reno

I have an old Computer Gaming World...can't remember which issue, at work now, but anyway...in it the high end machine they give parts and prices for had an AMD or Intel route...

Intel 667Mhz "Coppermine" 500 some bucks
-or-
AMD Athlon 700Mhz 900 some bucks +2 more fps in Quake 2 @ 800x600

Thanks to AMD for bringing us the low cost, high performance computers of the next century!

JavaFox

Fast forward to 2002, and you see a 2.53GHz Intel processor outperforming a 1.8GHz AMD processor by a puny margin.

The prices?

$650 for the Pentium 4 versus $240 for the Athlon.

Let's put that another way:

Pentium 4 2.53GHz

or

Athlon XP 2200+, a MSI KT3 ULTRA, 256MB of Corsair PC2700 RAM, a 7200-RPM ATA133 60GB Maxtor HDD, an ATi Radeon 8500LE, a US Robotics 56K modem, and a cheap-and-cheerful Codegen case.

reno

Thank God for AMD!

If it wasn't for their elitist bastard attitude we wouldn't have such cheap prices on CPU's! And the economic community wouldn't have an eternal underdog to worship!

"AMD never changes it's sockets...AMD only runs at 1.8Ghz and is less than marginally faster than it's 1.733Ghz brother so it is gooder...AMD is only for savvy computer people...AMD is only for the intelligent...AMD will kick intel's 6 billion dollar revenues with it's couple hundred million revenues...in a year AMD will have a kick ass processor that beats the P4 hands down...by the way, ATI will have the same deal with it's new card that will tromp on the Geforce4...wait...if AMD and ATI are so good...why do Intel and Nvidia outsell, outperform, outthink, and outinnovate them? I suck! I need to die!"

Next time you make an argument, realize for the performance inclined price is not a worry. And if Intel's fastest beats AMD's fastest...than Intel's fastest is the fastest.


http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=induction

digitalwanderer

Mmmmmmm....I could have a P4 2.53GHz....mmmmmmmmmm........

__________________
WTF is up with the sigs?

JavaFox

Hm.

What was the argument you were trying to make, exactly? Obviously, you don't think the $900 AMD was worth it, and I don't think the P4 2.53GHz is worth it, either. So, um, what's the difference, as Dr. Dre might say, between me and you?

What you need to realize, sirrah, is that the number of performance-oriented computer users are few in number, almost to the point of being insignificant. Do you think Compaq and Dell and Gateway would sell systems with onboard video, the nForce's integrated GF2, or a GF2MX if PC enthusiasts mattered? Of course they wouldn't. The fact of the matter is, most people do not give a good damn that the vaunted Northwood-B can outperform AMD's greatest by a few percentage points. Shit, a lot of PC enthusiasts don't even care.

I don't think I've even mentioned ATi in any of my posts, and, I've never claimed that AMD's fastest is faster than Intel's fastest. AMD's fastest is a better choice than Intel's.

JavaFox

Why Does Intel Outsell AMD?
Two reasons. Firstly, brand recognition and advertising. Everyone knows what a Pentium is -- but mention a K6-II and people get confused. Intel has pounded their brand-name into the heads of the consuming masses, and, as such, get sales. Why do people buy more Sony DVD-players than Samsung? Why do people buy more Godiva than See's? Why do so many people still use Realplayer? Why, reno, why? Ever thought about such things? Is it because a Sony is necessarily better than a Samsung? That's mostly perception; oftentimes, the features are the same. Why Godiva over See's? BRAND RECOGNITION. They know the name, they trust it, they buy it. Simple economics. The second reason is powerful business allies. If there was no Dell, where would Intel be? Not inside, I'll tell you that much.

Why Does Intel Outperform AMD?
If you're willing to pay for it, Intel's product does outpeform AMD's. Why? Because, simply, they have a new product out that's clocked stupendously higher than AMD's offering. AMD is a smaller company and as such, cannot spend as much on R&D as Intel can; they're pouring everything into Hammer. Not making an excuse, just answering the question. AMD is outperformed because they are smaller and fell behind.

