-
[quote]Originally posted by AlienDyne:
<strong>Another Intel vs AMD debate. Seems like I missed it.
Here goes my opinion.
Intel Advantages:
Quality
Reliability
Compatibility
Intel Disadvantages:
Price
AMD Advantages:
Quality
Price
Speed
AMD Disadvantages:
Heat
Reliability</strong><hr></blockquote>
I must side with AlienDyne on this one.
It really depends on the use of the computer. If it is a gaming machine that needs raw power, and can afford to crash once in a while, then go with AMD all the way.
However, if it is a production server that is running a database that is bringing in $5,000 a day, I'd go with Intel.
Look at the purpose for the machine to make a choice.
-
[quote]Originally posted by Sowulo:
<strong>
Didn't want to join the debate but have been pretty entertained reading all this.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yes, but you didn't tell us your opinion, Sowulo. :D :D :D
-
[quote]Originally posted by AlienDyne:
<strong>
Yes, but you didn't tell us your opinion, Sowulo. :D :D :D </strong><hr></blockquote>
That's because those of you who would agree with me would think I'm pretty smart and those who disagree with me would think I'm pretty stupid. Why go there if no one is going to change their opinion anyway. I could "prove" either case using "facts & figures" provided by hundreds of fans for either mfg. But the only ones who could hear my evidence would probably be again, the ones who agreed. This debate is just like religious ones....the bottom line is that the only "facts" one is able to hear are the ones which are "frequency tuned" to ones own experience and perspective--and I don't just mean technological experience: this includes socio-economic factors as well (e.g. Some will prefer AMD simply because Intel is "too big for it's britches" while others will prefer Intel because AMD is "too cheap." Neither is much of an argument based on technical merit.) Shall we next rehash the old MAC/PC debate while we're at it? Bottom line...Who cares? Buy what you want and live with it or replace it.
-
AMD for 100%
AMD is Cheaper (0.25 the price of an Equivalent Intel Proc.)
Faster (Hz Don't matter because Architecture diff.)
More Stable.
I have 2 of them at home.
-
[quote]Originally posted by Sowulo:
<strong>
That's because those of you who would agree with me would think I'm pretty smart and those who disagree with me would think I'm pretty stupid. Why go there if no one is going to change their opinion anyway. I could "prove" either case using "facts & figures" provided by hundreds of fans for either mfg. But the only ones who could hear my evidence would probably be again, the ones who agreed. This debate is just like religious ones....the bottom line is that the only "facts" one is able to hear are the ones which are "frequency tuned" to ones own experience and perspective--and I don't just mean technological experience: this includes socio-economic factors as well (e.g. Some will prefer AMD simply because Intel is "too big for it's britches" while others will prefer Intel because AMD is "too cheap." Neither is much of an argument based on technical merit.) Shall we next rehash the old MAC/PC debate while we're at it? Bottom line...Who cares? Buy what you want and live with it or replace it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Come on, Curt. I was just kidding!
I fully agree with you on that and that's why I just posted the advantages and the disadvantages of each manufacturer without saying my opinion.
-
[quote]Originally posted by AlienDyne:
<strong>
Come on, Curt. I was just kidding!
I fully agree with you on that and that's why I just posted the advantages and the disadvantages of each manufacturer without
saying my opinion.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, I know you were kidding but the perceived advantages and disadvantages are still going to be laughed at or scoffed at depending upon which side one is on. If someone wants to be a little more objective and run benches, then one still has to decide on which benches and justify one's choices. In addition, most people site price as an important factor. Would someone like to price an AMD 1.4 and an Intel 1.4 and include all the specific costs relevant to each processor such as CPU fan, certified power supply, certified RAM? If you're honest by the time these necessary components are factored into CPU cost, price isn't really a factor (AMD 1.4 CPU only = $105) (Intel P4 1.4 CPU only = $124).
AlienDyne, you were trying to be funny and you were but I think I'll stick with ironic and laugh for that reason. Price isn't relevant if you're going to build the system correctly (good enough parts to avoid constant hassles) whether you go with AMD or Intel. What can be had for what price vs. what should be done to make sure one is building a system that will properly fulfill its intended function are two very different arguments. The bottom line for my own personal use is speed and stability. For my customers I must also factor in ease of setup (how many factors are there involved in getting these parts to function together with their OS)--the more factors, the more potential for warranty visits
(I do all my work on-site). Again, each of you have your own opinions as do I and unless every computer is going to have an identical setup with identical OS and applications used in identically the same way, then there never will be a definitive better chip. One thing that many of you have stated that I will readily agree upon, competition is good for the consumer hopefully for improved features, performance and stability. If I can get those three things and I price I can live with then wonderful but otherwise price doesn't weigh that heavily--would you want your open-heart surgery performed by the lowest bidder? :D
-
That's why I was trying to make fun out of this question. We have had lots of similar posts in the past and I'm pretty tired of this kind of debates.
Yes. Some people think that price is an important factor but nobody has ever asked how many Intel or AMD CPUs have been RMA'd and for what reason.
FYI, I RMA'd 3 or 4 Thunderbirds last week (I don't remember the exact number and I don't have enough time to review my records right now). The damage wasn't caused by the customers.
My bottom line is speed, quality and reliability. The price is the last thing I have in mind if I want a solid system.
Some people might hate me for what I said, but this is my opinion and it's the first and the last time I said it.
-
It really depends on what you want it for. If you need it for compiling or creating video or audio, the P4's are the king. This is in part due to the RDRAM. For general purpose, do everything, an AMD system may be the best price for the performance. There have been compatability issues as people learn the quirks of having VIA and other companies make the chipsets. One thing to think of is that you should look at getting a good HSF if the computer is not going to be in a well air conditioned room. This will offset some of the price savings, but I've found it was needed. Other upgrades may be needed if you are upgrading an older computer. The power supply should be 300w or better. There needs to be excellent cooling so you should think of the airflow in the computer. All in all, it may be more economical to stay with Intel. Either way, both platforms have advantages and disadvantages. For servers, I'd consider P4 because of RDRAM's advantage makes it excell against T-Birds. In multiprocessor comparisons, dual AMD kicks but in so many things, that buying intel is paying more for less performance. Intel released a new P4 compiler, that brings the P4 in line with AMD's chips, or even surpass them. Problem is that most companies already made their apps and would need a massive patch to update it to use the new P4 instructions better.
AMD is a good buy, but weigh your individual needs, where it is going and what it is going in. If you are planning on buying a pre-made system, then it should have good cooling and you should worry less about cooling.
-
[quote]Originally posted by Sowulo:
<strong>
the perceived advantages and disadvantages are still going to be laughed at or scoffed at depending upon which side one is on\
would you want your open-heart surgery performed by the lowest bidder? :D </strong><hr></blockquote>
Watch out Sowulo, if I didn't know any better, I would say you were exposing an Opinion!
-
[quote]Originally posted by Ya_know:
<strong>
Watch out Sowulo, if I didn't know any better, I would say you were exposing an Opinion!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Only if you hadn't figured out my 'opinion' that there was no price difference because of the inherent added ancilliary costs associated with the AMD option.... :D :cool: ....therefore cost is not a relevant factor, only whether the chip meets the need and both AMD and Intel have strengths and weaknesses.....The only time 'one size fits all' is with really ugly clothing. :D
-
Im going to come out with chip Called the Daemon Chip :)
It will beat every chip out, hows that! :)
Specs -
Size: 2 feet x 2 feet
Energy: 120 watts
Speed: 7ghz
Bus: 2ghz
tell then we can argue :)
-
[quote]Originally posted by Daemon:
<strong>Im going to come out with chip Called the Daemon Chip :)
It will beat every chip out, hows that! :)
Specs -
Size: 2 feet x 2 feet
Energy: 120 watts
Speed: 7ghz
Bus: 2ghz
tell then we can argue :) </strong><hr></blockquote>
Not big enough! I want one large enough to double as radiant-heat flooring to cut down on my winter heating bills. On hot days in the summer it could be moved outside under the swimming pool/hot tub.
:D :D :D
-
hahaha that would rock, use your computer to heat your house in the winter hummm :D :D
-
Hmmm! Would that be passive T-Bird power? Might go a long way in solving some of power grid problems in the West! :D
-
hahhaha,
Ill use both Intel and AMD technologies :)
Ill put a sticker on it with "Intel inside"
And make it have the heat as the AMD with a sticker saying "Heat provided by: AMD" :D
