Go Back   Computer Forums > General Computing > Hardware
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-27-2005, 12:56 AM   #41
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

Then you aren't reading any of my posts in this forum. What am I supposed to do?
__________________

Giancarlo is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 01:00 AM   #42
Golden Master
 
alvino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,967
Send a message via AIM to alvino
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

What do you want me to do?! Search up every single damn post you've put up?! I'm just asking for a few simple links! If you don't want to then just say so! Not that hard!

EDIT>>> Got carried away there...whatever. If you don't want to post a few link, then fine.
__________________

alvino is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 02:34 AM   #43
Fully Optimized
 
winterfreshpwnz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 2,099
Send a message via AIM to winterfreshpwnz Send a message via MSN to winterfreshpwnz
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

Dude Gian, I'm not on anyone's sides here, but honestly, I can remember quite clearly most of the posts you made about Intel not being completely 64-bit, etc. and how people always requested links, yet you never gave any. I'm not denying your claim about Intel's falsehood, I have an AMD myself and would really liek to know if this was true and since you seem to be the only one who knows about Intel's lie, I wanted to see proof. All were saying is that you shouldn't just be posting stuff like that without any evidence, were not taking sides.
__________________
ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB 3.0 | AMD Athlon II X2 245 | 2X2GB A-DATA DDR3 | Western Digital Caviar Blue 500GB | OCZ StealthXStream 500W | Logitech G500 Mouse
winterfreshpwnz is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 02:39 AM   #44
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

I'm simply not saying anything about this anymore.
Giancarlo is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 02:41 AM   #45
Golden Master
 
alvino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,967
Send a message via AIM to alvino
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

Huh...right
alvino is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 04:08 AM   #46
Daemon Poster
 
connchri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Scotland, UK
Posts: 1,019
Send a message via MSN to connchri
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

LOL, anyway... OK.

I was very sceptical about that 4.7GHz, and F*CK! thats some speed! I don't care what anyone says, but that would kill any AMD Athlon 64 at stock speeds. Never mind his friends 5.2GHz. Are they all 6xx series? also what models at stock speeds are they?

Another question, If your so rich, can I get your hand-downs?????

Seeya!
__________________
Delta: "What's wrong Chris?? Chris: "I miss my old Cyrix"
connchri is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 04:58 PM   #47
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

It doesn't kill the AMD. Not even. Again AMD brings up the fact that MHz doesn't matter anymore. It matters how the chip is designed.
Giancarlo is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 05:09 PM   #48
Daemon Poster
 
connchri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Scotland, UK
Posts: 1,019
Send a message via MSN to connchri
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

Gaincarlo, I ain't gonna argue, but at 5.2GHz, thats almost 43% faster than Intels top-of-the-line 3.7GHz P4. I'm sure that the Athlon FX 57 is not as much as 43% faster than the 3.7GHz P4 6xx EE. Perhaps about 10-15% but not 43%

Remember I said Intels overclock v AMD stock speeds. Not a fair comparison, but that was not my point. My point was the extreamly high overclock and the increase in speed that would have been acheivable. Other than that, I am not denying anything else.
__________________
Delta: "What's wrong Chris?? Chris: "I miss my old Cyrix"
connchri is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 05:21 PM   #49
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

I don't think so. I will continue to argue against such points. AMD overclocks too. And you aren't comparing fair points. Again AMD proves MHz doesn't matter.
Giancarlo is offline  
Old 04-27-2005, 06:59 PM   #50
BSOD
 
DarkBlade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,355
Send a message via MSN to DarkBlade
Default Re: Intel's 64-bit narrows the gap with Athlon 64

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giancarlo
Another huge post... of flames. You do not have unbiased opinions. Nobody really can. Intel has made a Pentium that runs really cool? Where exactly? They all run very hot. The AMD may not OC as good, but it performs a whole lot better (thus invalidating the more MHZ is better argument). Don't go insulting me. You got embarrassed in the Logitech/Klipsch thread, and I'll do it again. The 6xx isn't that ruthless. They aren't that good either. No matter how much Intel tries it can't take the hill where AMD has its flag up. It appears a smaller company has outdid a bigger company. Not to mention Intel just issued a profit warning recently. I would be very concerned if you were pro-Intel.
So what about your dumb claim that the Pentium 6XX is not full 64bit? What do you mean, feel free to explain that... And you are right, being that Intel still uses 20 PPLs as opposed to AMDs 8, they are less efficient, meaning higher clock speeds. However, when you have a P4 running at 4.5GHz and 61Celcius FULL LOAD with good air cooling, that is PRETTY GOOD. (this was before OCing more with Liquid modded cooling BTW) The 6xx have high clock speeds, are much more efficient, use less power (IN THE LONG RUN) and can throttle themselves just as the AMD Cool and Quiet can. Intel is almost done with their 90nm perfection. I am not an Intel fan, I am an AMD fan. The new 840EE dual core Pentium SUCKS compared to the new AMD X2, however, you claim that the new 6XX sucks is HEAVILY FLAWED. Go look at processor wafer architechture and then come back and say that. The HT technology along with the enhanced broad PPLs allows for much larger data transfer. The 2MB L2 also allows for increased power in gaming and audio/video decode and recode/compile. AMD is the better company for GAMING right now, but for photoshop, video editting, audio editting, and LARGE tasks of that nature, AMD doesn't make the bar, Intel does.
__________________

DarkBlade is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0