Intel IS superior

By Phantasm66 · 102 replies
Jul 18, 2004
  1. OK I know the kind of thing this will probably start, but I just feel I have to share this experience with you all.

    You see, I had a CPU can failure today with my Pentium 4, 3.0 GHz based machine.

    After one short trip to the computer store to get a new fan, I was back up and running again. Instead of picking out a new motherboard and chip.

    Which is what I am SURE I would be doing if it was an AMD based machine.

    I think Pentium 4s are superior to AMD alternatives, and I will always be buying Intel from now on.

    I think if you too experience a fan failure with an Intel, and compare it to your AMD experiences, you will feel the same.
  2. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    It is your money, you are free to spend it on whatever you want. You could even buy a Cyrix CPU if that floated your boat.;)

    I've also experienced a fan failure on my system (2000+ Palomino). & windows felt sluggish & the system shutdown after a few minutes. It turns out the RPM level was set so low, the fan didn't even start.

    The system is still up & running.:)

    The bottom line is you never buy any computer part on name alone. Always research what you're looking for & choose what fits your needs the best. If it's Intel get an Intel, if it's AMD get an AMD, if it's mac, shoot yourself (j/k).:D
  3. SOB

    SOB Banned Posts: 119


    what it is that illicits product loyalty, selection of spouse, etc. i think it's called, "whatever floats your boat". i believe individuals buy for all sorts of reasons inconsistent w/ each and every other reason another buys certain "brand" products for. other factors such as performance will factor in as a higher priority than heat failure from a loss of a cpu fans function. to each their own. the next generation of cpus are out as well, and may not be as adversly affected if some similar situation would arise, in that arena, and therefore is limited to the 32 bit side of the coin. cheerio
  4. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 5,734   +8

    I see what you guys are saying, and of course I strongly research my purchases when I go out and buy something worth like £300 on motherboard, chip, etc.

    I don't generally suffer from any kind of brand loyalty as such, be that software or hardware or anything.

    But as things stand, I can tell you that at the moment I am SURE that the next machine I build will have an Intel chip(s) driving it.

    I am quite sure that I KNOW that had I bought an AMD 5 months ago instead of this Intel, I would at least be returning that board and chip right now.

    Lets face it... AMD chips are cheaper for a reason. Performance is not on par with Intel and their reaction to fan failure is a joke.

    I leave my computers on 24/7. If this fan failure had happened during the night, or whilst I was away:

    With Intel - It would just slow down, maybe crash, fan motor burns out, etc.

    With AMD - the computer goes on fire and burns my house down.
  5. acidosmosis

    acidosmosis TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 1,350

    AMD's are cheaper because they have to be to compete with Intel since Intel is more widely known. They are both electronic hardware. You just got lucky. You will be spending a ton of money for hardware with no more than a possible 5% performance difference over AMD. Your choice :). I'll stick with AMD.
  6. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    Did you read my post Phant ? I've had a fan failure with a Palomino (the only thing hotter then a Palomino is lava ;) ).

    & all my machines are on 24/7. That includes a 1800+ & a 2000+ (both Palominos again).

    If your motherboard was one as old as the first Athlon, yes your house would be a nice BBQ right about now but Athlon motherboards have had fan failure securities for a while now & they work quite well.

    Athlon64's thermal protections are even better so it's not even an issue.

    I have a video where they show how the C.O.P. features of the Asus A7V333 work.

    • When the fan failed, the system shutdown after a few minutes.
    • When they removed the heatsink while the system was running, the system shutdown instantly.
    • When they turned on the system without a fan or heatsink, the chip fried. That's the only case where it didn't work but then if you turn on your system without a fan or a heatsink on the CPU, you deserve to lose some money.;)
  7. SOB

    SOB Banned Posts: 119

    you know what

    if intel has what i deem to be "the superior product" i would be in line to buy theirs over others. yet, all we are talking about here is a fan sent to you by intel that failed. maybe, had you purchased the amd cpu, you may still have a fan that operates. hehe @ joke. intel, not even a competitor, the 64 bit arena. do these 64 bit cpus bear the same heat issues as their 32 bit counterparts? is this an across the board thing w/ amd cpus in relation to intel's or not? and a person wanting 64 bit functionality, basically, hasn't a choice, as of yet.
  8. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 5,734   +8

    yeah, and what's all of this "performance rating" stuff all about???

    Like you have to call a chip a 3333 or something when it actually runs at 2600 Mhz ?!?!?!

    AMD try to say that they call it 3333 because it runs like an Intel 3333, but the truth is, IS DOESN'T!!! It runs like a 2600 Mhz AMD chip! Which is exactly what is it.

    I know where you are coming from. I bought AMD for years. I spend hundreds of £££ on them. I resented Intel for charging higher prices based on what I thought was purely cashing in on the Intel name.

