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


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-29-2005, 08:30 PM   #1
Baseband Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 53
Default WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

First, AMD dual core is not really relevant in today's market. It was developed b/c they hit a wall and couldnt go to penitum 5 speed because of heating issues. Second, if you want BLAZING speed, go with a Pentium 4..around 3.4/3.6 ghz...trust me, it blazes.....dual core is good if you have like 5 things opened at once. the second core is idle most of the time....

second, as far as LCD monitors, not even an LG 20 inch has as much color and brightness as a proprietary crt, it just looks better.....if you go LCD, the only way to go would be a SONY XBRITE or NEC....have you all not noticed how dark lcd screen's are compared to crt's....i feel like most of you, although you THINK you know what your doing have all fallen into the MOTO Razor trap...figure it out. im out.
__________________

palladin the II is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-2005, 11:55 PM   #2
Golden Master
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 13,091
Default Re: WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

Hey, you already posted that!
__________________

lhuser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 01:13 AM   #3
Golden Master
 
alvino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,967
Send a message via AIM to alvino
Default Re: WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

Pentium 5 speeds?! What the heck? Intel even never made a Pentium 5 because they themselves hit a wall in clock speeds. They realized that speed IS NOT everything. AMD's architecture is more efficient and has less latency than the Pentium 4 (thanks to the Integrated Memory Controller). Hah! Pentium 4 3.4/3.6ghz...if you're referring to the Prescrap core, then forget about it. Prescotts may overclock well, but they're inefficient, have lots of latency and give off TONS of heat (compared to the uber cool Northwood cores). Dual-core doesn't need to be fast. The reason why there's two cores is that they can supplement each other when they need to (becides, F.E.A.R. supports multi-core, so why not?). At least AMD didn't do what Intel did; like fuse two Prescott cores together and slave them with a logics controller.

If you want blazing speed from a single core processor, get a AMD Opteron 146. Socket 939, 2.0ghz and 1mb of L2 Cache. This baby can overclock to 3.0ghz with AIR COOLING. Also, for you AMD nay-sayers, this baby doesn't suck at gaming. It uses the same San Diego core as the FX-57 and 4000+, but the cores are from the very center of the silicon wafer (which means that it's of the best quality). Also, it has a improved Integrated Memory Controller for reduced latency (something that Intel has failed to include to this day). The most glorious thing about this processor is it's price. You would think it's El Expensivo, but this baby costs about the same price as the 3500+ or 3700+ (depending where you buy it from). That's right folks! It's about $220-$250. It's VERY cheap considering what it has. A definate bargain. And it'll own almost any Pentium 4 anyday (unless spend thousands overclocking it to 4.0ghz+ with EXPENSIVE phase change cooling ).
alvino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 11:53 AM   #4
Golden Master
 
ISOwner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 12,208
Default Re: WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

Or you can get something like this:

"Athlon 64 FX-60 was present on a few internal documents from AMD with the subject of publishing their upcoming lowered CPU-prices, but they had also "by a mistake" written down two future models, the Athlon 64 X2 5000+ and Athlon 64 FX-60. Adrenaline Vault, who posted the information, has since then been silenced, but now The Inquirer has published some additional information about the new CPU-models. According to their sources, Athlon 64 X2 5000+ should simply be a increase in clock frequency, from 2.4GHz (4800+) to 2.6GHz, just as we expected. No matter what speculations say, it looks to be exactly the same thing with the Athlon FX-60, which according to the same source still has only one core, and operates at 3.0GHz. No matter what, the Athlon 64 FX-60 should be the last single-core-FX from AMD."

FX-60, whoa!!!
__________________
*Fact: Microsoft Window's Blue Screen of Death vs Computerforums.org's White Screen of Death. Which is worse?
ISOwner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 01:36 PM   #5
Golden Master
 
mammikoura's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,459
Send a message via MSN to mammikoura
Default Re: WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

Quote:
Originally Posted by palladin the II
Also, i never said Intel was better than AMD per se. What i meant to say was, which must've gotten "clouded" in my other rantings, is that an Intel pentium 4 3.4 GHZ totally outperforms a dual core AMD at 2.0 or 2.2 ghz....yes, maybe in the future this will change, but until the dual cores can reach speeds of the pentium 4 single cores....fuggedubowdit!
P4 does have higher clock speeds, but it doesn't mean that it's better. Now at 2.2ghz amd dual core we are talking about the x2 4400+, which does better at multitasking than a P4. Also as I said amd's are better at gaming. If we look for example at FEAR, I gues that the dual core would perform better, but there ain't any other games around yet which would take full advantage of dual core processing. But there will be soon. If we are talking about "blazing speed" as in good performance in games then amd fx-57 is the way to go. Not P4.
__________________
0_o
mammikoura is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 03:55 PM   #6
Fully Optimized
 
ownage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,404
Default Re: WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

Quote:
Originally Posted by alvino
Pentium 5 speeds?! What the heck? Intel even never made a Pentium 5 because they themselves hit a wall in clock speeds. They realized that speed IS NOT everything. AMD's architecture is more efficient and has less latency than the Pentium 4 (thanks to the Integrated Memory Controller). Hah! Pentium 4 3.4/3.6ghz...if you're referring to the Prescrap core, then forget about it. Prescotts may overclock well, but they're inefficient, have lots of latency and give off TONS of heat (compared to the uber cool Northwood cores). Dual-core doesn't need to be fast. The reason why there's two cores is that they can supplement each other when they need to (becides, F.E.A.R. supports multi-core, so why not?). At least AMD didn't do what Intel did; like fuse two Prescott cores together and slave them with a logics controller.

If you want blazing speed from a single core processor, get a AMD Opteron 146. Socket 939, 2.0ghz and 1mb of L2 Cache. This baby can overclock to 3.0ghz with AIR COOLING. Also, for you AMD nay-sayers, this baby doesn't suck at gaming. It uses the same San Diego core as the FX-57 and 4000+, but the cores are from the very center of the silicon wafer (which means that it's of the best quality). Also, it has a improved Integrated Memory Controller for reduced latency (something that Intel has failed to include to this day). The most glorious thing about this processor is it's price. You would think it's El Expensivo, but this baby costs about the same price as the 3500+ or 3700+ (depending where you buy it from). That's right folks! It's about $220-$250. It's VERY cheap considering what it has. A definate bargain. And it'll own almost any Pentium 4 anyday (unless spend thousands overclocking it to 4.0ghz+ with EXPENSIVE phase change cooling ).
hehehe, i love the S939 opterons, isnt that right alvino??? (I also love how you post the info i tell you before i even get to the post)
ownage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 06:51 PM   #7
Golden Master
 
alvino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,967
Send a message via AIM to alvino
Default Re: WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

So? You snooze you lose.
alvino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 07:20 PM   #8
Fully Optimized
 
ownage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,404
Default Re: WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

Quote:
Originally Posted by alvino
So? You snooze you lose.
but you told you all that stuff eh? eh?
ownage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 10:21 PM   #9
Golden Master
 
alvino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,967
Send a message via AIM to alvino
Default Re: WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

Ok ok, you get the credit for the info, but you have no complaining rights when it comes to who posted it first.
alvino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-30-2005, 10:24 PM   #10
Fully Optimized
 
ownage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,404
Default Re: WORD TO THE SO CALLED "GAMERS"

hahha, thats true
__________________

ownage 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 01:58 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