Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 93

Thread: amd vs intel article




  1. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    It was not meant like that but anyhow, yes it may seem a bit biased.

    I always liked Intel but i got my self a couple of Amd chips just to discover they are great!

    I'm just a bit tired of all the whining about cheating all the time. Some people seem to belive all the reviewers are paid of by Intel, even our own one evidently. Even though they don't have any problems trusting benchies found at sites like amd.com :laugh:

    And if it's not money, then it's most likely the software. Because everybody knows it, Intel can't beat Amd, just ain't possible.
    : omg:

    This type of militant brand addiction is so damn stupid, I for one had NEVER gone crazy like that if the tests had shown Amd is faster..

    I'm NOT a pure Intel man due to the fact that I run both types of chips and i like em' both.
    I just hate stupidity of the kind posted above..

    I think part of the reason there are so many "militant" people that back AMD is because AMD is the underdog. Some people just like to root for the underdog and love to see the big guy(s) (Intel) fall on their face(s).

    Why are so many people so "militant" about the underdog? Well I'm not a psychiatrist but I think it has to do with the fact that some people feel like underdogs themselves. And I think in the group of people we're talking about, there are probably a lot of underdogs. Think about it, a lot of the "computer geeks" out there that actually know and understand all this stuff probably weren't on the list of "most popular people" when they were in school. A lot of them were probably considered nerds and geeks by the arrogant "popular" kids. And as any nerd or geek will tell you, they would like nothing more than to see the "popular" kids fall flat on there face.

    Well in my opinion, this kind of mentality can carry over in the real world with out them even realizing it. The so called "nerds and geeks" will symbolize Intel as the popular kid on the block and AMD as one of them...... a nerd or geek..... an underdog. So they would like nothing more than to see Intel fall flat on their face.

    And then there are people like me. I was neither a nerd nor a popular kid in school. I was kinda in the middle I guess you could say. But I don't care about anyone falling on their face. I like AMD over Intel partly because I feel betrayed by Intel.

    Betrayed? Why do I feel betrayed? Well I was an Intel guy before the P4 was released. In fact I was extremely excited to read any and all prerelease articles about the P4 months before it was released. I drooled over any information I could read about the P4. And then the day came when the P4 was finally here. I eagerly read the first review and when I had finished my excitement for the P4 went from good to bad! I was like WTF!!!! What kind of crap is this?! The 1.3GHz, 1.4GHz and 1.5GHz P4 Willies sucked!!! All of them could barely out perform a 1GHz PIII or 1GHz Athlon!!! After doing some more reading my bewilderment turned into anger when I learned that (what seemed to me) Intel had lengthened the pipeline to 20 stages just so they could squeeze out more MHz. It seemed to me like Intel was more worried about selling CPUs based on MHz than actual performance. Sure, in hind sight this lengthening of the pipeline has paid off because today we are looking at a 3.2GHz P4. But at first I was pissed off and it takes me a while to get over being pissed off. I'm still stuck in the days when having a 1GHz CPU meant that you had a 1GHz CPU. But to me it seems like the P4 is a 3.2GHz CPU that is a little less than 3.2GHz. It just doesn't seem like its 3.2GHz.

    So until I get over it, I'm still going to root for AMD. Because I don't want Intel to fall flat on their face because I feel like an under dog, I want them to fall flat on their face because they pissed me off. :devil:

    Another (small) reason I like to root for AMD is because Intel needs the competition....... AMD will kinda help keep Intel in check (so to speak). If AMD wasn't around, god knows how much we would be paying for an Intel CPU today....... probably 3 times as much.
    DAS

  2. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    341

    Default

    When I read the review (I always start with the conclusion) i was a bit shocked. But when I read the test results it turned out to be the same old story. Intel beats AMD on most fronts. The most important results for me are openGL and 3D. I don't care if it takes .3 seconds longer to open an excel sheet. Intel is about 10% faster on average on those tests, but over here they are also about 25% more expensive. So if you want just the fastest CPU go for Intel. If you want more FPS than go for AMD and use the rest of the money to buy a 9800Pro instead of a 9700Pro
    :2cents:
    "Make FPS, not war"

  3. #43
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fincastle, IN, USA
    Posts
    3,776

    Default

    Well, they way I see it, though Im AMD all the way through, Intel beat AMD in the tests, BUT, When they've got an 800mhz FSB, theey should be raping AMD, and well, they arent, for only running a 400mhz FSB AMD is doing a damn good job of keeping up IMO

  4. #44
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by das9092
    I want them to fall flat on their face because they pissed me off. :devil:
    Yep but one thing I can't understand is how people can stand they way Amd treats their customers, paper launches every now and then. Promises never beein kept. When was the first release date on the hammer for example, was it a year ago or what..:?:

    Intel made that big one mistake on the first P4's with the lack on performance and all so therefore you lost faith in them. While Amd keeps doin' all those promises but NEVER keeps em'. I for sure is a hard man to please, if a company fail to deliver I take my buissnes elsewere.. If I were you, I would feel alot more betrayed as a Amd customer rather than Intel customer.

