Majestic Posted January 2, 2006 Author Share Posted January 2, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Dell now sells AMD as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bond996 Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Dell now sells AMD as well That doesn't really count. They're not actually using them in their computers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
just another thug Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Dell now sells AMD as well That doesn't really count. They're not actually using them in their computers. Yeah, I was reffering to like a Home PC you would find at Best Buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestic Posted January 3, 2006 Author Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Dell now sells AMD as well That doesn't really count. They're not actually using them in their computers. No, really Its a start, at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZAZEL Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Dell now sells AMD as well That doesn't really count. They're not actually using them in their computers. No, really Its a start, at least. Then again, I've never seen a Dell PC with an AMD processor advertised on TV. ~az Is common sense now so rare, that we should call it something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestic Posted January 3, 2006 Author Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Dell now sells AMD as well That doesn't really count. They're not actually using them in their computers. No, really Its a start, at least. Then again, I've never seen a Dell PC with an AMD processor advertised on TV. ~az Dell has a policy of only selling computers with Intel processors, and does not offer AMD-based systems. Dell also holds the biggest chunk of market share in world PC market, with 17.7%. HP is in second place with 15.5% Therefore, when Dell starts selling AMD pcs, all hell will break loose. Actually, I think it would be amusing to see the pentium brand vanish at the same time as Dell starts to sell AMD systems. The average american would go "WTF?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forfit Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Dell now sells AMD as well That doesn't really count. They're not actually using them in their computers. No, really Its a start, at least. Then again, I've never seen a Dell PC with an AMD processor advertised on TV. ~az Dell has a policy of only selling computers with Intel processors, and does not offer AMD-based systems. Dell also holds the biggest chunk of market share in world PC market, with 17.7%. HP is in second place with 15.5% Therefore, when Dell starts selling AMD pcs, all hell will break loose. Actually, I think it would be amusing to see the pentium brand vanish at the same time as Dell starts to sell AMD systems. The average american would go "WTF?" The average american probably wouldn't even know what ever happened, or know the difference. They will be asking themselves, "what happened to Intel? Who is AMD? Oh NO!!" Just because it may be something they never heard of, it all of the sudden becomes a bad product, until Dell starts selling them, then all the sudden it becomes the best CPU you can have in your computer!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-GRAVITY2- Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 My parents got me a hp with a dual core AMD 3800+ in it. At bestbuy all the hps are basically amd now. But now i have two pc's so when intel releases its new line, ill be upgrading my old pc to one with the new intel, cause ive always liked the bootscreen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoSNightmarE Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Yeah, but Intel is currently at 4 GHz, and AMD is close to reaching it's 5 GHzs. So, by the time Intel releases their new chips, AMD will still be ahead because I'm thinking they have something planned (obviously). And now since Intel lost the crown once, I don't think AMD will give in . Plese don't tell me you took the AMD64 4800+ processor or whatever it is technically as a being at 4.8Ghz/ I think that's what just happened so I will explain the rating system as much as i can...which isnt very well. The rating system for AMDs is not like Intels...Clockspeeds have little to nothing to do with it. It's more of a performance rating on a scale. For that reason, I have an AMD Athlon XP 2400+ which is only clocked at 2.0Ghz but can out perform an equivilent Intel at 2.0 Ghz. I did the best I could...correct as needed. We've all fought this argument too many times. Here's a pretty good explanation of why Intel and AMD are NOT comprable by Mhz. nicely done. i think that explains it all in a rather nice nutshell. i thought it was something with the CPU cycle. but wasnt sure how to word it and if it would make sense. im going to bookmark that for future reference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exkabewbikadid Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Yeah, but Intel is currently at 4 GHz, and AMD is close to reaching it's 5 GHzs. So, by the time Intel releases their new chips, AMD will still be ahead because I'm thinking they have something planned (obviously). And now since Intel lost the crown once, I don't think AMD will give in . Plese don't tell me you took the AMD64 4800+ processor or whatever it is technically as a being at 4.8Ghz/ I think that's what just happened so I will explain the rating system as much as i can...which isnt very well. The rating system for AMDs is not like Intels...Clockspeeds have little to nothing to do with it. It's more of a performance rating on a scale. For that reason, I have an AMD Athlon XP 2400+ which is only clocked at 2.0Ghz