    Then I actually bought an Intel and realised that it was far, far better than anything I had used for years. The chip was newer and faster, yes, but I've handled a sufficient number of machines over the years to be able to take that into account.

    Face it... Intel chips are better made. They run faster and they are more stable. They run cooler. They are better.

    Of course I read it. I put it to you that you were far luckier than I was, because a failure of this kind on an AMD is worse than on an Intel. And anyway, WHY is it that hot? I'd rather they made the chip BIGGER or something than they made it that hot. Its too exessive.
  9. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    Feel free to believe that. You've made up your mind, we shall all live with it.:)
  10. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 5,734   +8

    But my plan is to make YOU believe it!;)

    No one has yet said anything that disproves this...
  11. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    The bigger the chip, the more silicone it takes, the more expensive it becomes.

    The smaller the chip, the more you can produce out of a wafer. Intel are quite small, as small as AMD chips. They just happen to heat a heat spearder put on top.

    The Athlon64 has the same as it is indeed a very convenient & efficient way to get rid of heat on very small surfaces.

    PS. At work, they use only DELL machines so I know what Intel is like. They are quite faster then AMD on certain applications (rendering & video encoding) but they don't hold a candle when it comes kernel compiling for example.
  12. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 5,734   +8

    The size thing was just an example. What I am saying is that there is no way AMD should put a component inside a machine that runs as hot as that. They've obviously had to make concessions as regards the amount of excess heat in order to get performance up.

    Intel chips are SMALLER and run cooler.
  13. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274



    Yes, if you're not doing any work on your Intel machine, indeed it runs cooler.;)

    PS. Intel has the record for the hottest running chip. The 2GHz Willamette has only recently been beaten by... The Prescott 3.2GHz.
  14. SOB

    SOB Banned Posts: 119

    for some

    cpu functionality is all that is relative. for me, a videocard, that is restricted by the cpu ability, is my bag. i'm looking @ 64 bit processing (apparently not as hot as their 32 bit conterparts, look above), of which intel has yet to have, although i believe it is emminent, for the express purpose of garnering approx. 70 more frames per game. and, when pci express allows SLI mode, here comes videocardcard #2 for a 70% increase over that. patching far cry for 3.0 has shown that the next gen games are going to be demanding.
  15. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 5,734   +8

  16. SOB

    SOB Banned Posts: 119

    to reiterate

    apprently the newer, cough cough, amd chips in the 64 bit arena, are cooler. ;)
  17. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 5,734   +8

    why are you coughing?

    No doubt its because of the smoke coming off of your AMD chip!?!

  18. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

    Yes Phant, that article is old & no longer relevant unless you use motherboards from that same era.;)
  19. abc

    abc TS Rookie Posts: 39

    Rather than have us disprove your statements, why not prove them yourself?

    Really? have you had a computer crash just because it was running an AMD? Can you prove it was the AMD chip?

    The Prescotts are pretty damn hot.

    Now how am I suppose to disprove this? If I have to disprove this to get you to change your mind, I give up now. Lets stick to the facts.

    In pute GHz they do. Intel and AMD are better for different purposes. I'm sure you are all aware of them and won't explain it.

    Have you been to both the Intel and AMD fabs? And even so, would you know enough about the chip making process to tell which was the better made?

    I bought AMD because I could get a very nice system where the motherboard and processor cost less than $150. I don't see that happening with an INtel
  20. SOB

    SOB Banned Posts: 119

    he does!

    :grinthumb ............ that's not what the smoke is coming off of :rolleyes:
  21. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 5,734   +8

    So you are saying that if I bought a brand new AMD chip, and powered on my machine, and then took that heatsink and fan off... that that AMD chip would NOT start to pour smoke? Is this what you are saying?

    If you can back this up with scientific evidence I will believe you. However right now I believe my eyes and the dozen or so times as a computer enthusiast and as a computer technician to trade I did not see an AMD chip go up in flames...

    As to the questions about stability, I have noticed a DRAMATIC reduction in crashes after moving to Intel at home and at work.
  22. Didou

    Didou Bowtie extraordinair! Posts: 4,274

  23. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 5,734   +8

    Face it - a lot of you are students or working on your first jobs because you are young. Do buy what you can afford. You don't contemplate spending £100 more on a chip because its an Intel. I used to be the same. Then I spent more money the next time, and I am very glad I did. Because I think Intel based machines handle better. And they do.
  24. SOB

    SOB Banned Posts: 119

    good for you!

    you go girl. don't ever change :D
  25. Phantasm66

    Phantasm66 TS Rookie Topic Starter Posts: 5,734   +8

    Does anyone actually have anything concrete in terms of evidence that I am wrong?
Topic Status:
Not open for further replies.

Similar Topics

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...