AMD Vs. Intel processor

  • Thread starter Thread starter lapieuvre
  • Start date Start date
Thom IV said:
You actually hacked a corner off your heatsink just to make it fit???!!
Click to expand...
Here is the link to the article I put on AMDMB

Link to Hacked PAL8045

IMO, the problems had between the K7VZA and SoundBlaster are the combination of the crappy VIA chipset and the crappy SoundBlaster bus-hog design. There were patches released to remedy the problem, but they are as effective as treating the clap with a band-aid.

As much as I don't like VIA, I will tolerate their Southbridge chip in my clients systems (ABit KG7), but will NOT tolerate SoundBlaster cards. Too much grief. The Turtle Beach Santa Cruz plays well with other children and ties its own shoes. Very well behaved and sounds nice. Drivers are well done (unlike SoundBlaster), and the drivers don't crap all over your system (like SoundBlaster).

The KG7 (AMD Northbridge), Matrox G450 and Turtle Beach card combination are running in many of my client machines. Performance is 100% stable under W98SE, W2k, WinXP. The AMD chipset is now history, except for the dual processor boards. My next board line is going to base on the nForce chipset.
 
intel likes holding hands with M$ where AMD walks alone, i expect DRM will be the same in the near furture...

i run both systems and AMD is just faster, period. not any hotter, not any more stable or unstable or hard to config, but mainly lower in price...

best bang for the buck, besides, i never trusted intel, or M$...

i shy away from closed minded hardware/software makers, never know when they'll deside to hold up your next driver upgrade or take your freedom of what's your's or what you can or can't do on a machine away.... (running "there" hardware)

there were issues back a few years ago with AMD but not today, unless you ride the cutting edge pre release hardware, your lible to find a bug or two before anyone else does on either side of the fence...

i've been building systems since 96.... <nuff said>

intel is just a flash in the pan just like M$... they spend plenty on PR and lies... i built my trust from reading hardware and overclocking forums, not how pretty the colors are on my GUI... sigh"
 
Thanks for the link Bruce...appreciate the pics. I'm looking at my AMD chip and my Epox mobo and wondering if this thing is going to fit....if it doesn't, I'll have a clue as to how to proceed (getting ready to take the dive--it took me 2 years before I actually installed the ceramic pickups that I bought with my Les Paul--all in good time).

Fusion--I hear what you're saying about the oligopolistic nature of the hardware/software makers. That being said, isn't that what living a capitalist world economy (it seems) is all about :)?

I guess there are happy people with AMD, as well as those with Intel.

Question: Holy s***t....what's a beleaguered consumer to do these days?

Answer (IMHO): Pick whichever one you're most comfortable with, and do everything you can to make it work...if, ultimately, you can't, pick the other one...

:D

Tom
 
For the most in pure compatibility, an Intel chipset and board wins every time. And at such a cost.

I recommend Dell machines for business clients who don't want to purchase machines built by me. The Dell are slug bait compared to my AMD powered machines, but cost is the #1 factor for these clients.

I will personally build one of the new nForce Ultra 400 boards for my DAW machine, and add the hotrod AMD 3200 processor and matching memory. My needs are 24-channel tracking, so I figure the maximum power is a must.
 
bgavin said:

VIA chipsets suck. They sucked back then in K6 days, they suck now, and will continue to suck in the future.
Click to expand...

I keep hearing this, but yet I've built a few machines with Via, and yet to have a problem.

I must be lucky.
 
bgavin said:

I will personally build one of the new nForce Ultra 400 boards for my DAW machine, and add the hotrod AMD 3200 processor and matching memory. My needs are 24-channel tracking, so I figure the maximum power is a must.
Click to expand...
24 channel tracking has been possible for quite a while. You don't need to waste your cash on the fastest cpu on the market today. But it's all up to you. You'll definately get a machine that's up to the task.
 
