Ok, I keep hearing that AMD is just as good (or better than) Pentiums. I think not, and here is why:
1. People claim that their speeds can't be compared because they "work differently" yet they both measure their speed in the same increments (Ghz). Cars and Boats really do work differently and they use different measuring tools (MPH vs. NPH). AMD and Intel processors basically work the same and yet AMD doesn't even make processors that are near the same Ghz as Intel.
2. People claim AMD's are just as fast. NO! AMD's are cheaper and therefore when people buy them they put more money into other aspects of the computer (RAM for example) and don't see a difference. What you can get from AMD for $100 might be faster than what you can get from intel at that price, but as the price increases Intel pulls away. Like I've said, AMD doesn't even make a 3.4Ghz processor like Intel does.
3. People who like to build computers and/or overclockers like to boast on how much cooler AMD's are than Pentiums, well guess why, because they are LESS POWERFULL. The more powerful the processor the more heat, end of story. The only way to make it cooler is by putting cooling components around it (fans, sinks, liquid, etc.), which you can do for both an AMD and a Pentium.
4. Lastly AMD has recently partnered up with Microsoft. When the hell have we ever known Microsoft to give you something just as good for cheaper? Never. For that matter, the only reason AMD is even partnered up with Microsoft is because Intel turned down Microsoft first.
Hey, its one thing if you like your AMDs for the cost savings or whatever reason, but it is complete garbage to try to make others believe they actually compare to Pentiums. The phrase "you get what you pay for" comes to mind. Rant over.
- Forums
- EverQuest II
- General Discussion
- Rant about AMD vs. Intel
Rant about AMD vs. IntelFollow
Height, I am gonna have to call you on this.
They both measure their processors in Ghz, which is the number of clock cycles that they run. However, an AMD is able to do more in a clock cycle than an Intel does. The architecture of the processors is completely different. This is why an AMD 2400 is comparible to an Intel P4 2.4. Furthermore, if your argument holds true and the only measurement of how a processor works is Ghz than the slowest processors would be the Apple G5s...which they are not.
Microsoft went with AMD because Intel screwed up the 64-bit processor so many times it was holding MS back from releasing their products. People may not like MS, but if you own a company and can partner up with MS most will jump on the wagon and make sure that they can deliver (there are a few that this does not hold true, but the majority of companies want a MS partnership). If you keep ******** something up than they are going to look elsewhere. Microsoft doesn't need to partner with a company, a company partners with Microsoft. If MS wants a partner, they buy them (Bungie for example).
Yes AMD costs less. Why? Go to CompUSA and tell me what signs you see everywhere. In magazines? TV? Guess what, that costs money. AMD has lower operating costs and passes that on to consumers. This decision was published a few years ago and they stated that they were going to go by word-of-mouth.
If you don't believe me, look at Tom's Hardware Guide.
Before you post, please research and actually know what you are saying. I know this is harsh, but there are people that read these forums and don't understand PC hardware.
They both measure their processors in Ghz, which is the number of clock cycles that they run. However, an AMD is able to do more in a clock cycle than an Intel does. The architecture of the processors is completely different. This is why an AMD 2400 is comparible to an Intel P4 2.4. Furthermore, if your argument holds true and the only measurement of how a processor works is Ghz than the slowest processors would be the Apple G5s...which they are not.
Microsoft went with AMD because Intel screwed up the 64-bit processor so many times it was holding MS back from releasing their products. People may not like MS, but if you own a company and can partner up with MS most will jump on the wagon and make sure that they can deliver (there are a few that this does not hold true, but the majority of companies want a MS partnership). If you keep ******** something up than they are going to look elsewhere. Microsoft doesn't need to partner with a company, a company partners with Microsoft. If MS wants a partner, they buy them (Bungie for example).
Yes AMD costs less. Why? Go to CompUSA and tell me what signs you see everywhere. In magazines? TV? Guess what, that costs money. AMD has lower operating costs and passes that on to consumers. This decision was published a few years ago and they stated that they were going to go by word-of-mouth.
If you don't believe me, look at Tom's Hardware Guide.
Before you post, please research and actually know what you are saying. I know this is harsh, but there are people that read these forums and don't understand PC hardware.
Recent Visitors: 43
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (43)
- Forums
- EverQuest II
- General Discussion
- Rant about AMD vs. Intel
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC