Why does everyone always choose AMD ??

[Vernor]

This dude throws out some shiny bait.


Well...at least some other people reading got educated.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: caz67

AMD are considered low end, and are sold in back alley pc stores here in australia. Intel is marketed very well, obviously, but they do sell great products. The perceptions of AMD over Intel are vastly different. im not saying these things are true, just the public perception.

I think thats the public perception here. I have not seen and AMD commercial since they came out with 3Dnow. But Hewlett Packard now offers a server with the Opteron cpu. Up until now virtually all the major server manufacturers, like Dell, HP, etc, simply did not offer an AMD solution. I think once AMD taps into the server market on a large scale like with HP, thier desktops will get better recognition.

 

[Brian48]

I love AMD. Converted over from Intel with the slot A 700 and haven't looked back since. Still the better "bang for the buck" option out of the two.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: caz67
Hi All.

Just explain to me, why everyone always picks AMD over Intel.

There are a few reasons. It used to be that AMD was much cheaper than Intel. At the low end, this is still true. And any low-end AMD is better than the current crop of Celerons. Beyond 2 processors, Opteron is better than Xeon (see recent announcement that Intel is changing mem management chipsets ).

If I were building a gaming system, I would like an AMD system. Unfortunately, I do the one thing Intel does better, video editing (although Mac fans would argue otherwise ). So, my next system will be a dual Nacoma. But, I have tried very hard to watch the Opteron as a comparision. With my vendor of choice having not qualified an Opteron and some of the key encoding components not being equal yet, still have to stick with an Intel.

BTW, I was going to build Barton 2500 machines for my daughters, but that evil Dell came out with a small business offer that was about the same price as I had pieced with out. Then they threw in an OS, Works, and a free camera. Got the 3.06HT instead. Oh well.


You have to look at group dynamics too. This board is populated by AMD users more so than the general population, so you see a weighting towards AMD. Most have good reasons for their AMD support and price/performance are very valid.

Inside that group is a sub-group. Because AMD is smaller, it also has attracted the anti-capitalist, counter-authority crowd, which can be very vocal. Bigger or more market share makes them capitalist (sorry, but so are the folks at AMD). Capitalism is bad. Because they have more market share, they can direct the market like authority figures. There is also a crowd that resents success and will do anything to cause it harm, including harming themselves. Authority is bad. These folks also tend to be ABM (anything but Microsoft), anti-Dell, and anti-(leading graphics card vendor for that year).

 

[Markfw]

I still think that highend Intel, is the way to go.

BS ! The Athlon64 is much more high tech than the Prescott, and runs MUCH cooler ! Even Anandtech has now upgraded their server farm to use Opteron's and HP is offering them for sale now. Wake up ! it is not 1990 anymore, and Intel may sell more for the moment, but they are not currently the "leader". (I know times change fast)

 

[Hottie]

The last Intel cpu I have it Cel 333mhz, after that all my CPU is AMD from K6-2 to AXP. And I build AMD for all my relative. Builded one last week for my sis which is a 2500+/KM400 MB 512MB ram(256mb x2). If I go for P4 2.66ghz, it will cost the same as AMD CPU/KM400/256MB just the P4 alone. The system is burning DVD non stop the past 3 days and is totally stable(Via did a good job on KM400).

 

[goblue420]

i personally prefer intel, they run a lot cooler and are usually alot more stable, amd makes a decent chip but i think that intel is the best, btw intel pentium m is better than barton

 

[Pistolero]

AMD is the best bang for my malaysian child worker dollar.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: goblue420
i personally prefer intel, they run a lot cooler and are usually alot more stable, amd makes a decent chip but i think that intel is the best, btw intel pentium m is better than barton

Pentium M, yes. Also $$$, and limited in performance and expandability (max 1.7GHz, laptop only).
Bartons run cooler than equivalent-performing P4s, however, and A64s even cooler, and newer core revisions are going to do an even better job of it. My 1800+ and 9600 XT are hot enough for my tastes; I don't need more.

