

[stability99]

There's a topic on this website:

Who left Intel and came Back?

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=424096

So, I try to put a thread like this on AMD site like Anandtech.

Happy New Year

 

[Markfw]

Too many idiots on that forum (or at least in response to the original post) for me to take it seriously.

 

[Avalon]

The guys on that forum seem convinced that AMD is junk. Maybe someone should clue them in on how AMD has been doing the past few years.

Once I went AMD, I never left, but here is the order of processors I've gone through...

Intel 386, PentiumMMX 166mhz, P2 300mhz, P3 667mhz, Athlon XP 1600+, Athlon XP 2500+, Mobile Barton 2500+, Mobile Barton 2600+ (x2), Mobile Barton 2400+ 35w (x4), Sempron s754 2800+, Athlon64 3000+ Venice, Opteron 144 (x2), Opteron 146, Opteron 148.

By the time the XP line came out, AMD was significantly cheaper for almost the same performance in my sort of tasks as an equivalent P4, then became slightly cheaper for better performance with the A64 line.

 

[Zenoth]

I for one left Intel, and will never go back with em'.

 

[freethrowtommy]

I am one who left Intel... and I don't plan on going back until they straighten up a bit... if they ever do. I don't claim loyality to either brand, you put out a good product, that is where I am going, simple as that. AMD is the top of the pack, AMD is my choice for now.

I found this to be funny on the other forum you linked to, which leads me to believe that these guys are in fact, pretty dumb.

it's been for me intel>intel>intel>intel' and probably will be until AMD gets some sort of hyper-threading...

and

I'd say I'm an intel only guy and will always be. I guess back in the day previous althon AMD was usually garbage, and "personally" I didn't and don't see a reason to switch nor will I ever build and AMD system.

I look at several other factors than just "CPU" alone, you also have to take in consideration how reliable, stable and compatible are the rest of the components, in my case and exclusively personal I do not like amd one bit for the fallowing reasons:
1-Need CPU drivers to work on some benchmarks, cpu drivers, wtf?.
2-Requires high voltage to get close to 2.8 or 2.9 ghz.
3-Needs RAM with ultra low latencies.
4-nForce 4 are as crappy as IE, can't handle high memory bandwidth. CPU's fsb seem to be always set to be higher than RAM's fsb: look at this forum's page and also note the high CPU's voltage: HERE
5-Several RAM compatibility issues.
6-nVidia's chipset drivers could be buggy, nVRaid issues.
7-Can't handle too well 4x512mb of RAM.

I've done a lot of homework when it comes to "trying" to build (not switch to) an AMD system but quite frankly I'm not going to compromise stability, reliability over $50 less and 10fps more in games, the ratio just doesn't make any sense to me at all.

And the only excuse everyone says about Intel's is: "they run too hot"......ah......sorry but that can be controlled by a good quality 3rd party Heat-Sink/Fan or some cheap water cooling and have the kickazz option to run your CPU overclock 24/7 with super low CPU voltage core and another good reason I'm not building an AMD system is because everyone that has in their sig xxxx+ @ 2.4 or 2.6 sorry but I don't count their CPU-Z as a valuable proof that you can run it nor X2 xxxx+ @ 2.4 or 2.6, again I run my CPU overclocked and here's how I can certify that it does: System Properties @ 4.02ghz. To me the CPU-Z shot just shows how high they've gone. Otherwise look at my 650 @ 57.7ghz

and...

As you can see, I have given AMD plenty of chances to impress me. AMD chips are normally pretty good and overclockable but as has already been mentioned, the biggest downfall of AMD is the chipset support. The happiest I have been with AMD was using an EPOX 8K7A based on the AMD 760 chipset, I think it was 760 anyway. AMD produced this chipset to get DDR support for their chips as VIA was still trying to figure out how to make PC133 and their PCI bus work. Good stable OC board you could depend on working properly. Chipsets from VIA were a joke, you knew the first revision would be junk and the second revision would work better but have weird conflicts and features that may or may not work. Nforce is becoming the new VIA or at least Nvidia is working real hard at it.

I tried an X2 3800+ on an Nforce 4 board and used both Raid 0 and single drive with NCQ enabled and disabled. This was a great multi tasker with NCQ enabled but would eventually cause drive problems. With NCQ disabled the drive problems would go away but its MT responsiveness would diminish, felt like a typical AMD at that point. My take on AMD systems is that you take a good, powerful engine and hook it to a rubberband instead of a quality transmission and hope it will last.

