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


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-11-2005, 04:12 PM   #11
Guru
 
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Britain
Posts: 13,293
Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn
Default

An AMD?

I still have a Celeron 333Mhz working downstairs, with 86Megs of RAM and Windows 2000
__________________

__________________
A Knight is sworn to Honour. His heart knows only Virtue. His blade defends the helpless. His might upholds the Weak. His word speaks only truth. His wrath undoes the Wicked.
Lord Kalthorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 05:17 PM   #12
Golden Master
 
jac006's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,810
Send a message via AIM to jac006
Default Re: Why Amd?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Kalthorn
70%? Define 64-bit? Lol. Any Pentium 4 you buy today new for say... more than a hundred pounds, most 5xxs, any 6xx, any Pentium D, Xeon for more than 200 and any Itanium, will be 64-bit. As far as I am aware all Dell PCs with 5xx, 6xx and so forth are 64-bit; which is a huge bunch of people buying them. Perhaps that is 70%... I'm not sure. But I am sure that within 4 months of selling some 5xxs with EM64T, Intel outsold AMD's almost 15 months, selling 64-bit Processors as their whole topend range, in 64-bit Processors. So if indeed it is 70%, thats only because Intel sell such a huge range of Processors, for such a wide range of prices, to such a wide range of people, not all of whom even know what 64-bit means, very few of which would ever need it. Eitherway however, Pentium D is not the only 64-bit certainty

Do they sell good at the moment?
Yeah, but why would you buy an intel today? I wouldn't touch them, no offense. But I used an intel for 8 years and my amd for 3 years and my amd outperform's anything I've ever seen or used. Amd sells are huge range of cpu's too. Do you have and statistics to support that 15 months thing?
__________________

__________________
Macbook Pro and Logitech z5500s. All you really need.
jac006 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 05:39 PM   #13
Daemon Poster
 
acphenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 667
Send a message via MSN to acphenom Send a message via Yahoo to acphenom
Default Re: Why Amd?

AMD's desktop CPU's are superior to Intel's for the fact that they offer better performance in the most commonly-used computer tasks i.e. office work and gaming (office work covering stuff like compression, media playback, scanning etc.).

They are also much more energy-efficient. The room I'm using right now to go online is already hot enough with this Athlon 64 2800+, I can't imagine what it'd be like with a Pentium 4. I'd need a better PSU probably, and better cooling, which both require more money.
__________________
Windows XP Pro 17" LCD Monitor (1280 x 1024)
nForce3 250 Chipset Athlon 64 2800+ w/ C'n'Q
1 x 512MB DDR400 CL3 SDRAM 40GB IDE 7,200rpm HDD (8MB Cache)
nVidia GeForce MX420 64MB PCI On-Board Audio
acphenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 06:10 PM   #14
Guru
 
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Britain
Posts: 13,293
Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn
Default

Most people have reasonably ventilated rooms :P Not many people live in a room without a Window :P I myself actually save on heating for my entire room, which would use Kilowatts of Electricity from the boiler just by using my computer all day :P And it is an AMD! Imagine the saving from an Intel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jac006
Yeah, but why would you buy an intel today? I wouldn't touch them, no offense. But I used an intel for 8 years and my amd for 3 years and my amd outperform's anything I've ever seen or used. Amd sells are huge range of cpu's too. Do you have and statistics to support that 15 months thing?
Because they give far superior Multitasking performance and thrash AMD in 3DMark 05 and PCMark 04. I don't have the statistics to prove AMd sell a huge range of CPUs now, an certainly not 15 months ago. I didn't even say they did You did, you find the statistics
__________________
A Knight is sworn to Honour. His heart knows only Virtue. His blade defends the helpless. His might upholds the Weak. His word speaks only truth. His wrath undoes the Wicked.
Lord Kalthorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 06:18 PM   #15
Daemon Poster
 
acphenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 667
Send a message via MSN to acphenom Send a message via Yahoo to acphenom
Default Re: Why Amd?

It's err, well, it's winter, so it's usually cold in the house. And anyway, it's like 11:20pm right now, I ain't opening the window, cause we don't live in the safest area.

And everyone knows that PCMark is biased in favour of Intel, cause if you do the tasks that it simulates yourself, AMD CPU's usually win.