Why Does Intel Outthink AMD?
Does it? What's with the constant socket change? What's with sloppy releases and recalls? That's outthinking? Maybe that's in the past, but don't think it's the last time we'll see it. Maybe when Intel licenses x86-64 from AMD, they'll implement it wrong and the CPU will be unstable. You think this desktop Northwood is the only thing that matters? What about the Xeons? NOBODY'S buying them, because they're poor performers. That's outthinking? What's with Itanium? What's with this wacky departure from x86? Good thinking? Is that why even Dell's not onboard?

Why Does Intel Outinnovate AMD?
Intel is bigger and can afford more R&D. But what most people don't realize is that AMD had done tremendously innovative things. Largely, this perception that Intel is producing, designing, and devloping more is FUD, because most people don't realize what AMD's done. AMD was the first to use a 100MHz FSB. They were the first to utilize DDR memory technology. They were the first to use a DDR-bus on a PC. They were the first to 1GHz. They were the first sucessfully above 1GHz. They produced the first x86 chip capable of a G-flop. They are leaps and bounds ahead in SOI technology. They used copper interconnects FIRST. They developed 64-bit extensions to the x86 platform. MirrorBit?These are not innovations? Don't be ignorant.

brc64

Streaming porn.

- Me

Necrosis

Elitist bastard attitude indeed....

Hmm, okay if big bad Intel has nothing to fear from AMD. What is the deal with the following article?


Intel makes Acer, Asus an AMD offer they can't refuse

Is this a horse's head I see before me?

By Adamson Rust: Tuesday 09 July 2002, 10:43

THERE'S A LITTLE NOUGAT on Digitimes today which deserves more exposure.

The spicey wire says that Acer and Asus will make notebooks using AMD mobile processors but adds they're coming "under scrutiny" from Intel for so doing.

What can "under scrutiny" mean?

La Intella appears to have given "permission" for Asus and Acer to make these kinds of machines using the "enemy processors" just as long as they don't sell the products in Asia.

Isn't that kind of Intel?

You know since La Intella had her makeover earlier this year, she's just been all heart.

We presume what it means is that in return for Asus and Acer deliberately restricting sales of their products, La Intella will allow them to use its microprocessors and tell them things they need to know to keep their businesses going.

This is a vast sea-change from the days when Intel used to say "use that Via Pentium 4 chipset and you're in deep doo doo", if the rumours from last year are to be believed.

Or a year or two before that, when La is alleged to have commanded that the mobo makers not make AMD mobos and which forced the said manufacturers to ship their Athlon products in white boxes.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=4328

AMD has NEVER resorted to tactics like this. I may own a P4 but it doesn't mean I'm an Intel zealot. Matter of fact I'm building two Athlon systems this weekend. What is the reason? Price and it will do what the people will need it to do. I only had to show them price versus what they had been shopping for around town. There was really no point in showing the same speed P4 systems, since the AMD's are better at straight clock - clock. I will also say everything changes. Atari at one time was the console king, so was Nintendo. Nvidia at one time was a third rate player in the GPU market. Nvidia made a product that was ahead of it's time, and has done very well in the market. I've owned several Nvidia products, and a couple of ATI products. I like both companies, have no complaints about any of these cards I have owned. Well, I shouldn't say that. I purchased the very first Geforce with SDR, which was pretty much a joke. Every thread about this Intel VS AMD at times is very comical to read. No one ever mentions they were business partners at one time. It was when AMD started to show a bit of initiative on their part is when Intel tried to pull the plug on them. The whole speed debate basically comes down to this. The 2.53GHz P4 is a like a Ferrari, while the Athlon Tbred is like a 69 Charger. Depending on the model, the Ferrari of course is faster. I would just hope for the price you would pay for one it would be. I mean come on; of course a processor that is 2.53 GHz is faster than a 1.8 GHz processor. It is not being argued that it is not, but which car will you more likely own? The P4 I have now I bought just to see what all the hype is about, which honestly isn't much. Yes, it is faster than my Athlon XP 1800. However, I do see I'm still wearing my socks. Amazing thing considering this thing cost me around $240, and my Athlon XP 1800 is $85.00 on Pricewatch.

Everyone thinks what they have is the shiznitz (the best). AMD and Intel are both competitive forward thinking companies. I will admit I do lean toward AMD from personal experience, and of course cost. P4's are nice, but not everyone needs the speed and power of most of the processors out there right now. What they need is something that will what they want it to do, fast, and not empty their wallets/purses in the process. Pardon the pun, but which processOR will do that?

digitalwanderer

You got that almost right, I happen to know that what I got in me rigs are the shiznitz! (This is the flamezone, right? )

__________________
WTF is up with the sigs?

Necrosis

Yes it is Win9X Man.

reno

AMD only uses gimmicks to try and seem innovative. At the time, copper interconnects were superfluous...if Intel could get to 2.0ghz with aluminum, why change? Only to ratchet things past 2.0ghz, better business thinking.

1ghz could have been achieved months before AMD did it...but intel was trying to get rid of it's stock of older p3s...so why? Since most comp users aren't performance oriented what is a 1ghz CPU for 600 bucks going to do that a 933mhz CPU for 500 bucks can't?

x86-64 won't be "liscensed" from AMD, intel already had it in prescott but decided against using it. Why compete with it's 64bit Itanium? Separating 64bit and 32bit is amazingly smart from a business perspective, double the processor type, theoretically double the profits.

So AMD wastes money on gimmicks and barely keeps itself standing against the onslaught of billions of dollars worth of intels advertising an research and development. AMD's hardly even been profitable compared to intel. Intel is just plain the better business, the savvier, consumer demand oriented business.

BeOS doesn't sell to consumers, Netscape doesn't either, Compuserve doesn't sell, and Apple doesn't either, it's all because their business models SUCK and their advertising savvy is junk. I trust intel more than amd because they'll probably be around a LOT longer, and that matters when in 10 years I'm trying to find a driver for my 266 pentium system. Meanwhile, AMD's Sanders will be smocking a fatty joint in his mansion while his former R&D team is cleaning his pool. Fuck AMD man, maybe if they sold out to intel...then I'd buy their technology again...or MAYBE if they produced a processor that REALLY innovated...not gold interconnects or 3ghz CPUS...but RISC based processors, or multilayer transitor wafers, or VLIW...or 128bit...or something else...until then, Intel does all that AMD does and the only setback is the higher price. Why change just to save 50 bucks?

Necrosis

How do you know this? Were you on the development team? Intel is going ahead with the Megahertz race. Look here.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...,367431,00.asp

Amazing isn't it people want cheaper processors? Hmm, and what out performs the Celerons? I guess the whole ideal about what people want really is true. Your above statement is correct then about most computer users. The whole deal with the race to 1 Gig was about PR, and of course just to be first. If you’re going to spend the money and know nothing about computers, which would you buy? How much were the 1 Gig's back in March of 2000? I honestly don't remember but I drooled when I thought of the magical number of 1000MHz.

Okay so Intel is better because they are bigger and make more money? Using that same logic, which means Microsoft is better than Linux too. If both of these companies were so mind boggling great; why are the other two in existence? Sony's PS2 is the highest selling game system. However, XBOX and Game Cube are still in the market, and selling. The secret here comes down to a matter of choice/opinion. I own a pair of Klipsch because I preferred them over the Logitech's. It's as simple as who's been making speakers longer? Logitech makes computer peripherals, and what does Klipsch do? Why did you pickup your pair of z560's? I bet a big reason is price. Javafox has been repeating this same argument over, and over again about this being the very same reason WHY people buy AMD!!!

1. BeOS sucked.

2. Netscape is free

3. CompuServe is just regurgitated AOL.

4. Apple does sell though. Content creation: Video/Audio. How many professionals do you know that own an Apple? How about Sun Microsystems, they don't sell much either. If I mention Sun then I should also mention SGI. Last time I checked no Intel here to be found.

AMD has been around almost as long as Intel has. It seems if they can last that long, their doing something right. If you’re trying to find a driver for a 266 Pentium system in ten years I feel pretty sorry for you. I owned an Intel 486sx 20Mhz ten years ago; presently I do not have plans to find drivers for it. Why should I when I have two other fast computers to use?

If AMD sold out to Intel I doubt you'd be able to afford a new processor. It would be the early - mid 90's all over again; of course with inflation they would cost even more.

(Ahem)....cough...ugh...blah... 2.8 GHz P4. What is coming out in December, or looks now sooner? BTW, if a faster speed CPU is not innovative. You just screwed yourself on the whole P4 VS Athlon speed issue. By the by, the Athlon is based off of the Alpha processor which is RISC. The only reason why the Athlons are staying close to the P4's is because of this; if not it would just be a really fast K6 processor.

Interesting, look at your choice of words above; time for another look at your logic. Intel does "everything" AMD does. I thought AMD sucked? If what you’re saying is true, Intel sucks as well. It should be obvious to anyone this would mean AMD must be doing the right thing then since Intel is doing it. The inclusion of SSE into the Athlon is a great example of this.

I could just sit here, and shoot techno spit wads at you about AMD and Intel. However, that is like trying to compare apples to oranges. What really is the point? It all comes down to your own personal opinion. The P4 system you presently own has worked out much better than your Duron. You had a bad experience with AMD, does this mean they suck? The resounding answer to that is no. I am very happy with my P4 that I recently purchased; I can tell small differences in the two systems both good and bad. The first Athlon I ever owned did have issues because of the chipset on the motherboard. I worked through these problems, solved them and went on my merry way. Now that I am an adult I’ve realized it’s better to know for myself then to take the opinion of other’s as fact. I purchased the P4 to try it out, and honestly hope it will last me for awhile until the Hammer is released. If you are right about the Prescott, maybe I will just stick with Intel then. However, do you honestly think they will stick with the 478 socket? You must think about the PC market, and their sales. What would you do?

Onde Pik

Hmm what exactly do you mean by Atlon being based on an Alpha cpu. This is absolute drivel. There would be no reason what so ever to base the Athlon on Alpha architecture. I assume that u make this claim based on the higher IPC of the Atlon over the P4, but this diffrence is actually mostly due to Intels design decisions and not AMD's.

I would really LOVE to know what you mean by Athlon being based on an Alpha.

JavaFox

I think what Necrosis meant (and he could have, admittedly, been more clear) is that the Athlon used the Alpha bus.

Which it does.

It also exhibits some RISC-like behavior, but, AFAIK, it is not architecurally based on the Alpha.

Malus

Copper is a better conductor than aluminum. You are stupid.

Just because something is better for the business, doesn't mean it is better for the consumer.

__________________
quad (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel Q6600 - Asus P5E-VM HDMI - 2x2 GB Kingston PC6400 DDR2 Ram - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - 2xSeagate 1TB 7200RPM HD in RAID 1 via ZFS - Lite-On 20x DVD Multi Recorder - Coolermaster Centurion 5

router (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel E4500 - Intel D945GCNL - 2 GB PC6400 Mushkin Ram - Lite-On 48x24x48x16 - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - Silverstone SST-SG02-F

wanderer (FreeBSD/i386 7-CURRENT): Lenovo Thinkpad T61p

mini (OS X 10.5): Intel Core 2 Duo @ 1.8Ghz, 4 GB Mushkin PC5400 Ram - Headroom MicroDAC

Portable sound: Rockboxed iPod Video -> Westone UM2's
Not-So-Portable Sound: Headroon MicroDAC -> Singlepower PPX3-SLAM -> Grado RS-1's or Beyerdynamic DT-880's
Very-Not-Portable-Sound: Squeezebox v3 -> Denon AVR-1507 -> B&W 683's & Sunfire HRS-10

Necrosis

I wasn't clear on purpose.

Just wanted to see how people would respond to that comment. JavaFox is right though about what I mean by my statement. It just goes to show though based on what is said, compared to actual facts. You wonder if it's my own opinion or something that is actual fact. Makes you think doesn't it?

reno

You disassemble an argument like a 3 year old, taking things out of context to manipulate to how you want them to be understood.

Here's a taste of your own medicine:

Netscape was not a free browser until IE4 came out. I still have my copy of Netscape 3.02 that cost me 55 dollars. (Yes you could get netscape free, but it was a lite version and lacked more powerful features)

I've heard the z-560's and the Klipsch 4.1's in a side by side test with the exact same music, soundcard, and wma player. The z560's give tighter, more responsive, louder bass...clearer high frequency sounds (cymbals, etc)...more distinctive midrange, voice, and brass sounds...louder decible levels, less distortion, and better 3d localization. The Klipsch 4.1s are still superior in DTS on DVDs...but z560 wins in games and dolby digital DVDs. It was merely a perk that the 560s were cheaper. I would have bought 5.1s from Klipsch, but at the time I got the z560s they were not worth the extra money JUST for a center channel. then the fuckers came down about 75 bucks after I got my z560s...stupid computer economy! anyway...

Console wars are different than CPU wars, consoles are all about the software developers, CPUs are about the hardware. Simple as that.

AMD exists because it sells stuff so cheap. If a 2200+ was the same price as a 2.533Ghz P4 AMD would never sell a processor (except to those bastards that buy AMD JUST BECAUSE it's not intel).

Apple sells 1% of the consumer computers in the world. Yay.

(From another post) Gold conducts electricity better than Copper, Platinum conducts better than Gold. So why doesn't everyone use Platinum? BECAUSE THEY DON'T NEED TO! Athlons don't need copper interconnects, it's just an "enhancement" used to fight arguments with intel zealots. Athlons haven't even hit retail speeds of 2.0ghz yet, so if intel can hit 2.0ghz retail with more transistors and aluminum interconnects...why can't AMD?

edit: Intel does almost everything AMD does. AMD uses cheap gimmicks to gain favor, Intel does on a far smaller scale. Well, at least AMD fans use cheap gimmicks more in arguments. When was the last time an intel zealot argued about the P4 having more transistors than an XP...or the sticker you get from the box that tells you all the info about your processor...or the massive pipelines in the cpu...

I constantly hear from AMD users, "blah blah...copper interconnects gooder than intel...blah blah...x86-64 technology...blah blah... hammer gonna kick da shit out of anything...blah blah...AMD has used less sockets...blah blah."

If all the AMD zealots can fight with are copper interconnects and x86-64 technology...than AMD clearly is sucky. Maybe AMD should be a RISC manufacturer...fucking dumbass...yeah...Athlons are RISC processors my ass...if they were, a RISC processor at 1.9ghz would be an amazing technological marvel.

AGH AGH! Poop eater!

End of taste of your own medicine.

My reply, in all seriousness, I really don't give a shit about what AMD does...just because AMD's only purpose is to make my Intel processors cheaper. Really, a processor over 1ghz is enough for ANY game I want to play, the day of the CPU is over, now the GPU is king, and I'd rather take even an AMD solution with a better video card...an Athlon 1Ghz combo w/ a Geforce4 rather than an XP 1.9ghz w/ Geforce3 combo. Hell, without 3dcards current processors are nothing in games...

Ph3@r d@ GPU!

Can we argue about videocards more...please? It's really hard to feign interest in CPU debates for me.

Necrosis

I have to bring it down to a more general level so you can understand. I can easily see by your very emotional reply the post did have a primitive reaction with you. Thus, the reaction I was looking for.

Netscape was not free in 1998; how long ago was that? However, it is free NOW. I still have my copy of it too.

Console wars are still based off hardware. If a console is hard to code for; how many games will be written for it? What about the GPU in these consoles? I like to think of it like auto racing. Technology that is developed for one or the other is later integrated. The point of me talking about consoles was to give an example, not directly compare side by side.

First off, DUH! Of course that is why they exist! The Celeron's are slower but people are still buying them. Reason??? PRICE!! You may say people can buy a system with a P4 478 socket and later upgrade. However, how many people actually upgrade? There is only a small fraction of people in the PC market that actually do this. Everyone else just buys a new computer every 2 - 3 years. If AMD was selling their 2200 at the same price as Intel's flagship they would no longer be AMD; they would be IBM.

Many of the same things you say Intel Zealots have not said I have seen posted. I don't have the time to go and find every single one and supply you with a link to each. I have to go work on a Compaq Pentium II 450MHz that keeps locking up. AMD may have some gimmicks but at least they don't bully other manufactures around like Intel does.