I think a lot of why I like Intel better is due to the way the system feels to me. They seem more solid and responsive. Some may say this because of Hyper Thread but I don't believe that is the full picture as I liked the way the Intel systems worked even before HT. I believe it has a lot to do with the disk subsystems and how the various busses interact. Everything seems to cooperate better with each other and now with a good NCQ enabled drive it is even better.

People like this shouldn't be around computers... ever.

 

[RampantAndroid]

/\ Ummm, wtf? Some people can be pretty stupid...HT for AMD? Geta dual core idiot! I know opening the task manager and seeing 4 processors makes you feel good, but it doesn't have much of an advantage....AMD has been the king for a bit now...starting around the FX-53 and going on, and the Athlon XPs were very good as well.

Only time I ever left AMD was when the Athlon XP 3200+ came out....it wasn't as good as the current P4C Northwoods...so I went with a Northwood 3.0 GHz on an 875p...and I still have that computer. It multitasks better than my FX-53, but I don't care all too much...my FX-53 is awesome for gaming...I've been using AMDs since I got a Thunderbird (aside from the one P4C.)

Intel has been in the crapper since they went to the prescott core....and then their dual cores which were simply 2 procs duct taped together....thank goodness the P4 is finally dead.

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Had an XP 1600+, then a mobile XP 1700+, now I have a P4 2.4C, I'm thinking of moving to a dual-core Opteron but I don't really feel like spending the money to upgrade mobo + Radeon 9700 Pro AIW so the status quo persists

 

[nerp]

I never left AMD. My first AMD chip was a 386-DX40. Before that I had an Intel 80286-12.... Since that 386 I've had a number of AMD chips including a k62-350, a k63-450, 1.4 Tbird, 2100+ palomino (woo, those run hot but were damn reliable, one of em still working after years of 24/7 load, 2500+ barton, 2700+ barton oc'd to 3200 and an Opteron 148.

I must admit, I have a p4 2ghz in my dell, but that's simply for writing and work.

I don't think I'll ever buy an Intel board ever again.

 

[MDE]

Ooooh, let's list all our old systems!

Pentium 120
Pentium 166 MMX
AMD K6-2 400 (ran ROCK stable overclocked on a PC Chips board too)
Athlon XP 2600+ Thoroughbred B
Athlon XP 2500+ Barton (overclocked better)
Pentium 4 Northwood 3.2GHz
Athlon 64 3000+ Winchester
Athlon 64 X2 3800+

 

[neutralizer]

Athlon XP 1600+ --> Pentium 2.4C --> Athlon64 X2 3800+

 

[mindwreck]

amd 1ghz t-bird-> Deleron oc'ed to3.3ghz(had it for about a month before i sold it) -> rig in sig.

the semproni s like 50% faster than the deleron and runs SO much cooler. I'm glad switched back to AMD and I am not going back to intel.

 

[jlbenedict]

in order of ownership:

Intel Pentium 90
Intel Pentium 133
Intel Pentium II 350
(At this point, I learned about what AMD had to offer)

AMD K6-2 450

Intel Celeron 366 @ 550
Intel Pentium III 700 @ 933

AMD Socket A, Thunderbird 1.33Ghz

Intel Pentium 4, Northwood, 2.0Ghz

AMD 64 Socket 939, Winchester, 3000+ (1.8 Ghz)
AMD 64 Socket 939, Manchester, X2 3800+ (2.0 Ghz)

 

[Zensal]

A bunch of weird quacks if you ask me. If you keep reading, they get better. Most of them admit that the X2 is far superior to the Pentium D series. Seems like they just want to do more things at once(like encode video and surf the net) rather then dedicate their computers to one task(like gaming), and the single core P4's with HT are better at that.

Heres my proc history, if that is going to be the trend of this thread.

Cyrix MII-433 (weird eh? it was a hand-me-down engineering sample)
PIII 500MHz
Athlon 1700+ Tbird
Athlon 2000+ Tbird
P4 3.0 Northwood
A64 3000+ Skt 754
A64 3000+ Skt 939
Opteron 165

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: Avalon
The guys on that forum seem convinced that AMD is junk. Maybe someone should clue them in on how AMD has been doing the past few years.

I frequent that forum. That post was made in the intel cpu section, so its no surprise some of the responses. There are a lot of people that swear AMD is trash based on some outdated and unfounded notion from 10 years ago. But a quick look at the number of threads in intel versus AMD cpu forums will reveal there is a solid majority interest in AMD.

