Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 41441	2004-01-11 07:36:00	AMD or P4?	Madcat (5098)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
206732	2004-01-11 10:43:00	My comments were in my opinion, Lohsing, based on my experience, which may not be up there with yours. Personally I have found AMD's to be reliable and easier to configure as far as overclocking goes. It wasn't a comment on how far they could be overclocked, but the ease of it, that's all :) I did preface my response with imho, too :D	Jester (13)
206733	2004-01-11 11:09:00	I propose an addition to the rules that bans rehashing the same old crap every single week. Every week someone decides we need an AMD v Intel thread, a P4 v Thoroughbred, Linux v Windows etc etc etc.... The same people then come in, offer the same arguments, and then leave again... ad nauseum. There is a search button for a reason, damned well use it.	whiskeytangofoxtrot (438)
206734	2004-01-11 11:15:00	Holden or Ford?	Jester (13)
206735	2004-01-11 11:42:00	> Holden or Ford? Touché	whiskeytangofoxtrot (438)
206736	2004-01-11 11:43:00	If those same people feel fine about voicing the same arguments week in and week out, so be it. I haven't heard them complaining about doing that, so it must be of their own free will, and they must have no objections to it. True enough, search features on forums aren't used as much as they should be; but that doesn't mean we should go around blasting everyone when they ask a question that might have been asked and answered in the past.	agent (30)
206737	2004-01-11 16:19:00	For once I am in a good position to comment. I have just replaced my old Athlon XP 2000+ with a new machine running a P4 3.0. Both processors run faultlessly. The AMD ,even witn an extra fan, ran at almost double the temp of the P4. In mid aftenoon the AMD was running at up to 55 degrees. The P4 runs at 32. The AMD is easy to overclock, but you will get a temperatur rise as well. My opinion is that for very few dollars extra the P4 is a better buy. Jack	JJJJJ (528)
206738	2004-01-11 22:32:00	>Shouldn't we have a policy against people posting absolute rot? >Where in hell do you get the idea that AMD cpu's aren't stable and have a short life? >And in no way are intel more stable as has been said now a couple times. >AMD currently has not only the most powerfull cpu's on the market but also the best performing cpu's in all price brackets. They are not unstable,they do not run hot,and they most certainly do not die young. Agreed... theres some serious AMD bashing going on in this forum. People just don't know and so are stereotypical. I read that the new AMD FX (or was it the 64bit) bet the Intels rival chip... even at Intels favourite race, Quake 3. Holden or Ford? Exactly! Like P4's, Ford are expensive, but prestige. Holden, like AMD's are all performance at a nice price. >very few dollars extra very few dollars extra my ass! P4's are expennnn$ive! .ham	hamstar (4)
206739	2004-01-11 23:10:00	> I read that the new AMD FX (or was it the 64bit) bet > the Intels rival chip... even at Intels favourite > race, Quake 3. Yup, and it costs a measly $1500 + GST. How cheap. > Holden or Ford? > Exactly! Like P4's, Ford are expensive, but > prestige. > Holden, like AMD's are all performance at a nice > price. See above. > > very few dollars extra > very few dollars extra my ass! P4's are > expennnn$ive! Dude - have you even checked Pricespy recently? Why do we all have to go through these arguments ad nauseum ad infinitum??!! There are examples all over the place of Pentiums being not only cheaper but also more expensive than AMD's. Lo.	Lohsing (219)
206740	2004-01-11 23:12:00	> I read that the new AMD FX (or was it the 64bit) bet > the Intels rival chip... even at Intels favourite > race, Quake 3. Before we get into it... the AMD FX is a 64 bit chip. The Intel alternative is nothing but a P4 3.0Ghz with 2mb of L2 cache. Underneath it all, the Intel "gamer's chip" is still only a 32 bit chip. Not really an apples with apples comparison and hardly surprising that AMD whipped Intel's butt. Lo.	Lohsing (219)
206741	2004-01-11 23:22:00	> > I read that the new AMD FX (or was it the 64bit) > bet > > the Intels rival chip... even at Intels favourite > > race, Quake 3. > > Before we get into it... the AMD FX is a 64 bit chip. > The Intel alternative is nothing but a P4 3.0Ghz with > 2mb of L2 cache. Underneath it all, the Intel > "gamer's chip" is still only a 32 bit chip. > > Not really an apples with apples comparison and > hardly surprising that AMD whipped Intel's butt. > > Lo. The fact that it is a 64 bit chip has no bearing on its performence running 32 bit software.Its running as 32 bit when running 32bit software. And as for prices,jumping back to the thread starters request and having a look at pricespy. Intel Pentium 4 2.4GHz $281 AMD Athlon XP2400 $141	metla (154)
1 2 3 4