Intel P4 vs AMD

When you use someones sig to directly disagree with someone and then use this kind of language.

Doesn't this imply that I'm intentionally misleading everyone by omitting parts of an article?

 

baltekmi,

My post was nothing more than a humorous response to your post.
It was triggered by your request for an apology were none was needed from Sophocles. He was simply pointing out facts and you seem to think that AMD was only better than Intel in some articles.

I have too many machines and parts to list in my sig. But my AMD 3800 X2 has many bench marks in this thread and they destroy anything your old prescott can do. Not just by a hair. Intel has competing processors but you do not own one.

This is a forum. Please do not get upset at the back and forth of a bunch of guys typing on computers. It is just silly.

 

From what I read underneath posts, my system is the only one on this thread that yours would beat, and it wouldn't by much. Besides, I'm nearing upgrade time.

You still argue that Intel aren't flattened in every benchmark. They are. Actually open BigDK's link and see for yourself, there's no hiding it, and you can't claim those benchmarks are biased, no-one proves anything that way, and I can see they're not. Tom's hardware shows similar results. The only benchmark that shows Intel doing well is the biased Conroe test. You are, in the polite humourous non-offensive term, standing on some intel ***.
Only in the sense that you run a prescott, and the Northwood, and any AMD CPU is better!

Not me, neither do I think that of Brobear, sophocles, 6402, theonejrs or anyone else who's contributed to this thread.

These guys I think are very helpful, and besides this isn't really a help thread, it's a discussion thread.

That's it in a nutshell.

 

HI, What's up?
well i got my computer as yall know.. ..
and i am getting a ATI 1800.. over the 7900gt.. got any good sites for a really good price?

thanx..

 

I think there is a good chance that Intel can suprise us all this year. I read somewhere Maximum PC that Intel execs are confident that the new "conroe" core not only currently beats a AMD FX-60 but would beat it if overclocked to 2.8ghz. Ofcourse that is statements made by Intel execs that we all know are bias but it is still interesting. And if Intel's does outperform AMD for a quarter or or more, that is just an additional benefit to us consumers. Cheaper prices and more advancement by both companies.

 

Only in an extremely biased first test. In any case, Conroe will be out after the FX-62, which will use DDR2 and have a faster speed, it's a sure bet to flatten the Conroe.

Whereabouts are you, US?
If so, newegg. And wise choice going X1800XT, I'd recommend the 512MB version.

 

I've got a believe it when I see it attitude. When I hear of projected release dates and projected performance levels, I think they should have had the product ready for market when the boasts were being made. We'll see when it shows.

We've been seeing benches and as we know, the AMDs have been shining on bench races, especially the OC(ed) units. Though when you do percentages, the over all differences aren't as significant all the time. What I'd like to see more of is real world time trials. How long does it take to do an encode with AMD vs Intel? How long does it take to run a particular program on an AMD and Intel system? I'd like to see some real time tests instead of just benches. I'd also like to see stock figures as well as the OC(ed) times we get. Most people don't use OC(ed) PCs.

 

Say, for example, set up an X2 4800+ and maybe a 965 converting a three hour film at top quality, then compress the file in Winrar. That'd be good, but of course it can't be official since intel won't compete... Wonder why lol.
FX-62 and Conroe'd be a good bout though!

 

The FX-62 is just a stop along the way. Rumors have it that AMD intends to release the AM3 in the first quarter of 2007 using DDR3 memory. Then add to the fact that the HyperTransport consortium has just released hypertransport version 3.0 which is much faster than 2.0 which is in the current AMD chips and things are going to get really interesting.

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30617


http://www.dvhardware.net/article11126.html


http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/04/24/hypertransport_3_announced/

 

I'll believe it when I see it. Rumors have it. Sounds like a lot of rumors have it, both Intel and AMD.

LOL Can't be done because the owners are biased. LOL Otherwise we could have Intel users do Intel times and AMD owners do AMD times for comparison. Intels may lose right now, but by how much? Intel might not do it because anything that looks like competition sells more PCs for the so called winner. I'd like to see some unbiased testing in the real world.

 

Baltekmi,

I've sat back and watched the posts. I think this forum gets a little silly from time to time, myself included. I'm 61 and the day all the child in me disappears, get a shovel! That's what I always blame "The Child in Me"! Most of the guys (meaning just that, Gals included) here know when someone is kidding. I know I've issued an appology or two myself because someone mis-understood my meaning. Everyone here has!

Most of your "perceived" problems are your own fault. You are a terrific Intel "Fan-Boy"!!! You want them to succeed so bad at times that it clouds your judgement. It's not bad to support something, but it's not good to support it through rumors or "Known" poor sources like the Inquirer. I mean lets face it, things like the Conroe are no more than vaporware. Yes, we have seen (???) one Conroe chip! You can't buy it so it doesn't exist. I would also like to ask you: How much does a test prove when you have the future competing against the here and now? And the "here and now" is stomping Intel right now!

All of this can mean only one thing. Better processors from both Intel and AMD for all of us. No one wants to see Intel fail completely as that would be bad for all of us. Prices of "Premium" CPUs would go up, way up! Intel will come back! I don't think that they will ever hold the same market share that they once did but they will be back. This is good for all of us!

