Spread the love! TechSpot Tech Gift Shortlist 2017




  1. Is AMD better?

    4 vote(s)
  2. Is Intel Better?

    4 vote(s)
  3. Top Performance

    1 vote(s)
  4. Top Stability

    0 vote(s)
By Vehementi ยท 68 replies
Mar 4, 2002
  1. PoPDragon

    PoPDragon TS Rookie

    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.
  2. eddy05

    eddy05 TS Rookie Posts: 152


    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 :rolleyes:
  3. Arris

    Arris TS Evangelist Posts: 4,726   +378

    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...
  4. Molman

    Molman TS Rookie

    Re: Hey!

    . . . 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*
  5. TS | Crazyace

    TS | Crazyace TS Rookie Posts: 275

    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.
  6. uncleel

    uncleel TS Rookie Posts: 980

    Remember Ace? We discussed overheat protection eariler!
    originally quoted by uncleel
    Protection Against Thermal Death :dead:
    Athy XP has an improved design, incorporating a thermal diode in the processor's core for overheat protection.
  7. Molman

    Molman TS Rookie

    . . .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). . .
  8. eddy05

    eddy05 TS Rookie Posts: 152

    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.
  9. Arris

    Arris TS Evangelist Posts: 4,726   +378

    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 ;)
  10. smtkr

    smtkr TS Rookie Posts: 131

    Re: Re: Re: AMD vs. Intel

    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.
  11. Talon_262

    Talon_262 TS Rookie

    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.
  12. boeingfixer

    boeingfixer TS Rookie Posts: 1,006

    Re: Re: AMD vs. Intel

    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.
  13. Talon_262

    Talon_262 TS Rookie

    Re: Re: Re: Re: AMD vs. Intel

    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).
  14. boeingfixer

    boeingfixer TS Rookie Posts: 1,006

    Thermal Protection

    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..
  15. boeingfixer

    boeingfixer TS Rookie Posts: 1,006

    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.
  16. Talon_262

    Talon_262 TS Rookie

    BF, I wouldn't try to find out unless you like Athlon XP flambe. ;)

    The thing with the thermal diodes used in the XP is that the mobo makers have to build in a mechanism to throttle or shut down the computer once the CPU's threshold hits a certain point (like current Intel boards). To my knowledge, there are no Socket A mobos currently in production that can take advantage of the XP's thermal diode to do that. The only successful test that I'm aware of is the one THG did with a specially modified Socket A board some time back.
  17. Th3M1ghtyD8

    Th3M1ghtyD8 TechSpot Paladin Posts: 664

    Athlons have got cooler since their initial release (in relation to their performance) but until AMD switch to a smaller manufacturing process, they are not going to get any cooler.
  18. eddy05

    eddy05 TS Rookie Posts: 152

    Oh i knew it... someone bound to comment on my reply... but well, that was a nice one. I didn't know that the Athlon XP is also designed for the Windows XP. Guess I also have a lot to review. But like you said, it's also the value for money that we look into while buying AMD or Intel CPUs, and I don't blame you for sounding like an AMD fan because I sounded like an Intel fan there. Sometimes I feel that it's hard to choose between AMD and Intel -_-U
  19. TS | Crazyace

    TS | Crazyace TS Rookie Posts: 275

    When speaking of AMD chips, I dont think I specified XP's, just their chips in general. EVERYONE knows of AMD's heat problems, it's not somthing I need to find 10 links to, if your a hardware enthusist, then you know. It's a fact, that is why motherboards have extra protection for them.

    AMD chips do NOT perform 25% faster than Intel chips clock per clock. Northwood chips are performing on par. ANd, with the release of the new bus (133 or 566 whatever u call it), the P4 chips are surely going to pass AMD's ancient core. The overclockers have these things on a 200mhz bus (800!!!) and they are smoking ANYTHING in their way!

    Intel chips are built better. Why do u think they overclock so good? AMD is now pushing their chips to the limit, sorta overclocking them. Intel P4's could hit 3.0GHZ NOW!

    But, I like AMD chips. I think about 3 months ago if I were to purchace a PC, it would have been built around a TBIRD/XP platform. I just happend to wait til lthe Northwoods came out, and was impressed with cost/performance.

