View Full Version : Processor thoughts...
Ever since I went from my old P166 system to an AMD K-6 333MHz system I've loved AMD. I loved the way they offered unrivaled value for money compared to brands such as Intel, without skimping on power like Cyrix and others did.
Since then every system I've bought has featured an AMD processor, and I've been through a myriad of different socket types along the way. A couple of gems stick out, like my Athlon XP 1700+, and my Barton XP-M 2500+ (God did that overclock!).
But with the recent introduction of Intel's Core Duo processors, and the Quad cores processors on the way, I can't help but feel AMD don't have anything solid to come back with at the moment.
Part of you wants to stay with AMD because of die hard fan boyism, but the other side says why not move to Intel for a while, they're making much better products currently.
What do you guys think? Do you always stick with one manufacturer, or switch depending on whichever one will be best for you at the time?
I could see myself moving to an Intel Quad core setup next year perhaps, but I'd still be sitting there feeling guilty for not having stuck with AMD :?
I'd love AMD to turn around and suddenly wow the world with a product they've been keeping secret that will wipe the floor with all the competition, but it's unlikely.
Simple really.
If AMD are better for your needs, go AMD
If Intel suit your needs better, go Intel
I've always used intels upto the last upgrade a few weeks ago when i went dual core amd...only because it was cheaper for me to go that route new cpu/mobo than go core 2 which meant buying new cpu/mobo/ram/maybe vid card as well. Who knows what route i will take in the future I may go back to intel I may not..
The same can be said about graphics card do you stick with ati or nvidia or even switch between which company has the best card at the time..
Like Belso said whatever product suits your needs at that moment in time then thats the product you use
:)
Hi,
Like yourself I once was a diehard fan of AMD and did love my Athlon XP chip but I set out for an upgrade. I looked at all the possibilities and decided I needed a complete upgrade so I posted on these boards a system that I thought would last for at least 6 months, this system however was nearly laughed off the boards. I received lots of replies and suggestions all of which were geared towards the intel conroe systems so I threw caution to the wind and let aria build me a complete intel system. To be prefectly honest my new system is awesome I have only had it for a week but it is simply immense.
I went for the conroe 6400 which was very cheap at the time and it overclocks beautifully on my gigabyte 965 ds3 board, it also runs very cool. If AMD did bring out a new chip that did wow the world I would not think twice about going back but for now the Intel is the way forward I think, I belive AMD a simply 6 months behind Intel on everything they do now and Intel are really being competetive with the price.
Just my thoughts
regards
[quote:4db1018a3d=\"Barley\"]Ever since I went from my old P166 system to an AMD K-6 333MHz system I've loved AMD. I loved the way they offered unrivaled value for money compared to brands such as Intel, without skimping on power like Cyrix and others did.
Since then every system I've bought has featured an AMD processor, and I've been through a myriad of different socket types along the way. A couple of gems stick out, like my Athlon XP 1700+, and my Barton XP-M 2500+ (God did that overclock!).
But with the recent introduction of Intel's Core Duo processors, and the Quad cores processors on the way, I can't help but feel AMD don't have anything solid to come back with at the moment.
Part of you wants to stay with AMD because of die hard fan boyism, but the other side says why not move to Intel for a while, they're making much better products currently.
What do you guys think? Do you always stick with one manufacturer, or switch depending on whichever one will be best for you at the time?
I could see myself moving to an Intel Quad core setup next year perhaps, but I'd still be sitting there feeling guilty for not having stuck with AMD :?
I'd love AMD to turn around and suddenly wow the world with a product they've been keeping secret that will wipe the floor with all the competition, but it's unlikely.[/quote:4db1018a3d]
Intel is more expensive at the moment. I'm not bothered about every little drop of power out of machines. The computer industry is ridiculous the more I think about it. Do you really need quad-core etc? Well, maybe if you want absolute maximum out of games. I doubt anyone here needs 4 cores to do their day to day tasks. Even then, you've got to wait for the optimisation. Quad-core will not be common place for a long time so dual-core AMD is fine, as far as I can see.