but can out perform an equivilent Intel at 2.0 Ghz. I did the best I could...correct as needed. We've all fought this argument too many times. Here's a pretty good explanation of why Intel and AMD are NOT comprable by Mhz. nicely done. i think that explains it all in a rather nice nutshell. i thought it was something with the CPU cycle. but wasnt sure how to word it and if it would make sense. im going to bookmark that for future reference. Yeah, that puts it in a concise understanding, especially this bit It boils down to a design tradeoff. Do you want to do less work at a faster pace, or more at a slower pace? This is kind of like saying, would you rather drive a route in your car that uses large streets, but has long stoplights or would you rather use small roads with short stop signs. In reality, you might reach your destination in the same amount of time, but the first route will have felt choopy and second will have felt more fluid. People used to complain about AMD chips not feeling as responsive in windows as comparable Intel chips, yet when it came to large workloads, AMD had the advantage a lot of times. One thing about that article though is that some people will argue that P4s aren't true out-of-order, but I never really understood the basis of that arguement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anus Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Yeah, but Intel is currently at 4 GHz, and AMD is close to reaching it's 5 GHzs. So, by the time Intel releases their new chips, AMD will still be ahead because I'm thinking they have something planned (obviously). And now since Intel lost the crown once, I don't think AMD will give in . Plese don't tell me you took the AMD64 4800+ processor or whatever it is technically as a being at 4.8Ghz/ I think that's what just happened so I will explain the rating system as much as i can...which isnt very well. The rating system for AMDs is not like Intels...Clockspeeds have little to nothing to do with it. It's more of a performance rating on a scale. For that reason, I have an AMD Athlon XP 2400+ which is only clocked at 2.0Ghz but can out perform an equivilent Intel at 2.0 Ghz. I did the best I could...correct as needed. No I know that, but still a 4800+ is made to catch up with an Intel 4800, so Intel is still behind AMD. The clockspeed doesn't matter, but AMD gives the performace of a 4800 Intel, but Intel's still at 4000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bond996 Posted January 3, 2006 Share Posted January 3, 2006 I've starting seeing AMD processors in big names like HP packages. That means that AMD is starting to gain marker appeal so the tides are changing. But I think once Intel releases their new godly line of processors we will see the tides go back towards Intel. Yeah, but Intel is currently at 4 GHz, and AMD is close to reaching it's 5 GHzs. So, by the time Intel releases their new chips, AMD will still be ahead because I'm thinking they have something planned (obviously). And now since Intel lost the crown once, I don't think AMD will give in . Plese don't tell me you took the AMD64 4800+ processor or whatever it is technically as a being at 4.8Ghz/ I think that's what just happened so I will explain the rating system as much as i can...which isnt very well. The rating system for AMDs is not like Intels...Clockspeeds have little to nothing to do with it. It's more of a performance rating on a scale. For that reason, I have an AMD Athlon XP 2400+ which is only clocked at 2.0Ghz but can out perform an equivilent Intel at 2.0 Ghz. I did the best I could...correct as needed. No I know that, but still a 4800+ is made to catch up with an Intel 4800, so Intel is still behind AMD. The clockspeed doesn't matter, but AMD gives the performace of a 4800 Intel, but Intel's still at 4000. That was the original intention of the AMD naming scheme, but you can't use an AMD model number and an intel clock speed to benchmark and compare the two. They're not equivalent like that anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anus Posted January 5, 2006 Share Posted January 5, 2006 Bond, Oh. That's weird. An AMD FX57 is still better than an Intel Xeon 4000 (or the maximum speed) right? AMD's got latency, and heat reduction on it's side and Intel has cache and support for DDR2. So, what's better at this moment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majestic Posted January 5, 2006 Author Share Posted January 5, 2006 Bond, Oh. That's weird. An AMD FX57 is still better than an Intel Xeon 4000 (or the maximum speed) right? AMD's got latency, on it's side and Intel has cache and support for DDR2. So, what's better at this moment? lol, what the hell are you trying to say? your question sounds like a load of jibberish. There are too many factors to take into account to explain everything in one post. Also, the prices on processors vary greatly, what is true this month may not be true next month Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anus Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Bond, Oh. That's weird. An AMD FX57 is still better than an Intel Xeon 4000 (or the maximum speed) right? AMD's got latency, on it's side and Intel has cache and support for DDR2. So, what's better at this moment? lol, what the hell are you trying to say? your question sounds like a load of jibberish. There are too many factors to take into account to explain everything in one post. Also, the prices on processors vary greatly, what is true this month may not be true next month Sorry about that, I didn't know how to put that question correctly. I was trying to ask what's the best processor at this moment in every factor? But your post answered it, so thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now