Intel P4 vs AMD

Seems you need to take some lessons on being a good consumer if you have that many problems. I've not had a bit of trouble with my PC and I've had it for about 3 years. The memory isn't limited. I have 1GB installed and the system can handle up to 4GB if I wanted or needed to install that much. It's currently using 2 512MB Micron Modules. It has 4 slots, so to max it out, I'd have to switch to 1GB modules. Doubt I'd ever need that much. So the most I'd do that's cost efficient would be to add 2 more 512 MB modules to get 2GB total. Ample for anything I'd need to do with this small processor. Besides, as you pointed out and I've stated before, factory boards aren't built for overclocking. They're intended to be stable work platforms. Which mine has proven to be a very good one. The chipset response on my system is good for the processor I have. It has an 800MHz FSB. Most systems now only have that. Only some of the new super PCs like the one I mentioned have a true 1GHz FSB. Currently I only know of 2 companies that make the PC-8000 memory that can exploit those capabilities. But 800MHz FSB on a 3 year old PC isn't bad. I don't think I've suffered any obsolescence there. You wanted bench results, well the one I supplied with my PC compares to a stock 2800 AMD. You can go back and check that. And since we're speaking of factory systems, there are factory AMD machines. They suffer from some of the same build flaws as the Intel systems. They don't lend themselves to the enthusiast either. Glad you mentioned that what you're bragging on is a personally built designer PC.

You keep talking about the new advances made by AMD that make them superior to Intel. Yet, you are using an older CPU with the Venice core. A lot of material you're handing out is coming from publications and the net as well. I'm aware you can overclock a system, but you don't have any of the newer CPUs or motherboards with the latest chipsets. I priced some of the components and to build either the high end Intel or AMD, it would take more than the cost of a decent 3GHz+ factory machine. Just an Asus board with the new 955 chipset goes for over $200. The comparable board for AMD is $1 more at NewEgg. So no cost savings there. The CPUs for high end PCs are similar. No savings there either. By the time one buys a CPU, motherboard, case, power supply, ROM and burner drives, the optional floppy, hard drives, sound card, graphics card, speakers, modem, keyboard, mouse, monitor, printer and software, then budget in for miscellaneous like themal compound, solder and the like. Lets not forget the cables, they're not free either. Heavens forbid if one doesn't already have all the handy tools to work with. A nice little anti-static mat only runs about $40. A high impedance meter comes in handy sometimes. Priced a good one lately? As an enthusiast, you've accumulated a lot you can use for doing a build. For the average person, they would get sticker shock rounding up everything needed to put a complete PC package together. Oops, I forgot, I'm not supposed to know what's under the hood.

Getting back to my PC it has a good sound card and graphics cards and both can be upgraded any time I wish. Pop the side of the easy open case and there's the slots and a couple of screws on the back of the case and one just slides them out and the new in. Forgot, I'm not supposed to know that am I. Just don't know how to get under the hood on one of those things. The current cards are good and the 4.1 stereo sound with the woofer is good enough to produce nice sound. I've never encountered problems with my current graphics so no need to update that either. Don't know where you got it that these things can't be upgraded. The factories just don't like anyone trying to clock up the systems to where they become unstable. That they're not built for. I've yet to need it either.

Let's just say I know what the BIOS is and how it relates to the CPU and memory. Be rest assured I can flash one for updates and change the settings when I need to.

We've both discussed equipment neither of us have. I'll tell you now, I'm not running out tomorrow to buy any top end chips. Both AMD and Intel make good equipment.

Why not if Intel is comparable?

Like other discussions, you've decided to attack the person instead of the issue. I usually have a decent hold on concepts when I discuss them and believe it or not, I can get under the hood and have. Nowadays I don't get into personal attacks. Since you've decided to use that tactic, [bold]The Discussion Is Now Over.[/bold]

 

Brobear,
I don't think Sophocles was trying a personal attack. I thought you guys were just having the usual heated debate. Sophocles seems to like the arguements like this with you because your intelligent and determined.
Good information often comes from both of your arguments when pointing out possible errors in each others and my statements.

I don't wish to loose any good information partners.

For reference the FX57s cost a lot more largely because of their status at the top of the enthusiast heap and the upper limit to the multiplier is unlocked for additional OCing flexability.
The mainstream processors can be clocked to similar speeds an can yield close to the same results.

While I have always been an AMD guy, it is largely because I'm cheap.
You can have a lot of fun at low cost if you get into putting your computers together. But time is a problem for some with family life and all.
Because I am cheap I still intend to get a 200 dollar Pentium D 2.8 dual core when I get a chance. Just because.

 

brobear

I don't intend to insult you personally but you argue out of your league on occassion and sometimes way out of your league. Surfing the internet can provide only so much information but if you don't fully understand or know how to use it then your just guessing. I don't need lessons to become a good consummer that's why I choose to build instead of buying. The best costing and high performing computers are always in the hands of those who build their own. To make my computer cost me about $1200 including DVD Roms and all, to purchase a computer equal to mine would cost you over $4000. Where come from that sounds like one hell of a deal.

Before you accuse me of attacking your person, go back and read your posts again and then wash your hands.

Your Dell only handles two gigs of memory not 4. The 2 gig limitation for a desktop is only recent. It might have four memory slots but they can only hold 512 megs each. However realizing that I can be wrong I'll look it up at their site. I used Micron memory back in the 90's but they're not on the list of top suppliers and most of their memory is CAS3. If you want quality you get Crucial, OCZ, Corsair, Mushkin and a few others. None of them actually make their chips, the buy them and then bin them for perfomance and then program them with their instructions. Samsung supplies the best all around chips although windbound is making a comeback. All of those names I just mentioned have their chips made by those two manufacturers. The Samsung tccd chips are the best all around and Corsair just obtained exclusive rights to them.

I'm not talking about things that I know nothing about, I've easily built better than 100 PC's in the last decade and I've repaired, upgraded, or worked on better than 1000 computers. I do make money at this on the side. I also consult to Hillsborough county school board, the school that I'm employed at has 597 computers (almost all Dell, a few compaqs).

[bold]Now this argument ends![/bold]

 

I was wondering about the TCCD on some of the Newegg Corsair memory.
Didn't know what it was.
I can't seem to keep up with you guys. I am reading the posts but I don't seem to be able to type and research as fast.
My new job is killing my body. Not so good on the mind either.

 

64026402

TCCD memory is highly binned and can almost guarantee timings of 2-2-2-5 T1 on any system. I'm not researching anything, everything that I'm posting is from memory or previous research that I did before building my current system. I think that I ruffled the fur on the bear a bit, he'll get over it.

 

The Intel/AMD debate never ends. It just changes as the new hardware comes out.
I would like to get the word out about CCE in particular. The Rebuilder encodes seem to favor the Athlon 64 procs right now and a lot of people like me didn't know.

My dual 1.8ghz and 2.0ghz machines have been stable encoders that run about the same speed on DVD rebuilder as 3.2 ghz single P4s.
2-3 hours for the longer harder movies. Less for the easier ones.

When Sophocles first switched from his hot rod P4 to a mild sounding AMD 3500 I was skeptical. The times at just 2.4 ghz were less than half for the same movies.

I did a AMD3200 budget upgrade to test this and found at stock speed it would cut my times in half. I bumped up to 2.5 ghz and got similar results to sophocles.

 

hey, my computer fried last night, got any ides,. im using my sisters 728 mgherts, with a 8 mg video, and 128 mg of ram......
HELP ME!!!

 

If your Cheap like me then an OCable Athlon 64 Venice core would be my recomendation. If you don't build your own computers then there is always a small computer shop that would put it together for you cheap.
Retail computers can be cheap but the lower end ones may disappoint in the performance area.
As Brobear said. Mainstream computer sales are geared toward stability for warranty not performance.
Although ultimately a well built custom machine will be much more reliable in the long run. Cooler heat sinks, ball bearing fans in the power supply, better quality motherboards, like Asus, Abit, Msi, ect...

Retail units cut cost where possible to keep the price competitive.

 

Sophocles

The 2 PCs at the top are my P4 and the Sandra benchmark P4, both 2.8GHz. The lower ones are the 2800, 3000, and 3200 AMD Opterons. For crappy memory, in stock configuration, the comparable pentiums did much better. I'm sure you will give some reason why AMD is still better. These are the unbiased Sandra benchmarks you like to quote. In fact the 3200 AMD is supposed to be comparable to a 3.2 GHz P4.



As for the memory capacity of my computer, I can assure you it is 4GB. Obviously in your vast store of knowledge, you've been missing something the past few years. There was no 2GB limit on Dell P4s, not for the past few years anyway. In fact, if you'd paid attention, the info was in the Sandra report I posted at Xentarium when we were talking about PCs over there. I'll post it again for you. Toward the bottom you'll notice that the capacity is 4GB and there are 4 slots.




If that isn't enough proof, you can go to Crucial.com and use their help tool for finding memory upgrades. Just enter the Dimension 8300 and it will give you the options and the system capacity.

There have been a lot of advancements over the past few months. In fact some of the parts are very difficult to buy at this point. The PC-8000 RAM from OCZ and Corsair for instance. Then you have the 955X Intel chipsets (released in late April and just showing up on motherboards). I've not heard anyone mentioning it, but the P4 EE CPU that came out in late February is really setting new records with the new motherboards that use the 955X chipset and the new PC-8000 RAM (it's clockspeed is 3.73 GHz and the FSB is 1066MHz). I can't afford it though.

These things are so new, I haven't even seen the benchmarks on them. There's something to be said for a system with advanced chipsets by Intel that can exploit these faster RAM modules. It's all about architecture and these systems can process as well as run fast. I haven't even added the part about these being tunable for overclocking. I don't think I'd want to though. They already run hot.

Before anyone points it out, the new RAM's latency is still a bit high. The OCZ speeds are 5-5-5-15 and the Corsair is 5-4-4-9. Obviously at this stage, the Corsair is the better choice. New tech and they say the speeds will be reduced. THere's even new cooling technology in the pipelines, thin film and liquid metal are some things being worked on. Still Sci-Fi, but they're working on it and hope to have some marketable items in 06. The faster the Processors and RAM get, the more heat. Air and water aren't going to cut it with the newer systems and the heat they generate. Even those cool running AMDs are starting to get hot as they speed them up.

Forgive me for not being up on overclocking the way you are Sophocles. I'm still not as superior as you are. I can't remember everything like that 2GB RAM limit, and all those latency specs on RAM. Heck, I still have problems remembering all the brands. However, I am a good hand with tools, I know quite a bit about PCs besides what I read. I know the inside of my PC as well as most enthusiasts know theirs. Overclocking is a bit overrated. Most anyone that knows how to flash a Bios and can hit the F2 key on startup can reset the clock speeds on a system that is set up to do so. Designer parts, not factory, I know. I'm not the moron about clocking that you make out. I'm just not as enthusiastic about telling the world how great I am because I know how do it. Mess around and up the voltage and it's awful easy to mess things up. Fry the RAM and they don't give you free replacements, CPUs either. That's why I'm really not into overclocking. I actually prefer the safety of the more stable platform.

I'm willing to spend a few more bucks for a chip that will accomplish the speeds without having to heat things up. Now that prices are down, it would only cost about $200 for me to up my Dell PC to 3.4GHz (less if I can find someone to buy a good used 2.8GHz P4). I already have the fast FSB, which I made a point of getting a few years back. THe PC has ample memory, even if it isn't the best. I planned against it becoming obsolete too soon. You were dead wrong about factory PCs being obsolete out of the box. It depends on what one purchases. If you want to purchase obsolete items up front, speak for yourself.

You make it sound like a person has to have a degree in math, physics, and science to build a PC. All a person has to have is some good electronics skills and be able to work on the parts without destroying them. Just add some decent PC operation skills and it's no big mystery. A little thermal paste goes a long way. I know about that too. Kids are building PCs nowadays. I must admit, they probably do it faster and better than I can. But I'm not going to worry about frying any circuits either. Now that my son is out of school, I'm thinking abot starting a little build project when the weather gets cooler. I don't like to waste the good weather this late in the year. Plus I'm in no big hurry, my tastes for clock speeds show that.

You're right, and don't worry about ruffling the bear's fur, it's thick enough. You can have the thread to do as you will. I just couldn't let those derogatory statesments go unanswered. I'm sure you'll have some spiffy reply, but I've said all I need to on the matter. Have a good one and enjoy your designer PCs. I've had about enough of this. As Donald pointed out, as long as there's Intel and AMD, somebody is going to want to argue who has the best. They both have good hardware. Look at what were were using 5 years ago.

 

Actually I believe that everyone should build a PC. I isn't that difficult. It can get technical as you try to do different things but you learn as you go.
Trouble shooting may give you a headache but usaually you just buy matching parts, assemble, and join a forum for support.

Your bench marks are for XPs not optetron or athlon 64s.
XP processors have a low bandwitdh problem.
None of the Hypertransport Athlon series have any such difficulties.

