Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 93

Thread: amd vs intel article




  1. #71
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aznx
    look at what i started:confused:
    lol no worries, we are all men and full of totesterone and if we weren't 10 million km away from eatch other we could arange a Ultimate Fighting contest. The winner aka the survivor could win a brand new videocard or a free fully paid for visit at the dentist.. :D :D

    Gee I would love that! More violence!! Maybe I could bring my nightstick from work and the show would be even more splendid.. :hammer:






  2. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    :rofl:

    Gee this thread has gone way off topic, and since no one seem to stick to it then we better close the case. I for one Is still going to check out reviews before buying new hardware. But if you think otherwise then DO otherwise.. :D

    Anyway I'm of for work, see ya guys in a couple of days, back friday..


    ahhh gotta alove hectic work schedules!! did you miss me? i read some of your posts, they are amusing. :D

    anyway back to topic then...the article here is the infamous quote from the conclusion:

    While supporting a 400MHz FSB, this is no where near enough to handle what is needed by today’s games and applications. AMD simply has lagged behind on the Athlon front, pouring more attention to the Athlon 64.

    as i said before, this is a rather idiotic statement. in his own review the xp3000 busts 200 fps in ut2003, which is very playable...how can he say with any amount of seriousness that 200fps is no "where near enough to handle what is needed by today’s games"? ROFL!!! the p4 scored 242 while the AMD scored 223, a difference of 19 fps. 19 fps from the 200 is not a whole lot ROFL!! in certainly not enough to jusify saying AMD chips "is no where near enough to handle what is needed by today’s games" what a joke!!

    as far as comparing the opteron to the p4 AND the p4 xeon, AMD beats them both. dont make any poor excuses such as "well the opteron is not a destop cpu" it is finding it's way into desktops, especially the 240, and 242. there is no law saying "thou shalt not put opterons in desktops!!" although i am sure intel would like it if there were! alot of people i talk to(and myself for that matter) are waiting for the nforce3 boards. even at that when talking about comparing the best intel and AMD have to offer, AMD takes the win. best vs best...period.

    the same goes for mhz to mhz. i posted my score with a xp2000 running @ 2170 mhz with a ti4400 tweaked out as well. i have yet to see a similarly tweaked intel system beat it, and until i see a p4 2.2 with teh same vid card beat it all i can say is put up or shut up. i play games everyday at this speed, in ut2003 i play with 4X AA in 1280x1024 and set to best image quality with a framerate averaging in the mid 50's to low 60's depending on the map!
    when some "reviewer" says the cpu i am running is "nowhere near" enough for "today's games" all i can do is laugh my @$$ off at the total ignorance of the statement...bias like this casts serious doubt on credibility.

    anyway i just got me a xp2500 barton, and i am going to tinker with it, so far it runs great @ 2.2 with default voltage.
    if truth is relative, then is it absolutely true that it is relative?

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Well if ya read my posts proper then ya would have seen that I did comment his statement as biased. However I really think he meant FUTURE apps and not the one we play with today. Most of us have discovered the fact that the XP line comes further and further back for every new released cpu they compare.

    The XP line isn't going to stand the competition mutch longer and therefore the 64 bit processing will save Amd. but my friend, this review is all about a XP vs P4 cpu and nothing else. I have never claimed something bad at all about Opteron, exept the price.. :(

    If you like Amd use them then, I run both but the P4 can't be beaten in my apps, no matter what XP you bring on. Let's face it, compared to my 2.26 ghz P4 the Amd 2100+ crawls when encoding movies and sutch.. :) And oc/tweaking doesn't help so don't even go there.. You can't tweak new instructions into a cpu which isn't there in the first place.. :devil win

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker
    the P4 can't be beaten in my apps, no matter what XP you bring on.


    "did you say "any" xp processor? how about one running the same clock speed? 2.26 mhz vs 2.26 mhz, sounds fair to me! i only spent $90US on this processor, how much did your p4 2.2 cost? :D
    if truth is relative, then is it absolutely true that it is relative?

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    4

    Default

    So I guess it looks like my homemade benchmark won't do a lot in the world of high end computing. Maybe I can create a website and do a little more programming and get it into the world of business and workstations.

    It's very obvious from the results of the tests being done with it that the Athlon is much better for a workstation processor doing typical Business apps.

