Why is intel so much more stable than AMD?

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

I have multiple emachines KM266 machines in my house and they have run flawlessly for two years. Pretty happy. I think both companies have their successes and their failures like any other company. Let us hold processor pins together and announce a truce to share SSE2 in peace

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: michaelpatrick33
I have multiple emachines KM266 machines in my house and they have run flawlessly for two years. Pretty happy. I think both companies have their successes and their failures like any other company. Let us hold processor pins together and announce a truce to share SSE2 in peace

hehe..... nice

 

[SimsFreak]

Tell your school to buy a AMD 2600+ or 3200+ whatever, and a P4 2.4Ghz, compare the both and return. Then you will see the more performance. But with the blue screen of death can be any of the below:

Expantion card not in all the way
shorted circuit
Bad connection
OS error
Not updated OS
Glitch in the application coding
SP2 error (different then OS error =) )
Memeory error
Bad connectors

There are so many it's not even funny. So get some updated stuff and you will see more performance. A 1.5Ghz Athlon can take on a P4 2Ghz, or a 2.4Ghz Celeron. I think the Barton core of the 2500+/2600+ can take on a 3.0Ghz P4, not 100% sure though

 

[nick1985]

Text

 

[suklee]

You must really be BOREDTODEATH to ask this question...

 

[FelixDeCat]

Everyone knows Intel is more stable than AMD.

Thats why AMD is number two.

And INTEL is NUMBER ONE!!!

 

[Mik3y]

Originally posted by: FelixDeKat
Everyone knows Intel is more stable than AMD.

Thats why AMD is number two.

And INTEL is NUMBER ONE!!!

oh god...not again...

 

[whorush]

amd has no stability problems. some of the hardware and software might. i'd say it could be a screwed up OS, bad drivers (especially chipset drivers), bad bios, something like that.

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Originally posted by: Mik3y

Originally posted by: FelixDeKat
Everyone knows Intel is more stable than AMD.

Thats why AMD is number two.

And INTEL is NUMBER ONE!!!

oh god...not again...

FelixdeCat Philosophy 101: Grasshopper must remember that if something stupid and wrong is repeated enough than ignorant people will believe it as a truth due to the weariness of repitition.

Please FelixdeCat I beg of you as a Intel and AMD user let your comments be over brotherly silicon love and the frequency of core Joy rather than continue this charade of mock AMD diatribe that is as unworthy of your intellect as the AMD fanboys and girls is of theirs. Blessings of Processor Truce be upon You my Friend

 

[fsstrike]

Yes, AMD is less stable. In the past few months my PC has went to the blue screen 2 times without overclocking. I had my Intel p4 1.5 for 3.5 years and never once did I ever get the blue screen. But, I sitll love my AMD, im just not going to LIE to myself. In my EXPERIENCE, Intel is more stable. For the record, Id still choose AMD any day over Intel, a bluescreen every month or two doesnt bug me much, but it does happen.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
Yes, AMD is less stable. In the past few months my PC has went to the blue screen 2 times without overclocking. I had my Intel p4 1.5 for 3.5 years and never once did I ever get the blue screen. But, I sitll love my AMD, im just not going to LIE to myself. In my EXPERIENCE, Intel is more stable. For the record, Id still choose AMD any day over Intel, a bluescreen every month or two doesnt bug me much, but it does happen.

Probably not your CPU then hotshot

-Kevin

 

[Mik3y]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
Yes, AMD is less stable. In the past few months my PC has went to the blue screen 2 times without overclocking. I had my Intel p4 1.5 for 3.5 years and never once did I ever get the blue screen. But, I sitll love my AMD, im just not going to LIE to myself. In my EXPERIENCE, Intel is more stable. For the record, Id still choose AMD any day over Intel, a bluescreen every month or two doesnt bug me much, but it does happen.

wow, what a great way to judge something based on a single product out of MILLIONS!

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
Yes, AMD is less stable. In the past few months my PC has went to the blue screen 2 times without overclocking. I had my Intel p4 1.5 for 3.5 years and never once did I ever get the blue screen. But, I sitll love my AMD, im just not going to LIE to myself. In my EXPERIENCE, Intel is more stable. For the record, Id still choose AMD any day over Intel, a bluescreen every month or two doesnt bug me much, but it does happen.

