Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 44562	2004-04-23 02:51:00	P4 or AMD	dwnz2003 (5250)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
231427	2004-04-26 06:33:00	Be it Intel MB or AMD MB both has its state of the art top model MB and low down crap model with tons in between models. The fact is there isn't a big difference between the two. What you can find on the Intel MB you can expect to find it on an AMD MB as well. Of course they'll be using different chipsets for their North Bridge and South Bridge. Unless you've a particular chipset preference, it all comes down to speed. In SY case it's different as he wants to use the Onboard Nvidia display which is not available on any Intel Boards. But for those people who wants a seperate display and sound card. I don't think there's much difference between Intel and AMD boards as long as you get a reliable model. If both boards offers you the features you want then isn't the CPU will become the factor again? and cost :D	SKT174 (1319)
231428	2004-04-26 06:42:00	> In SY case it's different as he wants to use the > Onboard Nvidia display which is not available on any > Intel Boards . > > But for those people who wants a seperate display and > sound card . I don't think there's much difference > between Intel and AMD boards as long as you get a > reliable model . > > If both boards offers you the features you want then > isn't the CPU will become the factor again? Agreed . . . CPU will still make the main difference . . . As to dwnz2003's comment on going off topic, I think this is not too bad sometimes, especially seeing as a lot of people do a search for past posts on the same things . Hence, a post in your thread does not have to be helpful only to you . e . g . BillyT has just got some advice which he liked from another person"'s" thread . Something I like to think newer arrivals realised . . .	~~~~~ s y ~~~~~ (2054)
231429	2004-04-26 09:59:00	> Unless you've a particular chipset preference, it all comes down to speed. nope. a lot of you seem to forget about quality, stability, compatibility and support. a good cpu is wasted on a buggy unstable board. downgrading your choise of cpu and upgradeing the quality of the motherboard makes for a better pc and in a lot of cases a faster pc. however this is not an easy thing to market exspecially as few customers care about good stable motherboards.	tweak'e (174)
231430	2004-04-26 11:10:00	> > Unless you've a particular chipset preference, it > all comes down to speed. > > nope. > > a lot of you seem to forget about quality, > stability, compatibility and support. a good cpu is > wasted on a buggy unstable board. downgrading your > choise of cpu and upgradeing the quality of the > motherboard makes for a better pc and in a lot of > cases a faster pc. however this is not an easy thing > to market exspecially as few customers care about > good stable motherboards. Yes . I totally agree with you on that one. Sorry if I've been misleading ... when I said "Unless you've a particular chipset preference, it all comes down to speed." I was meant to compare an Intel chipset to an AMD chipset motherboard both having high quality and compatibility. Cheers	SKT174 (1319)
231431	2004-04-26 11:11:00	> a lot of you seem to forget about quality, > stability, compatibility and support . a good cpu is > wasted on a buggy unstable board . As I happen to be finding out more and more, as my home computers are dying on me all over the place :-(	mejobloggs (264)
231432	2004-04-27 00:28:00	Metla, I'm not going to bother correcting you on your spelling and grammar, but from my personal viewpoint, I cant really accept any credibility for your arguments at all unless you pay attention to the language we have agreed upon: English . Reading through your kiddygamer-scrawl dialect is a painful experience at best . > Your all talking like there will be only one motherboard availble with everything you need so that will dictate the cpu . No, we arent . > Doesn't make any sence to me, Seems to be a trend > Motherboards are available in hundreds of configuerations and made by dozens of manufacters . This is true, just like with cars . When you go looking for a car though do you consider the whole lot or a select tier of manufacturers? let's see here: I have $500,000 now what will I get . . a porsche, a toyota, or a lada? hmmmm decisions decisions . . . They're all from different tiers, and therefore you should select a tier (or tiers if you're a bit more modest) accordingly . This considerably narrows your options and therefore your argument is null . Motherboard manufacturers are generally split into three tiers . The upper tier consists of the top 4, which are Asus, Abit, MSI and the fourth spot changes around a bit . . sometimes Epox, sometimes Gigabyte The middle tier is taken up by names like Chaintech, Soltek, Shuttle etc Then the bottom tier is taken up by the likes of DFI, PCChips, ECS (this is a quicklist by the way, I'm not going to list the whole lot . Generally it goes top 4 - everyone else - bottom 4) Just apply some common sense, of course the middle tier is going to be ordered with some at the top and some at the bottom . Fanboys of certain middletier manufacturers would tell you that their manufacturer of choice is top tier, but the truth is the 4th spot is fairly volatile . Gigabyte usually holds that spot though . I wont go into my personal opinions about each brand, that's for you guys to decide yourselves . Usually I go with Asus if possible, failing that MSI . Right now though my main rig is Shuttle based and it's a solid performer . > Lay down the specs for the componets based on budget and purpose then use a motherboard that fits the required task . So you think the motherboard should be the LAST decision made? That's kind of silly . . choosing the component that can make or break your system based on whatever chump-change you have left from buying other components . The motherboard decision is a VERY important one . Dont choose your curtains before the foundations are laid . > Provided you