    Wonder why AMD is having so much trouble getting them into businesses around the world.
    I have an old piece of crap PC that hopefully will get replaced before my 3 year old graduates from High School.

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Fincastle, IN, USA
    Posts
    3,776

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The__tweaker


    Let's face it, compared to my 2.26 ghz P4 the Amd 2100+ crawls when encoding movies and sutch.. :)
    Well, My 2100+ with 512mb of SDRAM encodes a 2hr DVD movie to MPEG in right around 3hrs. Thats including the Audio, Multiplexing, and cutting in half for two discs. And, I havent had a bad encode yet. And, if thats not quick enough for ya, then you really need to quit sitting in front of your computer 24/7 and get a life, rather than sitting here watching your movie encode.

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    caves of bedrock
    Posts
    3,129

    Default

    wooh!!!! :wow:
    i did listen that something like this is going on in "Publication Discussion" forums, but never knew it will be so amusing.
    everyone has a point, no matter they understand wat they are talking or not.
    nice :cheers:

    Originally posted by Wiggo
    [b]As the old sayin' goes that I use in these topics, Certain horses for certain courses
    so did anyone listen that statement? : omg:
    Latest Microsoft Security Updates.
    Last Updated:
    10th MARCH


    If you are a security freak: Use Microsoft Baseline Security Analyzer (NT/2000/XP/2003)
    ======================
    icq : 203189004
    jabber : asklepios20@jabber.org
    =======================
    Linux user since: April 24, 2003 312478
    yabaa dabaa doo...
    Customized for 1024x768

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rkane
    So I guess it looks like my homemade benchmark won't do a lot in the world of high end computing. Maybe I can create a website and do a little more programming and get it into the world of business and workstations.

    It's very obvious from the results of the tests being done with it that the Athlon is much better for a workstation processor doing typical Business apps.

    Wonder why AMD is having so much trouble getting them into businesses around the world.
    Actually, your benchmark is fine. It's not bloated with stuff that can skew the results like a lot of other benchmarks out there. It seems to be pure Excel and nothing more.

    But that's also what's wrong with it..... It only does Excel. So if you wanna know how fast your system is in Excel, your benchmark will do an excellent job. ;)

    As for AMD not being able to break into the corporate market with significance.... well I couldn't tell you exactly but it might have something to do with the fact that a lot of people out there still perceive AMD as being the generic brand. And although most people usually don't have a problem buying the generic brand for their personal use, corporations usually won't touch generic brands with a ten foot pole.

    Take my boss for example. I work for a growing company and every time we hire on a new person in the office, my boss gives me the job of buying a new workstation for that person. But he won't let me get anything that doesn't have a P4 in it. I keep trying to talk him into an AMD system but he won't hear of it.

    Well one day I asked him, "Why won't you let me get a system with an AMD CPU in it? They are better for the type of office work we do here in the office?"

    His response was, "Well isn't AMD generic? Aren't they the cheap brand?"

    I said, "NO! The use to be but now they are just as good as Intel with respect to power and reliability. If not better in some ways..... Like office applications."

    He looked at me and thought for a few seconds and then said, "Just order 'em with Pentiums."

    I shook my head as I turned too walked away. : omg:

    The thing he doesn't realize is the computer he relies on the most, our main file server downstairs, is build around a single AMD Athlon 1600+. It is a custom system built by the third party company he hired to set up his network when he moved into his office(s). (I was hired in after the network and offices were setup.)

    Companies are just weird like that.
    DAS

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amd_man2003
    And, if thats not quick enough for ya, then you really need to quit sitting in front of your computer 24/7 and get a life, rather than sitting here watching your movie encode.
    lol no that's not fast enough at all, time is money and that may do if ya encode like one movie a week but it's not fast enough if you need plenty of em' done per day.. ;)

    Oh and 3 hours with that pc chip/sd ram mobo? Don't over exaggerate my man..


  10. #80
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shad0hawK
    how about one running the same clock speed? 2.26 mhz vs 2.26 mhz, sounds fair to me! i only spent US on this processor, how much did your p4 2.2 cost? :D
    Yep $90 + $20-50 bucks for some better cooling in order to manage that oc I assume.. ;)

    Well ya see same speed won't help because the lack of SSE2 instructions makes every XP quite slow in those apps compared to the P4 line of cpu's. And if you think It's B.S just because I mentioned it so ask someone else and they might explain to ya what SSE2 means.. :devil win


Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 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
  •