 

Hmm
I think I hit the wrong button. But as for SiSoft, for the Memory and Cache benchmarks, it is very limited as to the number of processors used. Those were the only ones for those speeds. The pentium doesn't have DDR2 RAM or Hyperthreading, so that isn't giving the Intel any advantages. I was using the benchs comparable to what I'm using, no advantage to skew it for either.

 

Give me your model number and I'll show you that you have a 2 gig limit. Secondly you've chosen another visual format to prove your point. Use the same one that we've been using. Secondly what you're showing isn't measuring actual speed, just the true clock speed. In other words those are not a benchmarks just system information.

I read my post again and yours showed the first signs of personal challenge. You know that I have far broader range of knowledge regarding PC's than you do yet you choose to challenge without information that you find here and there on the net. In Fantasy Football I have enough sense to admit little to no knowledge of the game and ask for advice.

To quote Lao Tsu " Seeing something once is better than hearing about it a thousand times." To use that quote, building a PC once is better than snippets of information that you've practiced. Once you've built your first PC you'll understand. Store bought PC's limit everything that you see and have access to. Homebuilt PC provides access to dozens of setting not available in the store boughts. I'm pretty sure that the chipset used on your PC is the limiting factor in adding memory to it, it can't cache it. How do I know, you're using a Northwood processor.

Surfing the net on how to fly a jet will render information but it doesn't mean you can fly a jet.

 

Sophocles

You're really starting to sound like a parrot with your prepared little speeches. I'm starting to wonder where you get your material. I am king of PC builders and overclocker's anonymous, do you guys have a union? Even Donald agrees there isn't that much too it. Overclocking is simple if you have a BIOS that has the options to reset the multipliers and voltage. One is best going by guidelines (specs) already set up by reputable testers and the limits set by the manufacturer. No brain surgery involved.

I realize you need to be right on everything, but you have that 2GB limit all wrong. You need to go back and change and add a few things to your song and dance routine. Here's what Crucial has to say. Notice they say the 8300 uses 4GB of RAM. It's the first step in their Advisor tool.

Listen to your own quote. I'll try this again.



Stop being the parrot. A Dell 8300 can hold 4GB, meaning your supposed 2GB limit is just some fabrication you came up with in your mind. Where did you get that anyway? If I've been led down the path, it's been by SiSoft, Crucial and Dell. Where did you get your info?

Get constructive and stop being so abusive. I could care less who you quote. I also don't care whether you believe I know how to build a PC or reset the clock speed on a PC or not. It's no big deal. To listen to you, it sounds as though you had invented the wheel. What you do is a hobby. Most anyone can do it if they spend a bit of time and have some basic skills. Granted there are little things one needs to know while doing the assembly. But as Donald pointed out, one gets the entire parts list and put it together like an erector set. The parts usually fit together in a predetermined manner. When in doubt, consult the guide or get some help. There's even people who help others without adding the sarcasm and derogatory statements. Go figure.

It doesn't help to try to belittle others. I remember how hostile you become when people question your intelligence or knowledge on a subject. Have a nice day.

 

I never said that you couldn't plug in 4 gigs, I said your system can't cache it which means your system will actually slow down with 4 gigs because it can't use it(now you can look up cache on the net). The difference between you and I is that this parrot knows from experience what he's talking about and the other one has to constantly surf the net for his answers since he doesn't really know them. There was no slur in that line just the truth. If you have a Dell 8300 with a Prescott then you might be able to use four gigs. Check the link below and it's newer and faster PC than yours.


http://reviews.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/desktops/0,39023849,10004197,00.htm

Then why are you the only one that's doing it. I never called you a parrot or anything else, all that I said is that you don't have enough experience to support your arguments or that you've never been under the hood and that you're out of your league and those are all true statements. You're bent on trying to subjugate me on something to which you are a novice. This is why I backed out on our previous discussions because you don't know when to quit, not because I was taking it personally. I preferred to preserve our friendship rather than win at a pointless argument. You on the otherhand would have never backed down even when you're wrong.

I never said overclocking was all that difficult, and for that matter I never said that building a PC is all that difficult, all that I've said is that you've never done either. Now matching components, boodling them and then tweaking them does have a overall degree of complexity, that's why most people choose to buy.


Look at Doc409's recent diffiulties and he's an experienced builder. The parts that I've chosen are not for the marginally inexperinced.