I'm just saying...that thread is what is, a circle jerk in a steadily shrinking club. You know how fanboys are...its like their personal worth is some how intrinsicly linked to a corporate entity. AMD has them too.

I like that forum overall though, the mods are pretty strict versus around here but theres lot of information gathering and sharing and interesting projects being done by members.

 

[Nirach]

Started life with a P1, then a P2.

Then went to AMD, haven't bothered with Intel since. Too many heat issues, and I have a fat lot of zero experiance with Intel chips these days. Maybe when I can afford it I'll get a P4 system to see if there is much of a difference..

 

[DeathReborn]

Let me think.... ah yes I used Intel not long ago.


Intel Pentium 75
AMD K5 200MHz
AMD Athlon 650MHz (Slot A baby)
AMD Athlon 1.4GHz
Intel Pentium 3 866MHz (Dual CPU Workstation, still running)
AMD Athlon XP-2500 (Barton) Mobile (had it at 2.4GHz)
Intel Pentium 4 2.8c (Still got this CPU)
AMD Athlon 64 3000+
AMD Athlon 64 3500+

So as you can see I still use Intel but mostly AMD.

 

[Dman877]

Pentium 60 > Pentium 233 > Pentium 3 550 > Athlon Tbird 1000 > Tbird 1333 > Palamino 1533 > Tbred 1800 > Barton 2500+ > Mobile Barton 2400+ (35 watt) > A64 3000+ (754) > Pentium 4 2.8 (Northwood) > A64 3400+ (754).

Hyperthreading was nice but all it really did was smooth out non-cpu intensive multi-tasking. It didn;t allow me to encode mp3's and do other stuff any better then I could with any of my AMD procs. My next proc will definitely be dual core for that reason.

 

[phaxmohdem]

Ughh, I've had too many systems to list in my short existance, so I'll just shout out the ones that are currently up and running in use at my home:

AMD K6-2 450 @ 550MHz (Testing Rig)
Dual PII 450 (SCSI Drive Testing Server)
Athlon XP 2500+ /333 FSB (file-server/Render Node)
Pentium 4 Northwood 2.8 /400FSB (Render Node)
Athlon XP 2600+ /266FSB (Render Node)
Athlon XP 2400+ /266FSB (Render Node)
Sempron 2400+ /333FSB (Rener Node)
Pentium 4 Northwood 2.6C @ 2.86 /800FSB (Render Node)
AMD Athlon64 FX-51 @ Stock speeds again (Main Rig)
Dual PIII 600 (Secondary Rig/Render Farm Control Node)
Pentium 4 Northwood 3.0C @ 3.45 /800FSB (Lan Party Rig)
Pentium M 1.6 /Banias (Lappy)

I wouldn't call my computer family biased in anyway, I've got 6 Intel Rigs (Including my laptop), and 6 AMD rigs. All the computers are fast enough for my needs, and do their jobs perfectly regardless of processor company. What more could you ask for? Though if I were going to rebuild my main rig today, I'd definately buy an Athlon X2/DC Opteron at this particular point in time.

 

[TuxDave]

Heh, I thought the thread would be about who worked for AMD, left and decided to come back. In fact there are so few vocal AMD employees in this forum that I would be surprised to see a single response.

 

[Thor86]

It should more be like:

Who left Intel, and NEVER went back.

 

[Zap]

I don't "leave and come back" to any product. These are commodities, not wives. Have I switched? Yes. I will use whatever suits me at any given time for a number of reasons, though mostly (but not always) based on price/performance at that time compared to competing products.

 

[Capt Caveman]

FWIW - the original post was posted in the Intel section of ocforums.

 

[WobbleWobble]

I've always mixed between Intel and AMD.

Pentium 90
Celeron 400
Pentium 3 900MHz mobile
Athlon 1.0GHz mobile
Athlon 1.0GHz (killed cracked core)
Athlon 1.2GHz (fried temp probe got inbetween heatsink and CPU while reinstalling)
Athlon 1.4GHz (fried heatsink got loose)
Athlon 1.3GHz
Barton 2500+ @ 2.1GHz
Barton 2500+ Mobile @ 2.4GHz
Pentium M 1.5GHz @ 2.0GHz
Athlon 64 3200+ @ 2.5GHz
Pentium M 1.8GHz

Edit: added a few more that I forgot I had

 

[sodcha0s]

Athlon 1.0GHz (killed cracked core)
Athlon 1.2GHz (fried temp probe got inbetween heatsink and CPU while reinstalling)
Athlon 1.4GHz (fried heatsink got loose)

Dude, maybe you should've let someone else play with those naked cores.....