 

[remagavon]

*looks around*

I bought xeons, and ended up playing CS with them most of the time

*cowers in corner*

 

[justly]

As you can see most people that choose AMD do it for one of two reasons, they either believe it is better than an Intel solution, or that it has a better price to performance ratio.

I guess I fit in that group, but there are other reasons also. My first AMD was a K-6 200MHz and I got it because of the price, since then I realized that processor speed is only a small portion of real world performance especially when dealing with general computing needs. It is true that a processor will make a difference but it is also true that many other things can cripple a systems real world performance much quicker than a processor.

The point is that no matter how fast a processor is it can only get data from a CD or hard drive at the limit the drive can provide it. Intel has usually led the market in high-speed cache and bandwidth, but both Intel and AMD will suffer the same delays when getting data that is not stored in memory.

There are also different things I consider between upgrading and purchasing a complete system. When upgrading I try to avoid extra expenses like having to upgrade a power supply just to get an additional 4 pin power connector, something most P4 upgrades would require.
When replacing a complete system I look at a variety of things but in regard to processor choice I normally look at what is being heavily marketed (hyped) as a selling point of each and ask myself how much I would use that feature, how much it will increase my real world computing experience, what percentage of my software will benefit from it.

What I normally conclude is that AMD can provide me with a more consistent performance increase across all of my software and with the way I use my computer. While I am sure Intel P4 processors are very good it is much harder for me pin down when, how much and with what software I will see its features benefit me, but what I can see is where it has weaknesses, they may not be noticeable in real life but I just don?t see the reason to take that chance, especially when Intel usually is more expensive.

Caz67, you asked why people choose AMD, so I told you some of my reasons, but what I?m curios about is why you seem to believe Intel is a better high-end choice. Do you encode a lot, is it bandwidth, latency, Hyperthreading or something else. I doesn?t bother me that you prefer Intel but I would like to know why. I ask this not because I want to convert you but because it sounds like you are basing this conclusion on marketing hype.

Also, if you use a marketing term like Hyperthreading could you explain (in at least some detail, don't just say ?it will let me multitask better? switching one marketing term for another just doesn?t cut it ) how it will help you in your day to day computing needs.

 

[Saulbadguy]

Because my Intel Pentium 4c 3.0 ghz is faster than everything AMD had to offer at the time, pretty much. Its also more compatible with 3rd party software and hardware. Also, over the years, i've seen way more many people write in with problems with their AMD rigs than their intel rigs. I also did not buy in to their BS marketing scheme with the "3000+" label. You can't tell me a 3000+ competes with a 3.0 ghz.

And what do you expect by asking this loaded question? Of course people here are going to think AMD is the best. It is what they own. They are cheapskates.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: Saulbadguy
Because my Intel Pentium 4c 3.0 ghz is faster than everything AMD had to offer at the time, pretty much. Its also more compatible with 3rd party software and hardware. Also, over the years, i've seen way more many people write in with problems with their AMD rigs than their intel rigs. I also did not buy in to their BS marketing scheme with the "3000+" label. You can't tell me a 3000+ competes with a 3.0 ghz.

And what do you expect by asking this loaded question? Of course people here are going to think AMD is the best. It is what they own. They are cheapskates.

I will take on your P4 3.0c on everything but encoding with my Athlon64 and equal or beat it (and it runs cooler, and at least as stable). I think it is really BS to make a statement like that, and even Anandtech.com and the owners would debate you on that I bet. If you wanted to start a flame war, you just did.

Quote from the Anandtech article:

Even more important, the 3000+ performs very well compared to Intel?s 3.2 GHz Pentium 4 ? a chip that sells for almost double the cost of the Athlon64 3000+.

Yes, I AM telling you that my 3000+ can beat your 3.0c most of the time except encoding, and while running cooler at the same time ! And I can back it up, can you ? Read the article I quoted from. And cheapskates ? I think my SCSI array will beat whatever you got in your box for hard drives. Stop talking out of the wrong end.........