Todd B. said:
bgavin, why not wait for Athlon64?
Click to expand...
Those who live on the leading edge of technology are usually the first sacrificed on that sharp edge. I've seen the leading edge since IBM introduced System 360 waaay back when.

No thanks.

:D

The Athlon64 is going to be another party where nobody comes to play. (IMO). The compilers aren't really ready yet, so that means the apps are certainly not. Intel is getting blasted because their 32-bit performance on the 64-bit processor sucks canal water.

Corporate America is going to be the customer for this type of machine, and there is no demand for this much power in Cubicle Ville. Intel outfitted all their employees with laptaps so they can slave away at home, on the bus, or on family outings. I doubt the 64-bit machines will make it to laptops in the short term, so those 50,000 Intel employees won't be using I64.

Mom 'n Pop don't give a hoot about I64, because all they do is read AOL email and send a few pictures. Small office clients are working fine with Dell 550 MHz machines. Lawyers live on WordPerfect, and I doubt there is a 64-bit version around the corner. Lawyers are the last to change ANYTHING, so that is a dead market at the onset.

As for the nForce machine, the real expense is the 3200XP Barton core processor. Newegg shows this around $450 at the moment. Yikes. Good news is, the 333 MHz FSB chips have dropped way down in price already.

I love Yesterday's technology: fast, stable, and cheap.
 

i run both systems and AMD is just faster, period. not any hotter, not any more stable or unstable or hard to config, but mainly lower in price...

How much lower though? The price difference has dropped dramatically - AMD processors are maybe $50-$60 less then their Intel equivalent, if that.


i shy away from closed minded hardware/software makers, never know when they'll deside to hold up your next driver upgrade or take your freedom of what's your's or what you can or can't do on a machine away.... (running "there" hardware)

What's your point? Everybody who wants to make money is like that...



i've been building systems since 96.... <nuff said>

Wow - 7 years! I guess you know everthing then...

intel is just a flash in the pan just like M$... they spend plenty on PR and lies... i built my trust from reading hardware and overclocking forums, not how pretty the colors are on my GUI... sigh"

Hmmm, yeah - I guess you're right. They've only been around for 20 years and keep turning a profit. Who would wanna be like them?:rolleyes:
 
bgavin said:
Those who live on the leading edge of technology are usually the first sacrificed on that sharp edge.
Click to expand...

Historically, I would agree with you. In this particular case, I keep reading about how one Epic programmer only took a week to port Unreal Tournament 2003 to 64-bit, and how other companies have taken 2 or 3 days to port their software to 64-bit. I haven't read anything lately about the state of the compilers, but if the required coding upgrades are truly as easy as they've been made to appear, I think that a lot of people will be showing up for this party. :D

Intel's IA64 is not natively backward compatible with 32-bit, and has to run it in emulation. That's the cause of the loud sucking sound. AMD's x86-64 is backward compatible, and I've read that the chips will run 32- and 64-bit x86 apps simultaneously.

I expect that gamers will provide the initial market penetration for Athlon64, but I would also think that multimedia users, such as people doing audio processing, could benefit greatly from the technology, which is why I was curious about your decision to go with nForce2 and XP. Not that it's a bad choice, because as you state, it's cheaper and it's a known quantity.

...Don't get me started about attorneys, I have to work with them every day.
 
AMD64 is certainly not a flash in the pan, with IBM and SuSe already jumping on board due to the backwards compatibility with 32 bit.

AMD did a good job on this one, and I don't think it will take very long for everyone to enjoy the benefits.

I am not a huge Intel or Microsoft fan, but reading someone say they were a flash in the pan was hilarious.
 
Bruce—I could not agree with you more regarding the older technology (gimme a ’57 Chevy anyday...)

In fact, I’m contemplating (second guessing?) this upgrade that I’m thinking of making...the older technology is working pretty much fine for me now (recording 2 simultaneous digital audio tracks at once, and then mixing/editing 32 tracks)...I’m thinking more for the future (I’d like the capability to record 4 simultaneous audio tracks at once)...could be just my personal obsession...

