PDA

View Full Version : This should get things pumping in here again


The VTech
10-12-03, 11:38 PM
http://www.blackviper.com/TheRant/amd.htm

Discuss

TC
10-12-03, 11:44 PM
Why bother getting upset about that? If that guys article really bothers you then you don't have enough real life problems to contend with imo.

The VTech
10-12-03, 11:46 PM
Doesn't bother me at all I thought it would be fun. I busted a gut over it.

Wasn't thinking it would be taken so seriously but yet again I have been prooved wrong.

OC Detective
10-12-03, 11:50 PM
Discuss

Old and irrelevant.

Discussed.

Deathknight
10-13-03, 12:07 AM
Originally posted by OC Detective

Old and irrelevant.



Yeah nothing really new here but more importantly its old info. The fact that he even mentioned rambus memory in there was a clue to how fast times change ;)

TC
10-13-03, 02:05 AM
You never know - maybe he's talking about that dual channel rimm 4200 that's catching on really fast ;)

Steven4563
10-13-03, 04:45 AM
that guy just keeps going on and on might aswell go back in his cave

Cúchulainn
10-13-03, 09:02 AM
Well, these two lines,

But you can over clock it!

Sure, but placing more stress on a CPU that is already "over spec'ed," as I feel, tends to not make any sense.

should put up a big red flag for anyone here ;)

maxima88
10-13-03, 09:25 AM
Old news, let's move on.

Molester
10-13-03, 09:43 AM
all i have to say, is my computer overclocked outperforms all current stock P4 3.0+'s, and i spent $130, not $400+, and it's rock stable

i'm sure alot here can relate, and that's the simple basis of the AMD/P4 flame war

everyone also knows that an OC'd P4 will be beat by nothing, but again, cost is outrageous

for me though, it's not about having the best performing system, it's a system that will be able to run Doom 3 w/ full graphics at the highest possible frame rate, as cheap as possible, or, best bang for buck, lol

IdreamofDSl
10-13-03, 08:42 PM
That guys artical is good, GOOD FOR ME TO POOP ON!

brennan77
10-13-03, 10:39 PM
"Some people have asked me, "Even though you have a few computers, why are NONE of them AMD based?!?"
Simple. I do not like AMD."

That's as far as I got. He states his thesis with "I do not like AMD". How is anyone supposed to take his arguments seriously when they are prefaced by such bias?

Alacritan
10-13-03, 10:45 PM
His performance comparisons were all based on pre-Athlon chips. And all he did was knock the PR ratings on the newer chips. No performance comparisons between chips you can still buy. Sorry, but AMD chips are designed to be more efficient than Intel chips. They aren't the same design so you can't do a Ghz to Ghz comparison and expect it to accurately represent performance. AMD performance numbers are the equivalent of the current Intel chip running at that speed. And despite his knocking of that, they are pretty damn accurate and they're unfortunately necessary because too many morons buy based up on numbers and not benchmarks. Yes, in the end, if you have an unlimited budget, Intel setups are faster. But AMD setups can get you to the same place for less. Since the introduction of the Athlon, it has been this way. And now AMD is in the lead again with the Opteron. His article is so outdated he doesn't even bother to compare the current market. Maybe 15 months ago it was sort of remotely kinda like that with the PR ratings, but now you have AMD chips that outperform Intel's fastest by up to 25%, depending on application. The CPU market is always changing. His 15 month old opinions are far out of date. He's a curmudgeon from a forgotten time. I don't even remember what was out 15 months ago.

Sterculus
10-13-03, 11:05 PM
Personally I thought it was amusing that he went into depth to prove that 'mhz is not everything', but that is the exact argument for the PR system which he later bashes...
The red flags were also thrown when I saw the name Tom's.
Also, there are no actual numbers. If I was possesed to, I could write an article and say that my old Thunderbird 1.0 outperforms my friend's 3.0C. It wouldn't be true, but I could write it.
Edit:
Just noticed that, even though 'the P4 was designed for RDRAM', this guy built a DDR system instead (he updated that today as a matter of fact). When you blame any poor P4 scores on DDR, why would you buy a DDR system? Plus, it would have been amusing if he had bought RDRAM instead of DDR ;)