I really hope your not serious about this comment. I've owned two versions of the Geforce 3, and now own the 4. Games do play better, but was it really worth the $350.00 for it? For me it has been a hard decision between what I'm seeing an increase in performance from; new CPU or GPU? I still have yet to bench an Athlon system (with a SIS chipset) using the BM program I use. However, I just can't believe it is the chipset. My board receives higher scores in Sisoft for memory bandwidth than it's the Intel counterpart. The memory timings in the basis are still in the default settings. For myself I do think this whole debate about CPU's is about as tasty as a week old Subway 6" Italian sub.

reno

Emotional, wow, considering I wrote that response while I was picking my nose and watching Clousure I'll take that as a compliment. Let's see if this one will be emotional, I'm definitely picking my nose hardcore, playing solitare and thinking about playing final fantasy 3.

You know, maybe if you had any rudimentary knowledge of how consumers and the economy work you'd understand some very basic facts.

Netscape charged for an internet browser in 1998, Microsoft didn't. Consumers aggregated toward IE because it was free and good enough for them. Now that Netscape is free...you still have to download it...and most people run 56k modems...IE comes on any Win98, and successive versions, disc. Netscape fucked itself over and it's all rooted in their original decision to charge for Netscape.

Consoles: The Playstation won the original 3rd generation battle because of it's software, and the only reason it gained that software was because it was sony. 3D0 and Sega CD didn't sell, just because their software base was crap. The playstation was 25mhz and couldn't even do basic bilinear filtering...but it won out against the N64, Jaguar, and Dreamcast because it had Final Fantasy, Gran Turismo, and Resident Evil. Nintendo had Mario and Zelda, Atari had Aliens and Doom, Sega had nothing.

That bullshit about "difficult to code for" is just that, bullshit. Game programmers get paid to be versitile, not to be creative. Ports are MEANT to be made and are predicted. The XBox is vastly different than PS2 and Gamecube, yet they all get the same shitty sports games that sell hundreds of thousands. Xbox has way more horsepower than all three, and Gamecube is number 2. Again, PS2 is just Sony, and they have the market prowess to win developers. But dood I seriesly think da PS2 iz eazier to code for becuz it is a war of hardware and PS2's 4 meg of video ram iz mohr powerfull then XBox! (If it were hardware based, why wouldn't the XBox...based off a 750mhz processor and with a 250/500 Geforce3...win against a 200 some mhz processor with a 4mb vid card that can't display over 640x480?)

==emotional rant!==I'm so mad! I'm so mad at you poopy head! I am infuriated by you because you made me mad! I'm so mad that you have the god-like powers to make me mad! I'm mad because your soulless mad words stored as magnetic polarities on some mad server's harddrive are so personal and insulting to me! I am so mad! ==emotional rant!==

No one seems to remember the days of yore when AMD had a chip on it's shoulders and sold it's processors hundreds of dollars more than intel, it was just because of their failing investor base and plummeting revenues that they had to start pricing agressively. AMD is no religious "sell as low as possible" God-like corporation like you make it out to be, they are just trying to make a buck and retain their lifestyle. At least Intel tries to better their position in the economy, AMD just releases "good enough" hardware for great prices and they get away with it. Good for them, but it won't last forever.

AMD doesn't bully anyone around not because they are nice and good hearted, it's because they have no clout in the marketplace and need all the friends they can get. They are the little bitch of the computing world, always striving to make friends just to make ends meet, giving themselves up to bigger companies just to get a slightly better percentage of chip sales. They are but a snivelling leech compared to Intel, sucking blood from a giant.

I'd finish the rest, but I realized I have to take a shit.

Zardon

spoken like a true hardware guru

shai

reminds you what microsoft was at first 3 ppl nice ppl and now not
and amd will be like that one day

Necrosis

LOL...Reno you just kill me sometimes!!

Wow! You seem very talented with your hands! I guess that comes from practice, right?

Hmm, well I guess I don't but my stock portfolio sure seems to say I do. Could I see your portfolio? Oh that’s right! Your a teenager and live at home. I'm sorry.