Thermaltake Butterfly 480w

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
Yes, AMD is less stable. In the past few months my PC has went to the blue screen 2 times without overclocking. I had my Intel p4 1.5 for 3.5 years and never once did I ever get the blue screen. But, I sitll love my AMD, im just not going to LIE to myself. In my EXPERIENCE, Intel is more stable. For the record, Id still choose AMD any day over Intel, a bluescreen every month or two doesnt bug me much, but it does happen.

Yea, and have you ever tries to figure out where you screwed up ! Its not the CPU, and in your case probably not the chipset or mobo. I would say memory (I have not had good luck with OCZ myself) or SOFTWARE. You are way too quick to judge.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
Yes, AMD is less stable. In the past few months my PC has went to the blue screen 2 times without overclocking. I had my Intel p4 1.5 for 3.5 years and never once did I ever get the blue screen. But, I sitll love my AMD, im just not going to LIE to myself. In my EXPERIENCE, Intel is more stable. For the record, Id still choose AMD any day over Intel, a bluescreen every month or two doesnt bug me much, but it does happen.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that AMD based systems are less stable than Intel, but I will say that my current P4 rig with the i865 chipset is the most stable system I have ever owned. My previous rigs were all AMD (K6-II, Thunderbird, and Palomino) with different chipsets (ALI, VIA KT333, and nForce2), and the P4 is the most stable. That isn't to say that the AMD based rigs were unstable by any means, but this current rig is like a rock - it never crashes or even hiccups.Then again, this rig was also twice as expensive as any rig I previously built. I use a P4 based Dell at work that isn't bad, but it is not as solid as my home rig, so I think a lot of this depends on the quality of the rest of the components as much or more than the cpu/chipset.

To take it a step further, I would say that over the past few years computers and software in general have only gotten easier to use and more stable. I would be willing to be that most of the crashes I had with my K6-2 were due more to Win98 than anything else. If I was to upgrade today, I would not hesitate to go with an Athlon64.

 

[PsharkJF]

On my old slot 1 P3, I had to replace the motherboard 3 times! =P

DIE INTEL DIEDIEDIE!!1111111

[/silly]

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
Yes, AMD is less stable. In the past few months my PC has went to the blue screen 2 times without overclocking. I had my Intel p4 1.5 for 3.5 years and never once did I ever get the blue screen. But, I sitll love my AMD, im just not going to LIE to myself. In my EXPERIENCE, Intel is more stable. For the record, Id still choose AMD any day over Intel, a bluescreen every month or two doesnt bug me much, but it does happen.

I have two AMD emachines that have run for nearly two years with nary a glitch (I am talking not one BSOD). I have had some freezeups but they were all software related. I have had an Intel run system act funny and a Dell PII 450 that is rock stable for like 4-5 years running (not one hardware glitch) so I think it is like anything else. On the whole I would imagine that both sides of flawed chips (a great minority) and overall perfect chips (as perfect as anything man-made can be of course.

 

[Viditor]

Well, let's look at the record over the last 5 years...


Intel
1. 820 Camino recall
2. MTH recall
3. 1.13 GHz P3 recall
4. 900MHz PIII Xeon recall
5. 900MHz Itanium2 quasi-recall
6. Grantsdale recall

AMD
1. none?

 

[DetroitSportsFan]

You can't judge a users knowledge by the number of posts. Also, I might add that there is no need for all the arrogance since we were all nOoBs once. You help someone new today and in the future that person may be the new leader in this field. You diss him, he may never come back. So, lets not forget what the basis of a forum is for .... to share knowledge and to help.

As for the question, I'm going to reiterate what's already been said. I've built many machines over the years .... both AMD and INTEL both. I've never had a stability issue with either that I could determine that the processor was to blame on a stock clocked machine. Its already been stated that most instability issues are generally either heat related or related to the PSU. Other causes do tend to be software related, such as bad drivers, corrupted OS and things along that line.

Now a days, it seems that more stability issues are caused by the unprotected, uneducated fool's adventures on the internet. Spyware frequently escapes detection by AV software. Even viruses frequently get by a person's defense. The computers in question are in a college computer lab. I sincerely doubt that those systems are maintained like I or any of the experienced users here maintain their personal machines.

I like AMD on a cost vs. performance basis. Yet since I left win 98 behind several years ago, stability hasn't been an issue with either AMD or INTEL based machines. When a customer asks me to build a machine, I build what they want. If they ASK for my opinion, then I'll push AMD. Once again, I push AMD not because I feel its such a superior chip.... but because you get more bang for your buck.