use a motherboard that enables the cpu to run at its full potential then their shouldn't be any issue(and you would be an idiot to buy one that didn't), this is like the "it gets me from A to B" argument . Yes, ultimately they all get to the same point BUT they all do it differently - some faster, some more reliably etc I'll happily buy a workhorse and a comfortable saddle, you're more than welcome to stick to your ideals that would wind you up with an italian handmade saddle sitting atop a blind donkey . > You have to line up all the specs of all the components . This goes without saying . The method I'm describing doesnt provide any source of error as you seem to think it does (because alas you havent proven ANY understanding of it), all it provides is a logical and unbiased decision making process that ultimately gets the best balanced component combination to suit your needs and budget . It also has the distinct advantage of escaping the propoganda from both camps: "duh, intel cpus are more reliable than amds which are hot and buggy!" what a load of bollocks . > if i build a computer i would have in mind wht type of cpu i was going to use because as i said last time you need to now, because you may buy a amd cpu and find out that your motherboard need's a Intel CPU . WHY would you choose a MB first? Another one who missed the point . I said to build two competing pc's on paper, one based on intel and the other based on amd . This action alone would prevent anyone with at least half a brain from mismatching a motherboard to a cpu . The point is that the CPU is not *that* important of a decision in the bigger scheme of things, because CPU's generally are engineered much more consistently than other components, so they dont introduce much variation to the mix . Going with this method broadens the system design process and then narrows it down to a far more balanced system . The arguments against this train of thought seem to imply that a rig based on say a pcchips motherboard with generic ram would perform as well and last as long as a rig based on an asus motherboard and mushkin ram . Reality and experience tells us otherwise . Look, get yourself the best foundation you can get and compromise elsewhere - get a slightly slower CPU, get less ram, whatever . . because you can always upgrade those later . Due to the good foundation you've got, your rig will have longevity and subsequently will save you a lot of money . > In SY case it's different as he wants to use the Onboard Nvidia display which is not available on any Intel Boards . To be pedantic, you are wrong . The XBOX proves otherwise ;) > If both boards offers you the features you want then isn't the CPU will become the factor again? and cost you never know, perhaps one rig you draw up has twice as much ram as the other . . I'd go with more ram over a faster cpu personally . . again, it provides longevity because software is still catching up with hardware . I remember back in the k6-2 days, 16-32megs of ram was standard, 64 was a big deal . I walked into Atech and asked them for 128megs of PC100 (which was like 550 bucks back then) and they looked at me like I was some kind of nutbar . The scent of my credit card soon turned them straight though . That k6-2 computer was a solid workhorse for my parents for a good 3-4 years, now they're on a p4 2 . 4 with a gig of ram and I dont forsee having to upgrade that for a long time .	whetu (237)
231433	2004-04-27 01:49:00	This is a totally futile argument ...... The real question should be asked like this: I want to do [[insert purpose here]], what would be the best system for this purpose ? An AMD cpu on [[insert chipset here]] will excel at certain tasks whilst an Intel CPU on [[insert chipset here]] will excel at other tasks. There are areas where certain chipsets are simply better than others. Some offer superior Lan or firewire solutions, others offer greater memory performance. It is about the whole package not just one component (but then some people have been trying to explain that). The fundamantal concept of systems development goes something like this: 1) Identify the problem. 2) Investigate all possible solutions. 3) Pick the best possible solution from all available options. Anybody who builds a system based on "fanboy syndrome" should not be building systems as far as I am concerned. When it comes down to CPU comparisons it should be looked at a strength by strength comparison not overall. A CPU that is reviewed as being stronger overall may be extremely weak in one particular area and that may actually be the area where the customer is going to use it the most. This which is faster "AMD vs Intel" argument is stupid and shows the intelligence of users who ask it. All it ever does is invoke fanboy arguments.	TazzieNZ (463)
231434	2004-04-27 03:02:00	Whetu, I’m not about to read all that dribble, whether you appreciate my spelling or not is irrelevant, I simply don't agree with your logic. Try not to take it personally, do what ever works for you, but don’t go pretending your train of thought is superior or beyond my understanding. Your mother is the only one who thinks your special.	metla (154)
231435	2004-04-27 03:08:00	And just to be picky,the top 4 tier motherboard manufacters are ASUS and ECS who compete for 1st place,flollowed by MSI with about half the sales of the top 2,then bring up the rear is Gigabyte with monthly sales approx half that of msi. The top spot is volitile,4 place isn't. These companies are considered the big 4,i have no idea where you got your facts from.	metla (154)
231436	2004-04-27 03:26:00	why bring my mother into this? why lower yourself to a primary school level? basing the tiers on sales figures isnt too relevant IMO, oem customers tend to skew the figures . do whatever you want to do . The day after 9/11 muhammed ali said this about different religions: "many rivers all leading to the same sea" I'll stay in my river, you stay in yours . At least I put in the effort to understand yours	whetu (237)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9