Athlon suck coz they just simply use dirty tactic for their bussiness strategic Athlon TB 1.9GHz = P 4 1.6 = wat the hell is this??? we should get 1.9GHz power insteaad 1.6 . BTW do you notice that it is easy to get sponsorship from them if you are just i game developer.

From a more "user" standpoint:
AMD makes chips which seem to process more Hz-wise.
Intel`s chips don`t do as much, but they go faster Hz-wise.

Also; Intel is more expensive per Hz, from what I see.
Intel also has more major computer makers using them.
I think Micron and maybe on or two other major computer makers use AMD.

Most computer makers, Dell, Gateway, HP, etc, use Intel.

What kind of intruction sets each uses and their tradeoffs are I don`t know; I`m sorry. But I can tell you that I would like to buy a AMD because the chips are slightly cheaper, meaning I can use the $ on other items.

Anyway, thats my take on things.


Bugle4d

AMD isn''t cheaper when you have to buy DDR to use it. Yikes! I love AMD, personally. If I had the money, that''s the way I''d go, but I can''t afford the DDR.

No, I''m not a student. I''m just poor.

quote: Original post by utwo007
AMD isn''t cheaper when you have to buy DDR to use it. Yikes! I love AMD, personally. If I had the money, that''s the way I''d go, but I can''t afford the DDR. No, I''m not a student. I''m just poor.

That''s not true. You can use SDRAM with a AMD chip if you buy a motherboard that uses SDRAM (most of them do). I personally bought a DDR board when I upgraded since it was cheap at the time.

Well, this is only personal experience but I''ve had two athlon systems die on me, one after only 3 months of use, the other after only about a year. I am now running on a P3 and it has been much more stable than the athlons ever were.

quote: Original post by Anozireth
Well, this is only personal experience but I''ve had two athlon systems die on me, one after only 3 months of use, the other after only about a year.

Yes, only personal experience. What do you mean by "die" anyway? I could have been another peice of hardware at fault or insufficient cooling. My Athlon has been going for a decent while now without issue.

I have an Athlon system that uses SDRAM, and have never had a processor die on me (had a 166mhz P1 since 96', 500mhz P3 since 98', 800mhz Athlon since summer 00').

I haven't had problems with either processor and don't have comparable processors (nor applications that would use so much power that I could tell a difference) so I cant say from experiance which is better/worse. I think it's more important to decide based on price and what you need.

The only piece of equipment that has died on me is a monitor.

*EDIT noticed mistakes...

Invader X
Invader's Realm

Edited by - Invader X on January 31, 2002 12:03:18 AM

The one that died after a year was DEAD, no video output, no drives spinning, nothing. Both the Mobo and the processor were gone. I tried swapping both with identical working ones (my friend had the exact same setup) and neither worked. The other one that died didn''t go quite the same way, but I think there was more something wrong with the mobo, but it would randomly truncate files on the hard drive to 1k, and it wouldn''t let me re-partition the drive. And it''s not the drive because that same drive is now working without a problem in my current setup. I doubt it was a cooling problem, I had appropriate fan/heatsink setups, and even so, why would the mobos have died too? Ahh screw computers =D PCs anyway...

Anozireth, the first is hard to diagnose but the second was much more likely a motherboard issue (or issue with the OS dealing with that motherboard), as you can probably see. Heating issues can potentially ruin the motherboard too, but it doesn''t seem like a heating problem, like you said.

Practically all problems with Athlon XP are because of the VIA motherboards.

We''re comparing Athlon XP with Pentium 4 aight? The Athlon is much better bang for the buck. I wouldn''t hesitate.

Meself I have an Athlon with the first AMD motherboard, never messed with me.