So please, lets not flame. Instead, let the experienced be the teachers that the less experienced certainly need! By doing so, we'll help maintain the integrity of this fine community. Most of you here are no longer kids, but you sound like it when you flame~

 

[imported_zenwhen]

Wow, these boards are sure packed with AMD fanboys.

I wonder why Intel owns the "must be stable" professional workstation market...

 

[imported_michaelpatrick33]

Originally posted by: zenwhen
Wow, these boards are sure packed with AMD fanboys.

I wonder why Intel owns the "must be stable" professional workstation market...

Marketshare and advertising budget before the Opterons came out (and still) and power of money (deep discounts/threats to hardware vendors)to keep corporations using Intel only. Do you really believe that AMD would erode Intel's workstation and server market overnight? Of course not. They are doing it the right way (the only way with limited foundry capability, at least until Dresden goes online with mature yields). Slowly and steadily. It is a good thing because it forces Intel to innovate and push better products out. AMD has no marketing money so they don't get the exposure and until the Opteron less than two years ago they were a joke in the server/workstation market. Do you think they are a joke now? Uh no! I think companies don't look at Opterons as a joke anymore but old habits and buying patterns and deep Intel discounts still hold sway. I find it laughable the people believe a dual Opteron workstation is somehow less stable than a dual Xeon workstation. Shakes the head.

I own both AMD and Intel systems and I will buy from either company so I am not an AMD fanboy. Just an opinion

 

[Markfw]

Originally posted by: zenwhen
Wow, these boards are sure packed with AMD fanboys.

I wonder why Intel owns the "must be stable" professional workstation market...

Only because they have been in it longer. In two years, AMD has gone from virtually zero to 7% (not sure the exact number) I think that is amazing. Just keep that attitude up, and AMD will pass right by them one of these days IF THEY KEEP UP WHAT THEY ARE DOING NOW.

BTW, My Opteron workstation has been running 2 instances of F@H, and everhting else I want for months 24/7, no problems. So I am not talking out of my a$$. At work, we have to keep rebooting our Intel dualies (citrix servers) since after updating the Mcaffe dats, they won't come back on their own, they just lock up. That doesn;t hapen to mine. So don't give me the Intel is the most stable crap. At least tied is my take (many peices of software can have bad effects and make systems lock up)

 

[FelixDeCat]

Originally posted by: Markfw900

Originally posted by: zenwhen
Wow, these boards are sure packed with AMD fanboys.

I wonder why Intel owns the "must be stable" professional workstation market...

Only because they have been in it longer. In two years, AMD has gone from virtually zero to 7% (not sure the exact number) I think that is amazing. Just keep that attitude up, and AMD will pass right by them one of these days IF THEY KEEP UP WHAT THEY ARE DOING NOW.

BTW, My Opteron workstation has been running 2 instances of F@H, and everhting else I want for months 24/7, no problems. So I am not talking out of my a$$. At work, we have to keep rebooting our Intel dualies (citrix servers) since after updating the Mcaffe dats, they won't come back on their own, they just lock up. That doesn;t hapen to mine. So don't give me the Intel is the most stable crap. At least tied is my take (many peices of software can have bad effects and make systems lock up)

You are talking out of your a$$. AMD is, and always will be, number two.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
Yes, AMD is less stable. In the past few months my PC has went to the blue screen 2 times without overclocking. I had my Intel p4 1.5 for 3.5 years and never once did I ever get the blue screen. But, I sitll love my AMD, im just not going to LIE to myself. In my EXPERIENCE, Intel is more stable. For the record, Id still choose AMD any day over Intel, a bluescreen every month or two doesnt bug me much, but it does happen.

it's NOT the CPU's fault. not a chance.
my A64 3200+ has never given me a single crash or hiccup, so it's the other hardware around it that helps.

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: zenwhen
Wow, these boards are sure packed with AMD fanboys.

I wonder why Intel owns the "must be stable" professional workstation market...

brainwashing?

well, no... but that certainly helps.

AMD hasn't had a server based market really AFAIK ever. they do have some, but it's not like Intels with server based CPU's (which AMD hasn't had until recently really)

I wouldn't even use that as a comparison, I'd just be comparing the Retail market, but that's just me.