    Everyone complains about how much P4s cost. Remember, they come with a heatsink that is probobly worth $30! If you factor that in, and the fact that there are some really KILLER mothervboards out there for under $100, you have a serious system. Intel also offers 3 options, DDR, SDRAM, RDRAM. Say what you will about each, it;s still a purchace option you can make.

    I dont want to start a flame match about which is better, they both have strong/weak points. The facts are this:
    AMD chips DO NOT handle heat well
    Intel Northwood chips are on-par with XP's
    Both systems are going to make any power user happy.
  20. uncleel

    uncleel TS Rookie Posts: 980

    My CYRIX RuLeZ

    But Ace, you are the one who elevates this subject in the strongest rhetorical terms. I've posted numerous substanial replies to this same topic even in the old forums. (UBB & Jawbreaker) AMD can handle heat just fine! AMD Thermal Solutions
    It's the overheat protection circuitry that's the question. Plus there's other (preformentioned) options.
    CPU are going to get so fast & hot in the future, refrigeration will be needed.
    I wouldn't base my purchasing decisions on, "The fan might fail!"

    My CYRIX (w/ a 486 fan) RuLeZ !
  21. TS | Crazyace

    TS | Crazyace TS Rookie Posts: 275


    When you watch your hard earned money go up in smoke, it's not fun.

    What I did: I screwed up, I admit. I was tinkering around with the system, and rebooed.

    Smoke belowed from the case.

    My chip died. Reason? When I tinkered the heatsink ended up not being totally flat on the chip, kinda lifted up on ones side. I know I screwd up, but its no reason for a damn chip to catch fire. And this was NOT overclocked.

    I have done some crazy stuff with INTEL chips, laped, instaall them lifted up ,fan seized, NEVER HAD A PROBLEM. When it hits home, it kinda ticks you off
  22. uncleel

    uncleel TS Rookie Posts: 980

    by comparison, when your HD fails?
  23. boeingfixer

    boeingfixer TS Rookie Posts: 1,006

    Hey 3DS Crazyace,

    I would like to refute some of this again.

    Please read what I said, I did not say the Athlon performs 25% better than the P-4, what I said may have been confusing. If I have an Athlon XP 1.5 and you have a P-4 2.0, my XP will run on par with your P-4...that is the same performance with a 25% deficit. The Athlon does this with superior core architecture. And if you think it is that easy to get the Northwood to 3.0, then why doesn't Intel just ace AMD and go straight for the throat and release it. Probably cause they can't. Intel is famous for the PAPER PROCESSOR.

    Another thing, you say Intel offers 3 memory options. Why do you think they do ? Because AMD forced their hand (Intel) the P-4 with the superior Rambus was a dog....BARK BARK. And a P-4 with SDRAM is a crippled dog....BArk.....the only reason they offer 3 choices is to go against AMD on cost.

    And if you throw away the $30 HSF, the P-4 is still more expensive.

    But like I said and will say again, Hammer will change alot of all this.
  24. Th3M1ghtyD8

    Th3M1ghtyD8 TechSpot Paladin Posts: 664

    its not that the Athlon has a "superior core architecture" it's just that Intel's use a lower instructions-per-clock-cycle, in order to produce higher mhz rated chips, in order to convince n00bies that they are better. Remember the old saying that higher numbers are better.

    Anyway, as regards heat why do we not see any AMD based servers (or for that matter P4), most servers I have seen use either PIII's (because they run cool and stable) or P2/3/4 Xeons (Which are so expensive I don't know if they run cool or not)

    The main point however is cost - AMD's chips have always been cheaper, this is a factor that Intel have tried to match and have proved they can't.

    If money is no object then P4 and RAMBUS is a surefire winner in terms of both speed and stability. But if you can afford to sacrifice some stability then the athlon is a lot cheaper.
  25. Mictlantecuhtli

    Mictlantecuhtli TS Evangelist Posts: 4,345   +11

    I'm happy with my Intel CPUs. I tested this overheating thing yesterday - removed the heatsink and turned the PC on. I got to BIOS, checked CPU temperature - it didn't show anything. Maybe it was too much :D. After a while, however, it froze. So I turned the power off, put heatsink & fan back and continued. I don't know exactly why but I've always liked Intel more than AMD. I had K6-2 once and my 286 is made by AMD, too.
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...