 

There are usually successful benches for most CPUs and mobos. There are voltage limits one goes by when upping the power to stabilize a system. Settings are in the BIOS for adjusting the FSB and the multipliers, if unlocked. The key is that the settings are in the BIOS. Is there a mystery that we should all be let in on? It was mentioned earlier and then reenforced by you just recently that you have to have custom equipment and not factory. It's also a fact that some companies supply more OC friendly BIOSes than others. So it is something to look for when compiling a component list. Now where's the mystery? Tell us what is so difficult about OCing a PC? The only trick I know is to do adjustments in small increments and do benches often and closely monitor the system. It isn't difficult to blow the CPU, memory, or a hard drive if one isn't careful. As for getting into trouble, I've seen people get into trouble with simple loop circuits on computer control systems. Isn't solving problems part of the charm. Or is it proving one is superior?

Of course you're right as always Sophocles. No one can be right except you. If the facts differ from what you say, by all means change the phrasing so it appears you just didn't add all you meant to say. 2GB limit goes to problems with the Cache and then the system will carry it but slow down. Crucial says support as does SiSoft and Dell. I only said there was no 2 GB limit as you stated. Once again your superiority shines through. Thanks for showing my shortcomings and inability. I'll endeavor to become a better computer enthusiast. I'll try to model my skills after yours.

Just out of curiosity, how do you know what I've done or not done? Because I freely admit I'm not an OC guru such as yourself, that doesn't mean I don't know the parts of a PC very well or how to install them. As you agreed, you didn't say it was difficult to adjust a BIOS. I've flashed BIOSes before and made adjustments. No big deal. I vaguely remember your telling me about making an error on your system not to long ago that set you back for a while. Guess even the master isn't perfect.

 

brobear

Apparently there is a mystery because all the steps you just mentioned are wrong or over simplified. Yes there's voltage adjustments that can in some cases stabilize an overclocked CPU but it can also make them unstable or overheat them and they're not all set in the bios some require manual pin setting. My CPU requires no voltage settings of any kind but my memory did. My board requires some manual settings as well that aren't in the bios. Until about two or three years ago there were no bios settings and all overclocks were done with physical settings made on the motherboard a fact that only us old dogs remember.

Many CPU's don't require or cannot receive higher voltages, the Intel Prescott is just such a CPU. To overclock an AMD CPU you might be adjusting both the clock multiplier and the frontside bus.

Trivia question. If you've made a bad voltage or overclock setting and your system won't boot, what do you do?

Memory also might require voltage adjustments for stabilization. And then there's memory timing settings crucial to overclocking the CPU because if they fail then it all fails. System memory speed and quality has to be purchased to match your intent and not the system. There's the memory divider settings. Now the CPU multiplier, the frontside bus, and memory timings are all affected by each other (they're multiples). Make one setting on one of them then you will probably have to make another setting on all of them.

Another trivia question do we raise or lower the frontside bus and why?




Actually no motherboard supplies their own bios' they're made by independent companies such as award or phoenix. The same goes for the chipsets they too are made by different companies. For instance Via, sis, nvidia, Intel, and now even ATI all make chipsets. The chipset on the Dell 8300 using the Northwood is of the 845G/VE variants but they only allow for 2 gigs of memory. I built a system using an Asus board about 18 months ago that used that chipset. The newer 8300 uses the Intel 775 chipsets which is incompatible with a Northwood they only work with Prescott's and they can handle 4 gigs.

We've been in close online contact for almost 17 months, you've been telling me off and on for all that time.

One final point, this entire post took me less than 15 minutes and I didn't surf the net once, this is all from memory. Now you try that.

 

I thought that Brobear had the Prescott, from previous posts. I could be incorrect.
The memory support for a Dell would depend upon the board used as well as the processor. Is there a problem with the Northwood when accessing more than 2 gigs?

 

64026402

No the trouble is with the chipset(845g) that was used with the Northwood. brobear told me that he had the Northwood because so did I. The Northwood was still a better processor though. The Dell 8300 series covered a lot of territory with some reaching 3.2GHZ or higher but they are Prescotts.

 

brobear


I'm not trying to prove that I'm more intelligent than you are. A greater knowledge of PC technology doesn't mean that either it just means that I know more about something than you do. I've always valued your intelligence and you know it. It might seem like I'm trying to be know-it-all but, remember I've asked for your advice regarding Fantasfootball because I'm a total idiot when it comes to sports. At DVDrip you'll notice that I never posted in the 321 thread because I had nothing to offer. When I have a question about DVDremake I always ask bigo or Vurbal. Although I'm knowledgeable about AMD CPU's it's because I've worked with them but the truth is I know more about IntelCPU's because over the last 10 year I've used them more. But right now AMD is it, maybe next year it will be Intel again, that's one of the reasons that I'm holding off on dual core (wqating for a price drop is another). If you want to find an area that Intel is winning in then you should've researched the Dothan core m-class CPU.