And anyway, X2 offers the best multi-tasking performance, so get that if you want multi-tasking.
__________________
Windows XP Pro 17" LCD Monitor (1280 x 1024)
nForce3 250 Chipset Athlon 64 2800+ w/ C'n'Q
1 x 512MB DDR400 CL3 SDRAM 40GB IDE 7,200rpm HDD (8MB Cache)
nVidia GeForce MX420 64MB PCI On-Board Audio
acphenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2005, 06:51 PM   #16
Guru
 
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Britain
Posts: 13,293
Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn
Default

They say PCMark 04 is biased, as wel as 3DMark 05; but by that reasoning all the game tests are Biased too for AMD, because AMD is good at that stuff Intel only get good marks on those things because of HT! People say they're biased because they can use more than one thread, how is that biased? Were AMDs to be able to use more than one thread per core, would it still be biased? It is not biased because it plays to a strength, it is a very good test for Multitasking because when you Multitask - you happen to use more than one thread however many threads your Processor can handle

840EE offers the best Multitasking Performance; it has HT on two Cores!
__________________
A Knight is sworn to Honour. His heart knows only Virtue. His blade defends the helpless. His might upholds the Weak. His word speaks only truth. His wrath undoes the Wicked.
Lord Kalthorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2005, 03:17 PM   #17
Daemon Poster
 
acphenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 667
Send a message via MSN to acphenom Send a message via Yahoo to acphenom
Default Re: Why Amd?

Like I said in the other thread...the HT on dual-core doesn't seem to work well for it, as it got beat by the X2 4800+.

And even if it did benefit it, I doubt you'd get much of an increase, unless you had like an SCSI 15k HDD, 2GB of low-latency RAM in dual-channel config...but most of all...IF THE ACTUAL Intel dual-core architecture was good! Cause the PD's have trouble with the shared FSB...I'm sure PEE is no different.

Anyway, might be a different story when Yonah comes out...but even then, I'm sure AMD will have a new dual-core model or 2.
__________________
Windows XP Pro 17" LCD Monitor (1280 x 1024)
nForce3 250 Chipset Athlon 64 2800+ w/ C'n'Q
1 x 512MB DDR400 CL3 SDRAM 40GB IDE 7,200rpm HDD (8MB Cache)
nVidia GeForce MX420 64MB PCI On-Board Audio
acphenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2005, 04:07 PM   #18
Guru
 
Lord Kalthorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Britain
Posts: 13,293
Send a message via MSN to Lord Kalthorn
Default Re: Why Amd?

Haha, yeah well... I'm not too much of a fan of the Dual Core Architecture myself; but it does work and hence it is good

Yonah should change it all yeah
__________________
A Knight is sworn to Honour. His heart knows only Virtue. His blade defends the helpless. His might upholds the Weak. His word speaks only truth. His wrath undoes the Wicked.
Lord Kalthorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2005, 06:09 PM   #19
Daemon Poster
 
acphenom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 667
Send a message via MSN to acphenom Send a message via Yahoo to acphenom
Default Re: Why Amd?

Ah, it does work to some degree, but I'd much rather go for an X2 3800+ or just put up with a single-core, cause I can multi-task fairly well with them anyway.

But of course, Yonah's what I'm waiting for. Not too happy about the 30W TDP though...especially with Intel CPU's TDP's being the CPU running at 75% load, unlike AMD's chips, which are the CPU running in the most extreme conditions.
__________________
Windows XP Pro 17" LCD Monitor (1280 x 1024)
nForce3 250 Chipset Athlon 64 2800+ w/ C'n'Q
1 x 512MB DDR400 CL3 SDRAM 40GB IDE 7,200rpm HDD (8MB Cache)
nVidia GeForce MX420 64MB PCI On-Board Audio
acphenom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2005, 06:18 PM   #20
Fully Optimized
 
UK31337's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,776
Default Re: Why Amd?

If I were to build a high-end gaming rig, I'd probably take AMD just to try it out, to see what the fuss is about.

But I've been gaming on an Intel for years without any real issues. The only difference I see on a dualcore AMD is the load times. The actual in game performance isn't visibly different.
__________________

__________________
Master of common sense. If you don't like it, stop reading.
UK31337 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:22 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