View Full Version : You guys need to get your facts straight
Supafly
05-16-01, 07:42 PM
bah, this is a mistake, i meant to REPLY to another thread.
I own, both amd and intel systems, and they are both pretty much the same price nowadays. But of course amd chips are faster at the same speed, but then again, i rarely ever hear anything but BAD things about via, and amd chipsets. Of course, this is my opinion.
Da Whip
05-16-01, 08:45 PM
Supafly (in the soup), I really do not think that folks here do not have their facts straight.
Most overclocking types prefer AMD and Via based chipsets due to the ease of push their systems, whereas Intel based are very limited in the overclockability ( new one for the Websters). I also own both and there are +/- to both, but for overall performance I will take AMD. IMHO.
oc jason
05-16-01, 09:07 PM
I prefer AMD-INtel vs AMD prices are not even CLOSE, AMD is way cheaper-but i like them b/c of the overclocking ability-Intel cant even adjust the FSB-not that that is the most importan part of a system-but it help for budget OCers like me
LikuidFusion (May 16, 2001 09:07 p.m.):
I prefer AMD-INtel vs AMD prices are not even CLOSE, AMD is way cheaper-but i like them b/c of the overclocking ability-Intel cant even adjust the FSB-not that that is the most importan part of a system-but it help for budget OCers like me
Didn't you mean to say Intel can't adjust the multiplier? FSB is what we can adjust.
"Less filling!" / "Tastes Great!"
"Ford!" / "Chevy!"
"Longer!" / "Wider!"
:D
Hoot
Hoot (May 16, 2001 10:16 p.m.):
"Less filling!" / "Tastes Great!"
"Ford!" / "Chevy!"
"Longer!" / "Wider!"
:D
Hoot
"Ginger" / "Maryann"
amd is cheaper than intel. amd is faster than intel. amd is every bit as stable as intel. there is no choice to be made! imho :)
really now.. the amd stability issue died with the k6-2 and k6-III... must we all use intel chips with bx chipsets for the rest of our lives because of that?!
TT120 (May 16, 2001 10:32 p.m.):
Hoot (May 16, 2001 10:16 p.m.):
"Less filling!" / "Tastes Great!"
"Ford!" / "Chevy!"
"Longer!" / "Wider!"
:D
Hoot
"Ginger" / "Maryann"
"toe-MAH-toe" / "to-mae-toe" / "t'mater" (southern)
"Slake / intelligence"
Supafly
05-17-01, 02:43 AM
proze (May 17, 2001 12:20 a.m.):
amd is cheaper than intel. amd is faster than intel. amd is every bit as stable as intel. there is no choice to be made! imho :)
really now.. the amd stability issue died with the k6-2 and k6-III... must we all use intel chips with bx chipsets for the rest of our lives because of that?!
right now, the procs are about the same price, a 1.33 amd t-bird cost 194 on pricewatch, and a p4 1.3 cost 183. Also, i never said that amds CHIPS have stability problems, i said the CHIPSETS which no one can argue with, it's been proven that there hasn't been nearly as many problems with intels 815 chipsets.
and now you ignorant amd lovers are gonna bring up the i820 hoopla, and the p3 1.13 recall
the procs are about the same price for americans.. no-one else. and believe it or not, there are other people in the world who buy computer equipment and can't use pricewatch.
before you go calling anyone ignorant: amd chipsets/amd chips/via chipsets/intel chipsets/intel chips... i own a piece of equipment using all of the above, and have never had any problems with any of them. and yes, i've overclocked with all of them. i own more amd stuff than i do intel. my friends own amd stuff... no problems. all a person can go on is personal experience. if i listened to half the "advice" people give, then i wouldn't have half the gear i have running beautifully in my machine.
have you owned any amd gear?! or is this second hand info? i wonder how many sales amd have lost to this "but intel's got the stability" cr@p...
I live in Scotland (United Kingdom) and AMD prices are way cheaper. A Thunderbird 1.33GHz is about £175 but a Pentium 3 1.4GHz w/ 128MB RDRAM is well over £225.
I think that its just a matter of preference. I personally prefer AMD because Im a budget OCer and the Celeron is way more expensive than the Duron over here ( Duron 750 - £35, Celeron 667 - over £50). I don't seethe point in arguing over the chips or chipsets. I'v ehad no probs with the KT133, my friend has had no probs with the i815. If you wnat AMD, buy AMD. If you want Intel, buy Intel. If you consider all the specs, they're more or less equal.
UnseenMenace
05-17-01, 06:03 AM
AMD is cheaper than Intel in the UK by a long shot.
MORAL OF THE STORY --- TODAYS LESSON !!!
Its worth remembering that prices of computer equipment vary across the world, and at least attempt to get the facts straight before making a post called 'You guys need to get your facts straight' otherwise you may look remarkable silly when everyone points out, that in fact you was wrong with the previous statement and perhaps you need to get your facts straight.
Ironic if you think about it.. heh
GERRY136
05-17-01, 08:39 AM
why cant we all just get along, sniff sniff, its times like these i feel we're all closer together as a family...burp!
I've said it once, and I'll say it again - what's the argument. Buy what h.ware YOU want. There is no point in arguing. There is no point in continuing this threa, there was no point STARTING this thread. Lets just stop this.
GERRY136
05-17-01, 02:31 PM
see what youve done now, youve upset nelly, now i hope ur happy! lolololol
Megahurtz
05-17-01, 02:41 PM
I agree with nelly. This thread should expire in peace. I would also like to say that this is very much like a 'familial' thread, in that there are lots of differing opinions, and almost no one wants to see things from a different perspective.
Precisely like a regular dysfunctional familial unit..=)
I own both AMD(4) and Intel(1) machines. I consider my AMD machines, fast and stable..They are all reliable performers.
Group hug?? Nah.....Heh.
T
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.