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: Saulbadguy
Because my Intel Pentium 4c 3.0 ghz is faster than everything AMD had to offer at the time, pretty much. Its also more compatible with 3rd party software and hardware. Also, over the years, i've seen way more many people write in with problems with their AMD rigs than their intel rigs. I also did not buy in to their BS marketing scheme with the "3000+" label. You can't tell me a 3000+ competes with a 3.0 ghz.

And what do you expect by asking this loaded question? Of course people here are going to think AMD is the best. It is what they own. They are cheapskates.

Ohhh, & he takes a low blow :Q

 

[Saulbadguy]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: Saulbadguy
Because my Intel Pentium 4c 3.0 ghz is faster than everything AMD had to offer at the time, pretty much. Its also more compatible with 3rd party software and hardware. Also, over the years, i've seen way more many people write in with problems with their AMD rigs than their intel rigs. I also did not buy in to their BS marketing scheme with the "3000+" label. You can't tell me a 3000+ competes with a 3.0 ghz.

And what do you expect by asking this loaded question? Of course people here are going to think AMD is the best. It is what they own. They are cheapskates.

I will take on your P4 3.0c on everything but encoding with my Athlon64 and equal or beat it (and it runs cooler, and at least as stable). I think it is really BS to make a statement like that, and even Anandtech.com and the owners would debate you on that I bet. If you wanted to start a flame war, you just did.

Quote from the Anandtech article:

Even more important, the 3000+ performs very well compared to Intel?s 3.2 GHz Pentium 4 ? a chip that sells for almost double the cost of the Athlon64 3000+.

Yes, I AM telling you that my 3000+ can beat your 3.0c most of the time except encoding, and while running cooler at the same time ! And I can back it up, can you ? Read the article I quoted from. And cheapskates ? I think my SCSI array will beat whatever you got in your box for hard drives. Stop talking out of the wrong end.........

oh noes...he threatened me with his SCSI array...

most of the time? Encoding? I don't do any encoding. i also paid 200 bucks for a p4c 3.0, motherboard, and a copy of xp.

 

[RickH]

Both AMD and Intel make fine products. In my experence AMD is cheaper to purchase, but more expensive to live with. You save $50-100 on the CPU and end up spending it on huge fans and powersupplies. Then you spend more $$ trying to kill the noise. I can't even tell if my PIV is on right now. The only noise is from the HD. R

 

[Gagabiji]

Why does everyone always choose AMD

Because AMD kicks ***.

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: RickH
Both AMD and Intel make fine products. In my experence AMD is cheaper to purchase, but more expensive to live with. You save $50-100 on the CPU and end up spending it on huge fans and powersupplies. Then you spend more $$ trying to kill the noise. I can't even tell if my PIV is on right now. The only noise is from the HD. R

That might have been true long ago, but my Barton 2500 uses stock cooling, I can barely hear it, and it run 45c max load. My Athlon64 3000+ runs cooler than the P4 3.0c, mine runs 32c, and gets up to a whopping 40c under 100% load (seti) after hours on a warm day. So that argument doesn't fly anymore.

 

[eldorado99]

The main reason I choose AMD is that I am a student with a limited budget, in my town I can buy a Athlon XP 2800 for $180 Canadian, or a P4 2.0 GHz. for the same price. Plus AMD has grown on me a little over the years .

 

[Bassyhead]

price/performance ratio

 

[caz67]

A64, is certainly cutting edge.

As of yet however 64bit hasn't proven its worth.

Once its main stream I will consider 64bit processors.

RIG 1

P4 3.2EE
Abit IC7 Max 3
1024 Corsair PC4000
Leadtek FX5950 Ultra 256MB VIVO
Pioneer 107D DVD R/W
Pioneer CDR/W DVD Combo Drive.
WD 200GB 7200 8mg SATA
WD 74GB Raptors in SATA RAID 0
SB Audigy 2 ZS Patinum Pro
Logitech Z680 THX 5.1
Mitusubishi 19"LCD Monitor
Thermaltake Highest Xaser V1000 series Black
Antec True Power 550W PSU
Zalman CNPS7000A HSF

RIG 2

I gave this one to my family and friends to use.