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20050525/pentium4-19.html#_under_heavy_cpu_load

 

Sophocles
I mentioned the P4 Northwood. I'm glad you agree it is a good CPU. But once again you're wrong in your assumptions. Where did you get your information? Not all Dell 8300 models using the P4 Northwood used the 845G chipset. Interestingly enough, my PC uses the Intel 875P chipset. That chipset supports 4GB of memory. Intel was supporting 4GB RAM with the 860 chipsets. With the 845s the 845G was limited to 2GB, but the G wasn't the only 845. The 845 was able to support up to 3GB of RAM when using SDR.

I don't see my needing 4GB or RAM or wanting to invest high dollars for that much in the near future, but the possibility is there. My 8300 with the 875P chipset sure wasn't obsolete out of the box. The board with an 875P chipset can utilize a more advanced CPU and memory over what I currently have in use. Glad you mentioned over 3.2 as well, as it can handle more.

I believe that may be the first time I mentioned the chipset. I wouldn't want you wandering around being wrong in the future. But then you are never wrong, you only make oversites. You weren't referring to an 8300 with an 875P chipset, but the one with the 845G chips.

That statement does imply that Dell only used the Northwood with the 845G chipset, which is totally erroneous as shown by my Dell 8300 with a Northwood processor and the Intel 875P chipset. You need to start getting all the info and stop just relying on your memory and what you've run into personally.

You are the master of OCing around these parts, I conceded that to you. With your overwhelming knowledge of clockspeeds, you should have realized something when I mentioned a 800 MHz FSB. First off, the 845G chipset supports the 533/400 MHz systems. Having a 800MHz FSB sort of eliminated the possibility of mine having the 845G chipset right off. Seems the master either forgot something or was never aware of it.

I realize you've made a hobby of OCing your custom PC systems. Interesting hobby if that is how one wants to spend their time. One place you made another error; I never told you I couldn't build a PC. In fact we've never discussed what my technical skills are. I've constantly listend to you tell of your accomplishments though and boast of your abilities working with PCs. Good for you. I've often preferred having you work with others on PC solutions because you enjoy exhibiting your knowledge and skills. Noticed you don't always get it right there either. Case in point, your recently not telling someone to check the BIOS when their new system wasn't picking up on "plug and play". That was with one of your new specialties, an AMD equipped PC. I wasn't sure myself, so I'm not saying I'm better because you made an error. Of course you weren't there in person, but then when are we here on the net.

As you pointed out, I can google and get most any answer to your trivia games. I conceded you are the OC king. If you don't think I know a solution, then you can simply say I googled for it. I'm not one of those people who try to claim I know everything. One of my professors said he didn't give a damn for those who know everything and try to memorize eveything. They tend to waste a lot of time in that pursuit. A person who knows where to find information and utilize it when found doesn't have to carry the burden and associated problems of memorization. As shown, your memory failed you where the P4N and the 845 chipset was concerned and your forgetting the 845 wasn't for a 800MHz system; that or you had not put all the data to memory, problem either way.

Since you always have to be right... you would win in a one on one trivia game. I don't try to remember everything. As you pointed out, I am good at finding answers and I know how to utilize what I find. You can reap whatever you think your rewards are. We're not playing Jeopardy. So, for your trivia games, you can go play by yourself, they have no relevance I can accept.

That was where you started making it personal in saying I had no right to discuss the matter because I had no understanding or knowledge. Then you told me I didn't even know how much memory my own PC was capable of supporting. That was an attack on me, not the merits of the discussion. Neither of us have top end equipment, yet we were talking about the merit of the new developments. The discussion covered hardware from the near past to what you have to AMD and Intel dual cores. We went from discussing hardware to your abilities as an avid custom PC builder and OC hobbyist. You've relegated what was a discussion to your having to prove you're right or at least making some point and getting in the last word. This discussion moved away from the merits of AMD and Intel some time ago and has become a theatre for your performance. [bold] You da man.[/bold] So let it go. I said before I have nothing more to say and you dragged me back in, this time I mean it.