Also, no celeron 300A's? Mine still works, and still runs @464Mhz on the legendary Abit BH6...

 

[Fox5]

I think I only owned 1 Intel chip ever....and it was a Pentium MMX, not even a Pro.
Well, maybe my 286, 386, or 486 chips may have been Intel, but I doubt it, price has always won for me and AMD has always been cheaper for the performance. Even if Intel reclaims the performance crown, I would never go Intel unless they beat AMD in price per performance. Of course, there's also the fact that I don't like how hot and loud PCs have become in general, which definetely cuts out a Pentium 4 from my future. I actually keep my processors overclocked to less than their max (I send memory as high as it can go though) to avoid heat.

Actually, I have owned one other Intel chip....the Pentium M in my Thinkpad, but that's the only Intel based laptop I've ever owned because AMD doesn't have a prescence in the ultra-portable market. (and barely in the tablet pc market) Of course, if I had just been looking for a general purpose laptop, especially a cheap one capable of playing some games, I would have gone AMD. Still, the P-M is the first and only Pentium Pro based chip I've owned from Intel, any previous Intel chips I may have owned would have been when every other company was just producing Intel clones.

I've done.... (well, for the whole family, not just me)
Some 286 in a Tandy
Some 386 in a clone
Some 486 in a clone...may have been a 486DX, or I may have had a 486DX afterwards.
Pentium MMX 133Mhz
K6 300Mhz
Athlon 500Mhz (hells yes)
Athlon 900Mhz
Athlon 1.4Ghz Tbird
Laptop with an 800mhz Duron
Athlon XP 1800+
Athlon XP 2000+ or Athlon XP 2100+ (forget which)
Athlon XP 2200+
Athlon XP 2400+ (note, these last couple aren't even in approximate order of purchase)
Athlon XP 2600+ (this came before the 2200+ and 2400+) Tbred
Mobile Athlon XP 2600+
Laptop with an Athlon 64...not sure what, it's my sister's.
Laptop/tablet with a low voltage 1.5Ghz Pentium M
And just checked my sister's old desktop which has a 750Mhz Duron.

The 1800+ and the 2000/2100+ both died in power supply failures...or so the computer show guy who built the computers says. The 1800+ was junked, but since the next computer failed within 3 months of the previous I felt this was completely unacceptable, nor did I trust his advice that everything was dead. I went and scrounged an old power supply from someone else's defunct PC, plopped it in, and everything booted up fine. From that point on, I built all my PCs on my own and no longer got stuck with $10 power supplies and $20 motherboards. (actually, the 2200+ ended up in a $20 motherboard, but that's because I was going as cheap as possible.....and a Biostar KT333 was still more stable than some of the completely no name mobos I'd had in the past)

I must say after getting Nforce 2, I'd never go back to a VIA chipset again. Huge performance increase with the same cpu, and no stability problems. (easy overclocking with tons of options helped a lot too)
K6 300 was hella slow and buggy, though I'm sure Windows is to blame as well.
Athlon 500Mhz felt like a speed demon, I got 3x the performance from that then the K6 300 was giving me. (or at least I went from 10 fps to 30 fps in emulating goldeneye)
The 2000+ eventually got fried somehow while installing it into a new mobo, so I bought the 2200+ to replace it.
The 2600+ was murdered. My dad liked to get involved with building the computers...and he has a bit of a temper problem. I had a small case with a big heatsink (Volcano 12) and had some trouble getting the heatsink installed. I asked him to hold back the power supply so I could fit it in....well instead he decided he was going to do it himself, got pissed off it didn't fit, and began to smash the heatsink on top of the cpu. I still have the smashed core. That's where the Mobile 2600+ came in, since I was eager to get into overclocking and eventually convinced him to pay for it as a replacement. (though he denies the incident ever happens and claims I broke it) The mobile 2600+ is what's in my computer right now, performance is still good, too bad AGP is dieing as I really need a video card upgrade, but I do want to go dual core within the next 6 months and don't want to be stuck with a top end AGP card. Oh, and I want DDR2 since it is already cheaper than DDR so I can't upgrade now.