Multi-tasking, future proof, fine for games etc. (939 or AM2).
In all honesty, you should be looking for a comptuer that doesn't last 6 months, but more like at least 3 years. Then, it becomes worth the money, imo. Current Athlon X2's fit that job perrectly for less money.
For me it has always been about value for money bang per ££ and, up until the release of conroe, amd have always won this battle hands down the fact that they beat intel on most of the performance stakes was purely a bonus. Personally i NEVER jump onto the new hardware band wagon for 2 reasons, reliability being the main one, hands up those who have bought into Core2 Duo and have had problems? And secondly i like to wait a few months to see how the competition react and this time round the price of X2's fell throught the floor so i snapped one up for my net pc which should see that through the next 12 months or more.
I wont be upgrading my main pc for at least 6 months or so so i am happy to see what AMD bring out early next year and then i will decide whether or not to change allegiance and move over to intel i AM an AMD fanboy at heart so i am hoping its going to be something a bit special.
[Removed at the request of the author]
At the moment I just can't see that AMD have any answer to the processors Intel are chucking out at the moment. The Duo processors Intel are making are very good, it's hard to believe they went from making such cr*p to something so good in one generation.
I think Intel's problem though is going to be that throwing extra cores at the problem is not a long term solution. hopefully this is where AMD will have the upper hand, as I find they implement more efficient ways of processing data.
[quote:7095ffbd7b=\"Barley\"]
I think Intel's problem though is going to be that throwing extra cores at the problem is not a long term solution. hopefully this is where AMD will have the upper hand, as I find they implement more efficient ways of processing data.[/quote:7095ffbd7b]
Sounds familiar doesn't it, except replace 'extra cores' with 'higher clockspeeds' ;)
It's all just a little bit of history repeating itself
I'm sticking with AMD... primary for the following...
1. Hopefully the AM2 socket will stay around for a while (think thats the idea anyhow) so upgrades should be easy.
2. Heat. AMD is always cooler and dont want a hovercraft as a pc.
3. Cost. Seen the price of the intel chips?!? and also the power the get through running full tilt?
4. Always had a good chip off them. I've had many an intel blow up.
Sure, AMD isn't usually the quickest, so if you need raw speed then probably go for Intel past, present and future (except for a brief 6 month span; but who buys a chip for 6 months?!!?); but I prefer quiet and reliable. But then I'm sad and do servers :(
[Removed at the request of the author]
Till you realise a stock £150 Core2duo will probably wipe the floor with a £400+ AM2 FX62. Still i agree anyone looking to upgrade but stay with the same mobo etc then the X2's are great chips and oc quite well if you want them too. However anyone looking to build from scratch and chooses to overlook C2D needs their heads looking at imho as they are relatively cheap for the low end ones yet they are powerful little buggers. I for one will give amd a few more months to bring something out to rival them but i WILL be upgrading early next year and it WONT be to current AM2 cpu's even though i am amd fan, gotta go with the sensible more bang per ££ option and atm that is C2D.
I had a couple of amd machines, kept having compatibility issues with my gfx card
since then iv always gone Intel and never had a problem, my intel machines have outlived my amd ones by over a year, but then when i do upgrade i usually replaced the whole system when doing an intel upgrade.
Aren't AMD bringing out Quad cores too so i read....
Go for AMD... They offer better value for money so you can get more bang for the same buck :)
Go for AMD... They offer better value for money so you can get more bang for the same buck :)
Dude, you're replying to a post which is 5 years old :P.
Dude, you're replying to a post which is 5 years old :P.
HHEEE HHHEEEE heat stroke
I started my first few years of pc building on amd chips, the likes of athlon 2700, 3200 then moved to intel, the likes of core 2 8200, q6600 and my current one, an i7 940 but i have to say both type chips i used lasted the time i had them and were great at the time , i think its a phase thing, amd was a 90s, 2000 era, anything after that was an intel era, who knows, it may swap again, thats just my thoughts though, everone is different.
HHEEE HHHEEEE heat stroke spamming for free delivery
Fixed...
Thread locked. Benzeman on spam watch list. :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.