    Not to mention al those PR ****. I know what it's fore but never the less most people think they got a 2.8 ghz computer just because they went out and bought a fancy new XP 2800+.
    And don't think for a second Amd wasn't counting on that when they started the XP@blahblah crap.. :2cents:

    Btw DAS9092 you made a very good point there on the underdog thingy.. :)


  5. #45
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    Yep but one thing I can't understand is how people can stand they way Amd treats their customers, paper launches every now and then. Promises never beein kept. When was the first release date on the hammer for example, was it a year ago or what..:?:

    Intel made that big one mistake on the first P4's with the lack on performance and all so therefore you lost faith in them. While Amd keeps doin' all those promises but NEVER keeps em'. I for sure is a hard man to please, if a company fail to deliver I take my buissnes elsewere.. If I were you, I would feel alot more betrayed as a Amd customer rather than Intel customer.

    Not to mention al those PR ****. I know what it's fore but never the less most people think they got a 2.8 ghz computer just because they went out and bought a fancy new XP 2800+.
    And don't think for a second Amd wasn't counting on that when they started the XP@blahblah crap.. :2cents:

    Btw DAS9092 you made a very good point there on the underdog thingy.. :)

    This isn't only AMD. Intel also has had numerous paper launches. It is common in the industry. Look at Nvidia too. The P4 launch was one huge paper launch. AMD was actually delivering at this time. It all comes in cycles.

    Paper launches don't affect me anyway since I am more than happy with my system right now. I don't need to upgrade yet.

    I'm afraid this thread has become AMD/Intel bashing which wasn't the original point. The thread was to discuss the article which has a pretty inflamatory conclusion that is way off base.

    I have no brand loyalty when it comes to hardware. I buy the best I can get for the money without breaking the bank. Right now the P4 looks quite good but I am not looking to do a major upgrade. When that time comes I'll evaluate what is available and make my decision. AMD or Intel doesn't matter as long as I am getting a great buy on powerful hardware.

    The competition is very good for us so I wouldn't want to see either company out of it.

  6. #46
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    Yep but one thing I can't understand is how people can stand they way Amd treats their customers, paper launches every now and then. Promises never beein kept. When was the first release date on the hammer for example, was it a year ago or what..:?:
    paper launches are annoying, but you have to admit they are not a new thing or solely someing AMD does, intel, nvidia, ATI they all do it.

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    Intel made that big one mistake on the first P4's with the lack on performance and all so therefore you lost faith in them. While Amd keeps doin' all those promises but NEVER keeps em'. I for sure is a hard man to please, if a company fail to deliver I take my buissnes elsewere.. If I were you, I would feel alot more betrayed as a Amd customer rather than Intel customer.
    yes they boo boo on that one. i am not disappointed though, at least unlike some other chip company they dont make us wait up to a year....


    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    Not to mention al those PR ****. I know what it's fore but never the less most people think they got a 2.8 ghz computer just because they went out and bought a fancy new XP 2800+.
    And don't think for a second Amd wasn't counting on that when they started the XP@blahblah crap.. :2cents:
    thats because mhz is not the sole determiner of pc performance. you can whine and moan all you want the simple fact is AMD is doing a good job, and your opinion changes nothing. in fact you should be thanking AMD. alot of intel's reputation is built on the fact that AMD used to make intel's chips... :D they co-authored the x86 architecture, intel tried to screw AMD and steal the patents, AMD sued them and won and now here we are, with someone trying to put AMD's practices in a bad light ROFL!! another reason you should be gateful to AMD is that without their competition, intel would still be making you pay $3000 for a processor like they used to....

    AMD based systems can and do perform on par with anything intel has to offer...mine is proof. after all mr_tweaker, it is outperforming YOUR slightly faster intel based system, and that "friend" says it all...since i have a busy day coming up i leave you to your fun and sophomoric insults :D
    if truth is relative, then is it absolutely true that it is relative?

  7. #47
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    4,246

    Default

    ***sniff....sniff*** anyone smell that? ....smells like smoke.... oh no! the this thread is on fire!

    I've gone too far and need to move on!

  8. #48
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shad0hawK
    thats because mhz is not the sole determiner of pc performance. you can whine and moan all you want the simple fact is AMD is doing a good job, and your opinion changes nothing.

    AMD based systems can and do perform on par with anything intel has to offer... mine is proof. after all mr_tweaker, it is outperforming YOUR slightly faster intel based system, and that "friend" says it all...since i have a busy day coming up i leave you to your fun and sophomoric insults :D
    I don't wine or moan, I just trying to get a few people around here to look at some given facts and then STOP whining about cheating and stuff that doesn't even exist. Look at the review for the 3:rd time, or are you to claiming the tests are bogus..?? Come on how old are you..?

    Don't talk about my machines, I have nothing top of the line, and I never said I had either so stop trying to get some free points on that one.

    This topic is about the latest cpu's from both sides. If they can and do perform on pair then WHY are we seeing reviews like this on the recent hardware..? Explain that..

    I'm sorry but if a grown man can't see something that is typed on the screen in front of him then it's no point trying to explain something either now is there. Now let's stop this as we evidently ain't coming no further on the topic. Your right, AMD won the tests in the review, there ya go, hope you'll sleep better nowing ya won.. ;)


  9. #49
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    494

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    My god man have you been living under a rock..?? Wake up and smell the coffe.. Starting comparing Opteron against P4, sorry to break it to ya but p4 isn't Intels top of the line cpu's.. So then wtf is wrong with using the XP line which is suposed to be Amd desktop cpu's..:?
    so if the p4 isnt the top desktop/workstation cpu, what is? the xeon? wtf?

  10. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    494

    Default

    the fastest clocked mm intel p4 is like what 4.2ghz? and vs the fastest clocked barton, i think which was at 3 something ghz? the barton would own;)

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •