now that more than 50% of us are AMD fans

**Zak33** · 03-02-2005, 10:33 AM

who fancies jumping ship and going back to Intel?

I mean it took forums like this good place YEARS to get AMD to where they are now. 5 years ago no one exceptOC and Hardware steadfast's had AMD PC's.

Now we ALL suggest our Mum's buy them for interweb surfing!

So...is it time to do a U turn and rush back to Intel? It's not like a 64 bit system from AMD is uber cheap now is it? I mean my first Athlon Slot A was a 500 that I overclocked to 600, and it was as good, if not better than a P3 600. And it was WAAAY cheaper. Even if it DID need a Nuclear Power Station for a PSU.

But now that a top spec 64 bit AMD is smal semi detached house in Eire money, might be time to turn and peg it back to Intel for a year.

What do you think?

**Grey M@a** · 03-02-2005, 10:42 AM

I stuck with intel so I don't shout about them

Last AMD I had was a 1800+XP and I had nowt but bother with it. I am looking at A64 but a few yrs down the line as my Intel rig is still beefy enough for the latest and greatest games to come for the next year or two.

I think the only reason I stuck with Intel was at the time the A64 and Intel Canterwoods were similar prices and also the fact that at the time Intel were the only ones to have the throttling feature so if I clocked it to much it wouldn't destroy the chip.

Granted the A64 is a better core than the Intel Prescott, and Intel really do need to pull something out the bag soon, but from my experience Intel have always been good enough for me and I am a heavy gamer and the system I have takes the punishment well so there is no need to go A64 right now.

**Mblaster** · 03-02-2005, 10:43 AM

Well, this will be an interesting year because of the Dual Core chips, this could see things turn back in the favour of Intel but I wouldn't count on it

For now i'm staying with AMD as the first choice as they are still better IMO.

**jimborae** · 03-02-2005, 10:44 AM

Not on your Van Nelly mate!

AMD is still much better value & clock for clock, in most applications, faster & runs coolers (read qiueter).

Er hold on what am I talking about, actually I already have switched back, bought an uber cheap P4 2.4c & board. But I only use it for browsing, folding@home, & office duties, it replaced an ageing XP2500 which was heavily o/c'ed. My AMD64 gaming rig still rules the roost in my house

**Zak33** · 03-02-2005, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by jimborae

Er hold on what am I talking about, actually I already have switched back, bought an uber cheap P4 2.4c & board.

ex-ZAKKLY ....and lets face it a P4 at under 3 gig can be very quiet. Its only the top end stuff that pulls your ear drums out cos of theheat situ.

A P4 at 2.4 ish is a quick thing and very good value.

**0iD** · 03-02-2005, 10:55 AM

I have both. 'The rig in the sig'. My shuttle (P4 2.8 SN61G) & my work rig, a p4 3.2 running at 3.6

Most recent systems i've built have been P4's tho. 2.8's are a reasonable chip price/performance-wise.

**shiato storm** · 03-02-2005, 10:56 AM

amd/intel...you get what you pay for. unless you get the most expensive bit of kit in which case its not really worth it...better to spend £100 on an AMD64 3000 and overclock it, then you're set for a decent chunk of time until the 128 chips come around!

**skuzgib** · 03-02-2005, 11:04 AM

If there was more support for the pentium-m, then maybe....

**Grey M@a** · 03-02-2005, 11:18 AM

To be honest this noise moaning is a lot of cobblers, I used to a run a 2.5 P4 with a 80mm delta screamer and that is ok for my noise levels and everyone else is moaning at a 40cfm fan on a heatsink that probably runs at a third of the DB level of the delta

put it this way, anything is quieter than a 80mm delta screamer

Oh skuzgib there are a few Intel Pentium M motherboards on their way

Hardocp has one they are looking at, at present

**Zak33** · 03-02-2005, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Grey M@a

Oh skuzgib there are a few Intel Pentium M motherboards on their way

Hardocp has one they are looking at, at present

yeah and thats gonna be a god thing cos the architecture is roughly based on the P3 and that was a fastchip

**Grey M@a** · 03-02-2005, 11:42 AM

They also clock a hell of a lot better to

**Agent** · 03-02-2005, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by Zak33

who fancies jumping ship and going back to Intel?

I mean it took forums like this good place YEARS to get AMD to where they are now. 5 years ago no one exceptOC and Hardware steadfast's had AMD PC's.

So...is it time to do a U turn and rush back to Intel? It's not like a 64 bit system from AMD is uber cheap now is it? But now that a top spec 64 bit AMD is smal semi detached house in Eire money, might be time to turn and peg it back to Intel for a year.

What do you think?

I think your wrong

A 64bit system is not expensive. You can get mobos for well under a £100 (cheap one at £60 at komplett), a 3000+ CPU for £100, and a PCI graphics card for anywhere from £60 upto several hundred.
Your current DDR RAM, HD's, Floppy, case, PSU, monitor, mouse keyboard...(need i go on ?), can be used with the system.
Intel have made it clear they want to move to BTX as soon as they can, so there go's your case (with a good chance of you upgading the PSU too), along with DDR2 (new memory) which add's to the cost big time.
If your talking about lower end P4's such as the 2.6 ect, AMD STILL offer overall better value for money.

A P4 at 2.4 ish is a quick thing and very good value

Yes, it is, but AMD is better value

A P4 2.4, or a AMD 3200+ ?. Price wise, there is under a tenner in it between them. Id have the AMD every time.

**jimborae** · 03-02-2005, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Agent

I think your wrong

........Yes, it is, but AMD is better value

A P4 2.4, or a AMD 3200+ ?. Price wise, there is under a tenner in it between them. Id have the AMD every time.

True but I got mine 2'nd hand from here so the price was even better

, plus the reason I got mine was for multi tasking & folding@home & there the Intel wins every time cos of hyperthreading.

**Rave** · 03-02-2005, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by skuzgib

If there was more support for the pentium-m, then maybe....

Agreed. Having said that though, even if AMD didn't have a price/performance advantage over Intel I'd be inclined to buy AMD just to keep them in the market giving Intel some competition. In the graphics card market NVidia and ATi are neck and neck in sales terms so I'm completely mercenary when it comes to my choice of graphics card since I know that neither is in danger of being edged out of the market. AMD on the other hand always seems to be only a year or two of bad results away from extinction.

**Zak33** · 03-02-2005, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by jimborae

plus the reason I got mine was for multi tasking & folding@home & there the Intel wins every time cos of hyperthreading.

you're not helping me here

2.4's dont hyper thread

right....Agent......it is my firm belief that you are right and I giveup

**Lee H** · 03-02-2005, 05:38 PM

Sorry Zak33 - I'm stopping with AMD64 until Intel pull their fingers out of their ears and listen to the consumer.

Intel Prescotts should come with a free fire extinguisher they run that hot and for the avid gaming fan the MHz does not cut it anymore for gaming as shown on the following link ;

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2330&p=2

HL2 is one of the most "intensive" games to test a system so I expect that the results here are a bitter blow for Intel.

Intels move to DDR2 was also bizarre - yes the memory maybe FASTER but this increase in speed was offset with an increase in LATENCY which totally hit the performance levels.

Thread: now that more than 50% of us are AMD fans

LinkBack

Thread Tools