Is Via AMD’s greatest enemy? – Anon.
(It’s only anonymous because I haven’t gotten permission from the author to use his name yet.)
For the longest time, I eschewed AMD CPUS. Not because they were bad, but because I hated VIA.
VIA caused me a year of hell with the MVP3 chipset, and AMD paid the
price.
I still believe that VIA has done more to damage AMD’s
reputation than Intel ever could.
How many times have we heard something like “AMD systems are not reliable or robust enough for xxxxxx
environment”? What are these statements really saying? They are saying
that VIA chipset systems aren’t reliable or robust enough!!!
AMD should be hoping and praying that Nvidia and SiS can finally create chipsets
that match Intel in stability and performance. It’s clear that VIA has
no inclination to do this on their own. VIA would rather sell and
abandon unstable and underperforming chipsets than do something right
the first time (KT133 vs. KT133A, KT266 vs. KT266a, KT333 vs. KT333A,
MVP3, and so on and so on).
They use the public as their testbed, and the buyers of every new VIA chipset get burned. BUT VIA doesn’t get
the bad reputation. AMD does.
(Ed.note: Obviously one man’s opinion, or is it? I can’t say I’d exactly demand a duel to defend Via’s honor. 🙂
Would you? Or do you agree with him to the point where you just won’t buy another Via board?)
Be the first to comment