|
|
|
AMD vrs. Intel
|
Original Message
|
Name: Derk
Date: January 29, 2003 at 14:11:56 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. IntelOS: XP Pro and Mandrake 9.0CPU/Ram: AMD 2800+/3gig ddr |
Comment: This is the perfect post to have a good argument on whats better AMD or Intel. AMD is Beter!!!
Report Offensive Message For Removal
|
|
Response Number 1
|
Name: J5im8yo
Date: January 29, 2003 at 14:36:19 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)There is no industry standard two compare the two processors.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 2
|
Name: J5im8yo
Date: January 29, 2003 at 14:38:02 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)After all I like AMD better. Its 166x2 vs 133x4. I can't wait until the Hammers comes out. Its just too bad I bought a new motherboard and it won't be compatiple so I guess 2800+ is the fastest processor I can get on this board. I will get it when it drops to like 100 bux.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 3
|
Name: Amourek
Date: January 29, 2003 at 14:40:56 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)I have an idea, before you post here, go to google and search "AMD versus Intel" or "Intel versus AMD." Read every page and you'll get your answer. Stop wasting everyone's time. By the way, I've noticed that fanboys have the worst spelling, and I hope that's not indicitive of your intelligence.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 4
|
Name: Derk
Date: January 29, 2003 at 14:53:02 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel |
Reply: (edit)Listen Amourek, if you don't whant to read a post about whats beter amd or intel don't click on a post that says "AMD vrs. Intel" OK?
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 5
|
Name: Amourek
Date: January 29, 2003 at 15:55:07 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)Well maybe you should stop bringing up the same topic that has been posted here hundreds of times. Before you post a new thread, it asks you to search for similar threads that have already been posted so you don't waste any of our time. OK?
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 6
|
Name: macdaddy
Date: January 29, 2003 at 16:08:24 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel |
Reply: (edit)Their both the best,the best there is. I own both,there is no difference to human perception. bda bda bda thats all folk's.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 7
|
Name: ExemptX2000
Date: January 29, 2003 at 18:27:39 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)I think Derk just likes arguing with people...LOL Well since I'm posting might as well vote... AMD for its price well over weighs the small performance gain of the Pentium 4s, IMO...
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 8
|
Name: AMDTech
Date: January 29, 2003 at 22:16:02 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)It's been prove time & time again for the Same Clock Speed AMD is 16% faster the Intel cpu. But i got to say i like both of them competition is good for us it make's the prices go down. But if i got to choose i choose AMD cuz to be able to outperform P4 cpu at same clock speed & sometime be close to a P4 performance with 1000 mhz difference & all this with a slower FBS. That tell me AMD make's better cpu architecture then the Intel P4. One more thing i always got Intel system before now it's my first AMD system (make the swith 2 years ago) from now on it's gone to be AMD for me & i got a say about AMD "Try one and you won't regret it"
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 9
|
Name: Derk
Date: January 30, 2003 at 05:09:55 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel |
Reply: (edit)Once again Mr.Amourek (Response Number 5) Stay out of this, if you don't want to read a post about what's better amd or intel don't click on a post that says "AMD vs. Intel" Thanks everyone ells for your comments. It sounds like AMD rules. OK?
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 10
|
Name: AMDTech
Date: January 30, 2003 at 07:07:07 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)Derk Don't get me wrong I like AMD but i don't think AMD rules , it would be more Intel P4 but only because they make more publicity around their P4 cpu's like they do on TV. Intel cpu's is a pretty good tech. they made a good quality product but AMD make them more powerfull (performance)out of their cpu's. BTW:Now AMD has open a new factory in german (already functional) to produce their new 3400+ 64bit copper base core cpu's , so a better quality then the aluminum core but maybe more expensive too ,we'll see.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 11
|
Name: J5im8yo
Date: January 30, 2003 at 13:13:35 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)Amourek is full of ignorance, just move your mouse cursor over to the next topic and have a life.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 12
|
Name: J5im8yo
Date: January 30, 2003 at 13:18:31 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)AMDtech I heard about that factor its called FAB30 or something, in a snowy place =D. Maybe thats why AMD's run so hot lol because they didn't take in the consideration of their environmental temperature. Anyway, rumor has it that the Hammer is going to have a rating of 3500+ and the fact is it has a new socket type right? Btw: I've said this before AMD is using a lower clock rate to beat P4 which is clocked significantly higher. If that's not a sign then go do your google search and check out AMD Athlon XP 7th generation. They have better optimization and architecture than P4's that's why they were able to achieve so. In fact just the Nforce2 boards alone I would've given up P4's for AMD.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 13
|
Name: Derk
Date: January 30, 2003 at 13:40:04 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel |
Reply: (edit)WoW, AMD's 64 bit cpu will be 3500+! When that comes out what will be Intel fastest cpu? By the way I agree with you J5im8yo (Response Number 11).
