Concur. I've ran the Windows platform since 1998 and ran the Mac OS from 93-98, now I'm running Windows/Linux. Each has their own strengths & weaknesses. Like in hundreds of other forums and websites their respective Strengths and Weaknesses have been discussed so I will not discuss them here. But you have to respect each for what they are good at. So far no OS has been good at everything. And I believe no OS will be the all out best. Hardware might be different though, I think sometime there will be a piece of hardware that is better than all the others (n its field) in everything else that is avaiable. But never in the OS.

It's has been a long competition that took placed even until now.

I liked Intel because of it's quality assurance labs. Although because of that, Intel CPU's is charged premium, I didn't really mind too much because when I bought my PC, what I've really considered is its stability. Then, I've got a choice of either Athlon XP 1900+ or Pentium 4 1.8ghz. And, well, I bought the Pentium CPU. NOT to say that Athlon CPU's are less unstable, it's only my views.

I liked Athlon XP because it was cheap, and it could perform comparably with the Pentium 4 CPU. It's a fast processor that is worthy of my consideration when I want to buy a new computer system.

I do not like Intel because it did not continue supporting what it developed. Eg. 423-pins Socket CPU and Rambus. It is really a disappointment for me, because my motherboard has got both these components, and it's sad that I couldn't upgrade it too much. My only other option is a 2.0ghz CPU, which will not make much difference.

I do not like Athlon XP (Not say don't like, but somehow, slight dislike) because of little good motherboards and chipsets that was compatible with the Athlon XP. Of course I know KT266 and K7S5A are great, but other than these 2, there isn't really any great motherboard. Another thing about Athlon XP is it's high heat emiting. I'm someone who's very reckless, I didn't even know that once, my CPU fan is not working, and the tempature soars to 120 degress C. After several crashes, I opened my casing and THEN, i realise that my fan isn't spinning. Luckily, it wasn't an Athlon XP CPU, or my CPU is fried.

I ain't bias or anything while I'm writing this reply, and all I've written is only my views and may be incorrect! Actually I do not mind too much about performance because, as long as the game runs at a comfortable speed, it's enough for me, that's why to me, stabilty is more important. Though I had a Pentium CPU... I'll prefer Athlon XP because it's cheaper...

OK, this is one reason why I always think "*****" when someone says they like AMD.

I don't quite understand what you mean by the AthlonXP having a superior core. I have news for you: The Athlon XP is yesterday's technology, scaled higher. Maybe it performs better clock for clock, but it isn't superior technology-wise. Also, if you think clock for clock is important, shut up right now and get a Mac, because by your standards, PowerPC architecture is superior to the Palomino.

If AMD makes more CPUs than Intel, what do they do with them? Intel contributes more than 80% of the CPU sales. In order to do so, they would have to sell more processors than AMD. Logic tells us that if AMD is making more CPUs, but Intel is selling more, AMD must be piling their processors up in a junk pile somewhere (or, they aren't making as many processors as Intel).

Seriously people, think before you post.

Now that that is all out of the way, I will state my recommendation: AthlonXP is a better buy right now. I emphasize the term "buy." To me, price/performance is a deciding factor in buying CPU components.

. . . care to clarify your comments on yesterdays technology?

AMD's rating system obviously sucks, but surely Intel's Processors are just as bad - with a low instructions per clock in order to make the higher clock speed processors.

Surely AMD's system is just as bad as Cyrix etc's performance ratings.

Just an observation from me... I still run PIII 450 and have been looking to upgrade for a year or so now. Sooo much to read and consider. I've been saving and watching. When I do, it's going to be a good one. No budget system here. And the most significant thing (besides the price of the actual CPU) is the type and price of RAM. When you compare the PERFORMANCE of high quality DDR and RAMBUS, it's RAMBUS hands down. Then go PRICE some of that high quality Corsair DDR. The good stuff (DDR) accually cost more than RAMBUS. It's still RAMBUS hands down. Coupled with the stability and overclocking features, minus the $100.00 or so in extra money for the PIIII, for me... it's INTEL.

Looky my computer stats below! It's around the same speed as ur computer! bought some 3-4 yrs ago. it's true that it's difficult to choose a good computer now... but it all goes to price, stability and value. depends on what u wanted more of. for me, it's stabilty, that's y i went for intel

I think most of my rant is still valid
Although with the Northwood and cheaper DDR platforms becoming available for the P4 I would consider Intel if I was about to build a system from scratch now. "Whats the best CPU I can get for the money?" is the question that every computer builder asks themselves before they start. This has to take lots of different factors into consideration, not just which is faster and cheaper. Stability, overclockability(am I making up words now? ), heat, motherboard cost, ram cost. All these things need to be considered. Its a personal choice when it comes down to it but if I can get a much better video card for gaming with the savings I make by purchasing AMD rather than Intel then thats the path I will choose.

In the end its all relative....

PS: I have always been against these arguments...

. . . I'm seeing alot of people making broad generalisations. Can someone please enlighten me with some hard evidience/facts as to P4's being so much more stable than AthlonXP's?? . . . .

. . .also to PoPDragon, Intel has officially stopped supporting RDRAM. Taking this into consideration I wouldn't be surprised to see the price of it go up alot in the near future as supply is cut (no point making a memory type no one wants to support). Its something I would take into consideration as it will make future memory upgrades costly. I could be wrong tho *shrugs*

There are some crazy son-of-a unknow whats running P4's without heatsinks, just to prove it. I'm not one of them.

An AMD chip without a heatsink = DEATH.

If you run an AMD system, you better hope your fan never dies.

Remember Ace? We discussed overheat protection eariler!
http://www.3dspotlight.com/vb/showth...eat+protection
originally quoted by uncleel
Protection Against Thermal Death
Athy XP has an improved design, incorporating a thermal diode in the processor's core for overheat protection.

. . .also I was asking in regards to stability, not what would happen if the CPU was run in a incorrect configuration (ie. without a heatsink). . .

Okay I give you my version of my views. Note that this is only MY views.

Why I think Intel is more stable.

First of all we all know about the premium we paid while buying the intel CPU. This extra money goes to the Intel Quality Assurance Labs. In these labs, Intel tested out their CPU with thousands of computers with different configurations (ie. different RAM, different Motherboard, different chipset... etc.). These are their efforts in trying to make the Intel CPU more stable.

Secondly, look at the market. Do you see more computer dealers selling Intel chips or AMD chips? This factor tells me that even computer dealers think that intel is more stable.

Thirdly, there are also many programmes optimized for Intel. Do you know that Windows XP is "optimized for the pentium 4 processor?" I do not know whether the Athlon XP optimizes WinXP, but I sure do know that Pentium 4 optimizes WinXP.

Needless to say, Intel has been in the CPU market for many years, therefore they more or less have got solid experiences in different problems and solutions.

Other than my fear of BBQ-ing my Athlon XP, the CPU also need a good motherboard to function well. Without a good motherboard, there will be many incompatibility issues. My colleuge once told me that the AMD K-6 2 is incompatible with the Nvidia TNT2 family, with results in a bottleneck. And, I've heard, that AMD rised up a lot faster because of VIA, meaning without VIA, AMD's still a toddler.

I haven't seen any info about XP's burning up since Tomshardware video with a pre-release palomino burning out...
If you have reviews/test showing this please post the evidence Paul

I'm just having a hard time finding technology that wasn't copied off Intel in the AthlonXP.

I realize AMD has some new technology in the AthlonXP, but I'm referring to things like SSE and thermal protection, which were both introduced in Intel's last generation of processors.

And you're implying that AMD doesn't test its product under "real-world" conditions in its labs? While it is true that Intel has been in the general-purpose processor business quite a bit longer than AMD (after all, Intel created the first commerical GP microprocessor, the 8008, in 1972), both companies were founded within a year of each other (Intel in 1968, AMD in 1969) and have been making chips that go into things the consumer never sees but has been affected by over the past 30 years or so (telecommunications, etc.). So, I don't buy the argument that the "Intel tax" benefits the consumer; competition does.
If you're talking about who Joe Schmoe's gonna buy in his prefab PC he gets from CompUSA or such, it's pretty much a no-brainer; most prefab manufacturers use a lot of Intel product because of the hefty advertising subsidies and exclusive discounts they get from them (that Intel seal and little jingle at the end of the commercials ain't there just to look and sound pretty!). AMD doesn't put as much ad money out as Intel does, so who do you think will wind up with more consumer mindshare? It has NO bearing on either companies' ability to produce good product, it's just Business 101.
Look here and you'll find your answer.
See above...
While it is true that AMD's K5 & K6 family had some problems when they were current stuff, so did Intel (remember the Pentium math bug or PIII serial no. fiasco, anyone?). And while VIA's support of the early Athlons and beyond have helped to bring AMD to its present level, it just wouldn't be right to pin all of their success with the Athlon on VIA. When the "classic" Athlons came out, it absolutely blew the doors off almost anything Intel was selling, performance-wise. The fact that a Palomino Athlon can still go toe-to-toe with a vastly faster (MHz-wise) P4 today is a testament to the engineering that went into it.

If I sounded a bit like an AMD fanboy just then, I guess I am. But I'm a bigger fan of true competition, which I think has played into the consumer's favor ever since the rise of the original Slot A Athlons. Because of competition, we all have a real choice and pay lower prices for what we put into our boxes, no matter whether it's Intel or AMD.

First of all smtkr, I am not an "*****".

Second, mabee before you imply that I am you should real your own words before you post.

Athlon performs better clock for clock, will gee....I dunno, if it performs better clock for clock....isn't that SUPERIOR in design ?? Superior in technology ?? If I have an AMD and you have an Intel and my lowly AMD performs the same as your Intel with a 25% clock/speed disadvantage, isn't that SUPERIOR ??

It really is a moot point, when Hammer comes out, AMD will again put another dent in Intel's all powerful armor.

The MMX and SSE technology is probably being licensed from Intel, just as the x86 tech is.

As far as thermal protection, that's a no-brainer for any first-tier processor maker nowadays...the faster your product runs, the hotter it gets. True, Intel put it in practice first, but I'd have to be sure that AMD had it planned for the release of Palomino/Morgan (which they did do).

Hey gang,

This is in response to all the thermal protection talk.

I have an Athlon XP which is protected from meltdown.

But how ?

I currently have the Giga-Byte GA-7DXR, and on this board is a protection circuit/jumper. When it is enabled (which it is) and the board senses there is not a CPU fan plugged into the CPU FAN pin header, the system will not boot. System up and running and fan dies or you unplug it ?? System shuts down....right now..

Ok, 3DS Crazyace, first this is for you and everyone else, This is not intended as a wizzing contest between friends. Just some friendly discussion.

Just curious. why do you say socket a is a direct copy of Intel ?

Also you are incorrect about chipsets with t-bird and XP. My GA-7DXR is an AMD 761 chipset bought way before the XP and it fully supports the XP's including the one I am running. It is true that you had to choose wisely or you would get stuck with a board that couldn't run the XP.

I agree with you on the rating system, I do not care for it however, I am not going to hold it against AMD for one little mistake.