P4 3.06B
Asus P4T 533-C
1024 MB PC800 RDRAM
Sony CDR/W
Pioneer 16X DVD Rom
2 x120GB WD 7200 8Mg IDE RAID 0
Seagate 30GB 5400
Sound Blaster Live 5.1
Logitech Z640
Leadtek Ti 4800SE 128MB VIVO.
Vantec Aeroflow HSF


I will be using my main RIG, and i wont upgrade again for at least 2 years.

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: caz67
A64, is certainly cutting edge.

As of yet however 64bit hasn't proven its worth.

Once its main stream I will consider 64bit processors.

RIG 1

P4 3.2EE
Abit IC7 Max 3
1024 Corsair PC4000
Leadtek FX5950 Ultra 256MB VIVO
Pioneer 107D DVD R/W
Pioneer CDR/W DVD Combo Drive.
WD 200GB 7200 8mg SATA
WD 74GB Raptors in SATA RAID 0
SB Audigy 2 ZS Patinum Pro
Logitech Z680 THX 5.1
Mitusubishi 19"LCD Monitor
Thermaltake Highest Xaser V1000 series Black
Antec True Power 550W PSU
Zalman CNPS7000A HSF

RIG 2

I gave this one to my family and friends to use.

P4 3.06B
Asus P4T 533-C
1024 MB PC800 RDRAM
Sony CDR/W
Pioneer 16X DVD Rom
2 x120GB WD 7200 8Mg IDE RAID 0
Seagate 30GB 5400
Sound Blaster Live 5.1
Logitech Z640
Leadtek Ti 4800SE 128MB VIVO.
Vantec Aeroflow HSF


I will be using my main RIG, and i wont upgrade again for at least 2 years.

Cutting edge is cutting edge because it hasn't hit mainstream YET.

How can you give your computer to your family and friends, did you part it out or do all of you live together?

You want to be cutting edge but you want to use the same computer for 2 years

BTW an A64 3000+ ($211) will keep up if not beat your "cutting edge" ($855+) rig in most aps, that's if you really own it.


Tom

 

[Budmantom]

Originally posted by: caz67

As of yet however 64bit hasn't proven its worth.

A64 hasn't proven it's worth yet, but the 3.2EE has?

 

[arod]

Heres how I look at things... When I buy AMD I get it an equivalent processor to intel but for quite a bit less $.... That saved money allows me to get a better videocard or more RAM which ultimately gives me a better computer.... If it preforms as well and is just as stable theres no reason not to go AMD. With intel your paying some for the "name" intel IMO, like nike in shoes. Thats perfectly fine they make good products but I want the best machine I can get (for the money) and I get it with AMD not intel. Lets face it, most of the people here arent rolling in cash and the biggest thing on peoples minds is the $.

 

[Hottie]

Originally posted by: RickH
Both AMD and Intel make fine products. In my experence AMD is cheaper to purchase, but more expensive to live with. You save $50-100 on the CPU and end up spending it on huge fans and powersupplies. Then you spend more $$ trying to kill the noise. I can't even tell if my PIV is on right now. The only noise is from the HD. R

I have no idea what you talking about, I have 2 AMD at home.

AMD2500+/stock HSF/80gb hd/2x 256mb/dvd rom/dvd-rw/usb2.0 PCI/NO CASE FAN
All of the above is in a 4yrs small desktop case w/ a 4YRS OLD 230W POWER SUPPLY. The PSU don't even have a 4pin 12v adapter for newer MB, I end up have to customer made a 12v adapter for my km400 mb.

AMD2100+ @ 2.2ghz/stock HSF/SCSI CD/SCSI cd-r/SB live/adaptec SCSI card/NO CASE FAN
All of the above is in a 5yrs tower case w/ a 5yrs old no name 250w power supply.

Have you ever use a AMD?