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 14
|
Name: Edward
Date: January 30, 2003 at 16:51:46 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel |
Reply: (edit)LMAO!!! As much as I don't want to join this conversation, I can't help but make some comments because reading this is just too funny to me. No offense, but some of you guys have this spelling problem that just cracks me up. Half of what is typed in this forum regarding this topic should be filtered with the spelling check feature in MS Words. Anyway, is it true that AMD CPUs surpass Intel's by 16% or is that just a particular model? I've used both and AMD is indeed cheaper than Intel when it comes to perfomace vs. price. Now I'm using Intel because my AMD is just acting up lately. Isn't AMD less stable than Intel. I realized that many companies and large corporate offices use Intel instead of AMD. Why's that? Stability issues? Anyway, please carry on with this topic. It's kinda fun.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 15
|
Name: matt small
Date: January 30, 2003 at 20:48:22 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)amd barton. my 2500+ has 512 cache and i overclocked it to 2.440ghz intel supports terrorism
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 16
|
Name: quackadilly
Date: January 30, 2003 at 23:18:17 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel |
Reply: (edit)Edward... Don't even say that AMD chips are unstable. AMD is as rock solid as Intel, or better. AMD way outperforms Intel for the dollar and for the clock speed. Do some research before you spout false info.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 17
|
Name: Derk
Date: January 31, 2003 at 04:59:19 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel |
Reply: (edit)I agree with you 100% quackadilly (Response Number 16) I have one more Question what the hell are talking about matt small at the end of (Response Number 15)!?!?!?
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 18
|
Name: AMDTech
Date: January 31, 2003 at 09:22:30 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)-J5im8yo yes the new AMD cpu's on copper base will need another soket board wont be the same anymore & yes i already said that AMD architecture are better then Intel but not the material to make it until now. -Edward where not here for a SPELLING course as long as people understand what you want to say , for the rest it's does not matters. & i got to say like Quackadilly get some info's about AMD cuz(because)for the correct spelling ,you f--- happy now! anaway , cuz everybody who noes AMD (Even intel user) will tell you for the SAME CLOCK SPEED AMD IS ABOUT 16% FASTERS.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 20
|
Name: Insect
Date: January 31, 2003 at 14:34:20 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)I don't think so. You'd have to emulate the Mac OS to run it on a PC processor. Unless AMD makes a whole different CPU for Macs. I really don't think Apple will do that. I know very little though.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 21
|
Name: AMDTech
Date: January 31, 2003 at 18:23:50 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)Yes Derk it's true AMD will make x86 CPU's for Apple but this is not confirm yet their just talking about it for now they trying to get the contract will see. But i'm curious if they do make the cpu for Apple are they gone to be able to play games & programms that we do on PC? are they gona be iBM compatible?
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 23
|
Name: AMDTech
Date: February 1, 2003 at 12:23:58 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)I don't know for the prices going down but like i said MAYBE AMD is gona make CPU's for Apple nothing is so sure ,it's just a solution that (i think) Apple is thinking about because we all know like it or not they're still far behind ,Intel & AMD in cpu's speed (GHZ) and still working with S-DRAM (PC-133) platforms. Anyways the future will tell but IF they do it's gona be good for Apple & AMD it would probaly make Intel nervous.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 24
|
Name: Derk
Date: February 1, 2003 at 20:16:27 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel |
Reply: (edit)I was wondering why AMD was going to make a 64-bit cpu? I think I know why AMD is going to make a 64-bit cpu! Because, the Apple OS X needs a 64-bit cpu. Is there any other reason AMD would make a 64-bit cpu?
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 25
|
Name: NubstaOfAMD
Date: February 1, 2003 at 21:30:35 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)ahem, u understand that argueing over a computer/internet post, makes me laugh soooooo much because u can never win? AMD is better for your moneh, but if u insist on using P 4/4m's(etc) then go for it its ur moneh not mine =P and i have spoken =)
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
|
Response Number 26
|
Name: AMDTech
Date: February 2, 2003 at 12:05:45 Pacific
Subject: AMD vrs. Intel
|
Reply: (edit)No not for Apple Intel too is going for 64 bit cpu it's all about evolution ,time for something else.
Report Offensive Follow Up For Removal
|
Use following form to reply to current message:
|
|

|