Thank you for the refresher. Everyone that has any clue what a browser is knows this story. It just goes to show your limited thinking, and lack of ability to think outside the box. I bet you wear Tommy Hilfinger, have a PS2, and swear off anything but Microsoft as well. You’re the guy that loves Creative too, need I say more?

1. Sony has deeper pockets.

2. Who bought out 3Do?

3. Prove the PS2 is more powerful than the XBOX.

Am I the one going around ranting saying because I own "this" and "that" it's the shit? Who is basing their whole opinion of a company based on one system they built for themselves?

Enjoyed your pun in the first sentence. I remember those days. In January 2000 I paid close to $700 for a processor, motherboard, and ram. Everyone is having troubles in this economy because the bottom of the tech sector dropped out. Did you even read some of the articles I posted? I never claimed AMD was anything. You're just pissed because someone is giving Intel some competition, and you’re personally ticked because your 750 Duron system sucked. Sorry about your luck. How many people on this forum us AMD?

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/thread.php?id=2102

What about Barton and Hammer?

I almost forgot, you know since I am the one proclaiming AMD is some angelic like saint corporation. What processor is in my main rig? I could just sit here and say Intel sucks. However, I put down the money down and tried the P4 myself. I'm impressed with it so far. Want to call me an AMD Zealot again? I know what it is! I'm not doing what I'm supposed to be doing!! HA, HA that is it! Now that I've switched over to Intel I'm supposed to get on here to flame AMD. I'm sorry but I'm not going to do that. AMD is still very high up in my book. BTW, if you would like to know I just upgraded someone this weekend from a Pentium II to an Athlon XP 1800. You wouldn't believe how happy they were with the system's speed and cost effectiveness. I give people choices; I don't try to force my opinions on them.

Ha, ha good one Reno. However, if Intel has nothing to fear like I said before why are they pressuring Asus and Acer not to sell AMD products in the Asian market? We all know this will be the next big boom in the PC market. AMD does more than just sell CPU's mind you; since you seem to know "everything" you should know what I'm talking about. Who bends over in front of the giant and takes it up ass, Remo?? Ho Ho Ho

JavaFox

Frankly, I find it difficult to have any sort of debate with someone so obviously mentally handicapped. I will do my best to enunciate, use short words, and bullet my points clearly. If at any point, you need something cleared up, reno, I will do my best to help you. Aren't you the one running a Willamette, though? Maybe there's nothing I can do...

First. You probably don't understand this concept, but AMD doesn't use copper interconnects just because it makes them look better or as a gimick. You might think so, but you're wrong. Have you EVER seen an Athlon advertised as having copper interconnects? When the Thunderbirds came out, were there retail CPUs marked as "Athlon Processor Featuring Copper Interconnect Technology"? No, because consumers don't give a good damn about that technology, and companies don't give a good damn about enthusiasts. We don't matter. AMD is not going to throw away money to make themselves look better on paper; that's Intel's job. AMD does not have the money to waste on catshit like that. If you can't grasp this concept, I can't help you.

Why not gold or platinum? Please try to use your brain. Gold and platinum cost more than copper. Companies will almost never use a more expensive technology than they have to. And they will rarely put out new technology until it is necessary.

I had always though you more intelligent than the average poster, but obviously I gave you too much credit. The reason Intel can hit 2.0GHz and AMD can't is Netburst.

Netburst is a different architecture.
It has a longer pipeline.
Longer pipelines means higher clockspeeds.
2GHz is a clock speed.
The P4 can go to 2GHz because 2GHz is a clockspeed.
Longer pipelines means higher clockspeeds.
2GHz is a higher clockspeed than 1.8GHz.
The Athlon has a shorter pipeline.
This means the Athlon cannot go to higher clockspeeds.

Understand?

You're really a damn joke, reno, because you don't have any arguments other than ridiculous claims about AMD using gimicks to sell. AMD doesn't have money to blow on technology it doesn't need.

brc64

1. If you think Sony has deeper pockets than Microsoft, you need your head examined.

3. How the hell did you not see the sarcasm in that!? He wasn't saying the PS2 was more powerful.. in fact, he said it was the LEAST powerful, yet it is STILL winning the "console wars" because game developers keep developing for it. Everything I read online tells me the PS2 is damn hard to code for, but that doesn't seem to matter, now does it? Like reno was saying, if hardware was really all that important in the console industry, the Xbox should be king. But it's not.. games, gameplay, and control ALL take priority over graphics and power in the console industry.

- Me

Necrosis

Sony does have some pretty deep pockets of their own; their taking big losses on the PS2's as well.

I wasn't quite sure what he meant by his statement, figured he just finished a nice big bowl of crack. I'm one of those people that doesn't like to be told I have to take what everyone else does. Why play PS2 games on a inferior system when you can build something more powerful and play them all.

brc64

Oh yeah, GTA3 is way better on the PC than it is on the PS2.

- Me

Necrosis

I'm going to feel like a dumbass for askings this. What is GTA3??

Malus

Gold is not a better conductor than copper. Using gold connects on various products is just a gimmick that companies use to trick consumers into buying more costly products.

__________________
quad (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel Q6600 - Asus P5E-VM HDMI - 2x2 GB Kingston PC6400 DDR2 Ram - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - 2xSeagate 1TB 7200RPM HD in RAID 1 via ZFS - Lite-On 20x DVD Multi Recorder - Coolermaster Centurion 5

router (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel E4500 - Intel D945GCNL - 2 GB PC6400 Mushkin Ram - Lite-On 48x24x48x16 - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - Silverstone SST-SG02-F

wanderer (FreeBSD/i386 7-CURRENT): Lenovo Thinkpad T61p

mini (OS X 10.5): Intel Core 2 Duo @ 1.8Ghz, 4 GB Mushkin PC5400 Ram - Headroom MicroDAC

Portable sound: Rockboxed iPod Video -> Westone UM2's
Not-So-Portable Sound: Headroon MicroDAC -> Singlepower PPX3-SLAM -> Grado RS-1's or Beyerdynamic DT-880's
Very-Not-Portable-Sound: Squeezebox v3 -> Denon AVR-1507 -> B&W 683's & Sunfire HRS-10

Malus

Here is a list of metals, from the best conductor to the worst conductor:

http://www.eddy-current.com/condres.htm

Notice how copper is a better conductor than gold. The only one that is better is silver. Since silver tarnishes, costs more money, and is only a little better than copper, copper remains the ideal choice.

Learn some physics, bitch.

__________________
quad (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel Q6600 - Asus P5E-VM HDMI - 2x2 GB Kingston PC6400 DDR2 Ram - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - 2xSeagate 1TB 7200RPM HD in RAID 1 via ZFS - Lite-On 20x DVD Multi Recorder - Coolermaster Centurion 5

router (FreeBSD/amd64 8-CURRENT): Intel E4500 - Intel D945GCNL - 2 GB PC6400 Mushkin Ram - Lite-On 48x24x48x16 - Seagate 320GB 7200RPM HD - Silverstone SST-SG02-F

wanderer (FreeBSD/i386 7-CURRENT): Lenovo Thinkpad T61p

mini (OS X 10.5): Intel Core 2 Duo @ 1.8Ghz, 4 GB Mushkin PC5400 Ram - Headroom MicroDAC

Portable sound: Rockboxed iPod Video -> Westone UM2's
Not-So-Portable Sound: Headroon MicroDAC -> Singlepower PPX3-SLAM -> Grado RS-1's or Beyerdynamic DT-880's
Very-Not-Portable-Sound: Squeezebox v3 -> Denon AVR-1507 -> B&W 683's & Sunfire HRS-10

digitalwanderer

Grand Theft Auto 3. It's got my vote for pc game of the year already, possibly up there in the "Best. Game. Ever." category for me. INFINITE replay value and a totally immersive living city to go drive around and kill things in. OOOODLES of fun!!!

Oh yeah, this is the flamezone...

...you lame ass little brainless wonder!

[SIZE=xx-small](Methinks me likes the flamezone just a little TOO much....)[/SIZE]

__________________
WTF is up with the sigs?