Are you just editing/mixing 24 tracks, or are you recording 24 tracks of audio at once? My line of questioning here is as follows—if I can mix/edit 32 tracks of audio with my wimpy little 700mhz Duron processor with very few problems (albeit, I use very few effects)-- then why are you needing such a beefed up system to do 24 tracks? What interface are you using?

Polaris--yeah...I had the same thought about M$ and the 'flash in the pan' thing...hehe...

:)
 
Well, Ive been building and working on PC's since they came out during the eighties. If a piece of software, or hardware has problems with AMD, or VIA for that matter, its a poorly designed piece of shit and you should stay away from it. AMD is compatible with everything I'v ever thrown at it, works flawlessly with my delta 1010, and Sonar. Its been my experiance that Intel is slower, and overpriced. If you fan is too loud buy a better fan. Via had problems, a long time ago, that have been resolved.
 
My expertise lies in computers, but I'm just a newbie here for recording purposes. So far, zero amount of recording of any type. I'm haunting these fora searching for knowledge so I don't buy the wrong stuff. "Recording Engineer" is a moderator here, and lives around the corner from me. When I got done with my !@#$% plumbing project, I plan on hooking up with him.

What I think I want to do is: 24-channel live performance recording. I'd like to mic each instrument, and mic each/most drum kit components, all to their own track. I think this is what I want to do, so I can have full track-by-track control over the final mixdown.

I'll need multiple mics on the drummer and conga player, and single mics for everybody else. My bass will go DI. I also play Hammond keys out of the same rig, so they will go DI also.

The desired result is a good quality live recording. I'm not concerned about subtle coloration, etc, as the intent is "live" recording. I'll use Shure SM5x mics for live recording.

As for building a hotrod machine, the parts are not much more expensive then building a slug... the primary $ difference is the processor itself. I will wait for a price drop on the 400 FSB, but the 333 FSB is cheap already. Crucial is selling memory at dirt cheap prices these days ($35 for 256mb), so now is the time to stock up. I track Crucial memory pricing over the long term, and it is at rock bottom right now.

The trick is choosing components that play well with each other. For me, NO sound blaster cards. Matrox video does the job and is probably the fastest 2D card out there. Very stable.

Emulators have been around ever since I was an engineer at IBM. They sucked then, they suck now. Even hardware emulators suck, performance-wise. Big corporations are only interested in big money. From this point of view, I cannot see any real demand for the 64-bit architecture right now.

When I can get fabulous performance froma 3200XP at 400 FSB for cheap, why do I want to pony up big cash for (very) new technology that is marginally faster? Until Intel kicks the PCI bus up to FSB speed, we aren't going to see magnitudes of performance improvement. The processor will simply spin faster in WAIT states while waiting for the PCI device to complete.
 
bgavin said:
Until Intel kicks the PCI bus up to FSB speed,
Click to expand...

That's coming next year, in the form of the PCI Express. smaller, and way the helluva lot faster. AGP will be on its way out too.
 
<general thread feedback>

we are talking cpu's right? not chipsets, mainboards, other hardware etc... cpu to cpu AMD does more than intel, check the stats, besides you can't find dick about intel boards now on the web where AMD has tons of info... hyperthreading is hogwash along with all the other BS benchmarks intel shoves in the publics view... buy if you must but don't look for much free help if you have an issue or at least an easy "find' for help, there to busy selling and not looking after there product, not that AMD does but it's way easier to find info on AMD products...

no, i don't know it all but i know intel caused alot of pain and expense along the way and tried to keep there users in the dark where it appears some here still are, whatever floats your boat...

there were horrible flame wars over this topic back in 2k with the athlon release, i'll leave it at that...

if you believe the hype and PR buy intel, ignorance is bliss they say...

peace...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top