A word about this forum and it's members. We are all characters as we all hide behind a screen name as our "psuedo" self. I could never do enough to repay all of the thoughtfullness, consideration and time taken by most of the members to help me. Yes a few of them got testy with me! They had good reason, like when I couldn't figure out how to do quotes. Brobear in particular bout hit me over the head with a hammer before I saw the light. I deserved it! My Stupid!!! Care to guess who the first member was that congradulated me when I succeeded the first time? What I've learned here in this forum you can't buy in a book, for we learn here from other members experiences. We share our thoughts on the current world of AMD vs Intel. We do speculate a lot on the future, but we do it in an informed way. Most of us read a fair amount of articles on the latest tech. Some of the members even have reasonable sources to back up what they are saying and often post links.

As you already know I own an Intel 3.0/800 Prescott. Without the members of this forum I would never attempted to OC my computer 20%! A number of people have told me that it couldn't be done given my hardware! Well lets see! 960MHz FSB, 320MHz Memory speed in dual-channel. It's almost as fast as Brobears mildly OC'd 3.4 Northwood. It's rock solid and stable as hell. I actually had it running for about a week at 3.70 but ran into problems when encoding DVDs. I put it back to 3.60 and that's where it's been ever since. It's no AMD Dual-Core, but it isn't supposed to be! What it is, is a good deal faster than a stock 3.0, both in numbers and the real world. I say this with great admiration, My present computer would not exist if it wasn't for the time, patience and knowlege of the people in this Forum. I'm proud to be considered a part of it!

Sincerely,
theonejrs

 

Well put. I enjoy speculation and the well put "rumor has it". The only thing that bothers me is using rumor to speculate on who's going to be best in the future. Either side can afford to pay the best minds available, so I still see the future as up for grabs.

It's a big deal that AMD is able to compete with Intel and has been winning customers away. Don't like Intel, I'll buy anything else; I'm opposed to Intel politically, so I'll buy AMD; I like this brand, wouldn't matter if it's Intel or AMD; I'm an AMD fanboy; all reasons for not buying Intel and favoring the competitor with nothing to do with performance. Add to that the performance advantage of high end AMD processors the past couple of years and you have the old single vendor system eroding away. Intel was king of the PC processors till just the past couple of years. Most of the time there was little or no competition.

If AMD hadn't seen a chance to make big bucks in the PC market, we'd still have to deal with stagnant development. What we have is 2 companies in heavy competition to get our money using the "better mousetrap". The consumer wins for a change. AMD is reaping rewards by just being in a competitive market environment, besides having the current tech lead. For the AMD fanboys, note it's only been a modest lead for the past couple of years. For the Intel Fanboys, there was the past, but Intel has a job to get back on top. Fans of both should realize a lot of what is discussed in custom threads means little to the average consumer. For most users, the performance difference is almost negligible. If there is one, they don't push their systems enough to enjoy it.

As for me, I'm a fan of both AMD and Intel. For a desktop, I'd build with AMD for now. Intel would have to deliver the Conroe. I can't build a "vapor". I like the work Intel has done with their mobile processors. I like the duo core Centrino platform. So, if I was buying a laptop, I'd go with Intel. Horrible me, I helped out those horrible coporate terrorists again. One of my friends is thinking about buying a duo core Centrino laptop because I was speaking favorably on the technology. Both Intel and AMD have good chips and I hope we continue to benefit from the competition.

 

theonejrs

You hit the nail on the head. I get berated for the so called rumors and or reports from the inquirer but 2 post before yours to me is the same thing. Brobear commented on it also in a different light. lol so what am i supposed to do. I mean no disrespect or harm to anyone. So I say lets get over it I owe no apoligies to anyone on the one.
Go intel Go intel Go intel YEA!! lol

 

LOL Laughs, winks, and smiles so you know I'm not going for the jugular. The Inquirer? But, rumors are rumors... Some can hold more credence due to the source, but still rumor (which can prove nothing).

 

I think I will start each reply with lol...lol ok go intel!lol-lol-lol

 

People would then think you meant Intel is a joke. Sometimes you can't win for losing. LOL

 

brobear...props!

 

Rumours have lots of things at the moment, but It would be fantastic if the FX-62 can be delivered using the next HyperTransport technology before Conroe gets on its feet, especially if DDR3 will be involved. Sounds a bit further off than that, but with Coroe vapourware as it is, AMD have plenty of time!

 

I believe that's why one uses the word "rumors" to discuss what might be. Rumors are usually a mixture of truth and untruth which doesn't substantiate anything. But before a rumor to be even given consideration it should be repeated by more than one source.

http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2006Mar/bch20060329035542.htm

 

At least Intel is a funny joke

Brobear,

You seem to think AMD gets a lot of sales because of not being Intel.
Intel has the advantage in that area. They have unlimited advertizing which is the only way they could sell the P4 considering how badly it perfromed compared to the P3.
I thought the P4 had its own TV show for a while.
When enough software started to support SSE2 then the P4 could finally hold its own but it has always had to compensate for poor performance by running high clocks. Now even that doesn't help.

You didn't mention how many sales Intel make just from their market presence. Many people blindly follow the Intel path just because so many others have before.
AMD has always had inovation but Intel has always out marketed them.
AMD was the first to 1 ghz but no one even noticed. The Athlon outclassed the P3 badly but Intel got the nod because of loyalty.

Only now that AMD has been flat killing Intel performance wise for a while are people just starting to see the light.
David has had a hard fight with this giant.

A few people who saw the light early might buy AMD because of loyalty but most who buy AMD do so because of a superior product and value.
The early AMDs kicked the Pentiums ass. The K6 beat the P2 in most areas of merit. The K6+2 was thye first to have 3d gaming instructions.
AMD didn't copy. They created new processors to try to better the computing world.