AMD or Intel?

2»

Comments

  • I like the CHEAPER part.
  • Yeah, plus now theyre FAR better than Intel. The old ones were HORRIBLE, but around the Thunderbird they started to get much better.
  • Well, maybe, Fish, you're right, cuz I've never used new AMD's, I've always used the old ones, and dunno exactly about new...
    Anyway, Linux runs worse on AMD's, because of Athlon's suckish FPU (Math Co.)
  • Athlons are GODAMN fast.....
  • I can attest to that!

    -Q
  • The next CPU I'm getting is an AMD.
  • so can i (even tho it only worked for 3 weeks)
  • I wonder what to buy than? AMD Athlon 2800+ or P4-3000 with HyperThreading... and 1M of cache...
  • AMD Athlon 2800+. Save the extra money for something else.
  • intels are like twice the price of AMD anyway, save your money slash
  • Oh.. I think HT technology is a very interesting thing, I think I should try that..
  • Yes it is, so is the new low-budget Celeron with No L2 cache thats suposed to compete with the Ceptron :-)
  • Slash wrote:
    Oh.. I think HT technology is a very interesting thing, I think I should try that..

    It'll just be a waste of your money.
  • And a large increase of your performance...
  • Compared to an AMD?

    Oh..if you wanna go Pentium IV HT without a new mainboard, forget it. Your current one probly cant handle it and youll still need a new PSU
  • Damn I know that. I'm not so stupid.
  • So why got Intel when you can go AMD?
  • I'll go AMD. Spend the money on RAM or something else.
  • I think I'm going to throw something into here.... AMD now uses SO MUCH MORE CACHE THAN INTEL.... 1MB L2 cache. Take that, Intel. Plus, my Athlon 1600+ is soooo much better than 1.8GHz Celerons.
  • Pentium 4s also have 1mb L2 cache.
  • I think I'm going to throw something into here.... AMD now uses SO MUCH MORE CACHE THAN INTEL.... 1MB L2 cache. Take that, Intel. Plus, my Athlon 1600+ is soooo much better than 1.8GHz Celerons.

    1.8Ghz Celeron? You can outdo more than that.

    I can outdo a Celeron 2.7GHz.

    Ive seen tests, Im equal to a Pentium 4 1.8GHz.

    Im not sure what yor at, that tests Ive seen only compare 3 CPUs. Celeron 2.7GHz, Duron 1.6GHz (me), Pentium 4 1.8GHz, and Athlon XP 1.8GHz.
  • Roger wrote:
    Pentium 4s also have 1mb L2 cache.


    The Pentium 4 Extreme Edition has 2MB L2, but those chips alone cost as much as a new computer would, whereas AMD puts in 1MB and make it 64bit, and have that with a full system for what a P4EE CHIP costs.
  • I wasn't talking about the EE. I was talking about this:

    http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications ... pNo=998912
  • But why get that, when you can get an Athlon 64 3000+ / 512K / 1600MHz FSB for less than that? LOL
  • You got a good point there.. But I was just correcting you and the Intel cache post.
Sign In or Register to comment.