amd vs. intel

[duder]

i've been using the 21.83's since they came out and haven't had a reason to switch, also when the thouroughbred comes out its going to pretty much shatter all the benchmarks and when the barton comes out, intel is going to cry and the blue men re going to start making amd tv spots

 

[koko]

after learning about wintel's dirty little secret, i choose to stick with amd.

intel uses burst speed technology, allowing the chip to operate at maximum performance only when needed. for example, running word or access? an intel chip isn't performing up to it's posted clock speed. running q3? prob still isn't performing at 100%.

in essence, when you aren't running apps that chew up a lot of clock cycles, your intel chip is running far below its capability. why would i pay for a 2.0ghz chip if it won't operate at 2.0ghz all the time?

i'll stick with amd!

 

[wyrlwyn]

i hit 300+fps with the 28.32 dets, while i was limited to 90ish with the older ones. is there some sort of bug with the refreshrate, or am i missing something?

 

[dejav00]

...

not sure x...23.11's score up to 80 points higher than any other dets that I've used. Anyway, that's just my results, download all of them yourself and see. I can't remember which thread it was, but the 28.32's are made for laptop systems and cards.

 

[boxman]

I got a P3 667 before the T-Bird came out and the latest thing from AMD was the old old school Athlon. Got my T-bird before X-Mas and I have never been happier with a system! All AMD now!

 

[wyrlwyn]

more power to yah if you get high benchmark scores, but when my firneds come over to lan, we don't sit around and play 3dmark, we play q3. so, great going if you get high benchmarck score, but it only matters what you get in the game, cause thats all that your using it for, unless you spent all that money ona 3d card to watch the pretty game1 and game2 cut senses

 

[dejav00]

...

I agree with you 100% on that wyrlwyn, benchmarking my system is merely a way of knowing about where to set game settings without setting them to low that the visual effects aren't there, and without setting them so high that my frame rate goes into fractions of FPS during a CQB.

 

[Hexum2600]

Intel over AMD

One of the reasons i prefer the Intels right now is because of the bus speed... the Rambus Ram is incredible, the benchmarks i've tested it with have blown the top off anything else i've ever seen. BUT! this is not to say i would never go with an AMD, it all just depends on the Price and what comes with each processer, sometimes its as simple as something like the bus speed...

 

[G-Money]

RAMBUS........ Over rated... Read up on it....

 

[G-Money]

read this

more to come showing DDR is better then Rambus !

 

[Hexum2600]

Watch though...

I am apologizing ahead of time for this huge post....


Be careful though when you talk about RAMBUS... since there is multiple types out there i guess i'll be more specific.

Rambus debued with the i600, following closely with the i700. These two only offered a supposed 5% - 15% increase over SDRAM... not impresive since the cost is not even comparable....

The i800/i820/i850 chipset was a big improvement, but it DOES have its own problem... first off its a power hog, it tends to consume ~ 10x more power than DDR & SD...

For a check:
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1444.3/

Also i guess its important to say that on 100/133 boards there was no way that Rambus could even come close to stretching its potential out... much better with the new P4 boards, allowing 1.6 GB/s stream... no don't ask me about that number, check it out @

http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1444.2/

Also check out the last two lines in that article.... I will be the first to tell you that i don't believe on talking down any hardware or software, that all come from a lot of experiance and hard work. Instead i like to talk up what i like, much better then tearing into others to make what i like look better. Nevertheless, this isn't me saying this. DDR is a lot less expensive, and for the normal user or even power user its going to offer more than enough.

One last thing... the bandwith.

http://www.hardwareanalysis.com/content/article/1444.6/

It makes a difference that i'm running a 1.8 vs. a 1.0 or 1.2 the faster the processer, the more of the Rambus's potential is being used... nevertheless the 1gig i put in was overkill....

That being said, i have had no problems, no reliability issues, and nothing that makes me regret the money i dropped into it. (except maybe that i put a gig in )

But if theres something i'm overlooking, let me know. I'm reading everything you write

Sorry again for the length......

 

[Hexum2600]

Latency...

Yes, with that i agree. The latency is an issue, as is the power requirements.

One other thing i want to point out though is that i AM using the 850 chipset... my board is the D850MV... I think that makes a big difference too....

 

[Hexum2600]

Last post for a while, i promise

One more thing,.. that article you posted the one at

http://www.inqst.com/articles/ddrv840/ddrv840main.htm

which is the main article... is using WinNT4 and 98SE as the system it was tested under... and only under WinNT4 did Rambus outperform DDR... my question is this. With 2000 and XP what wins out?

AND one last thing.... the dual channel and single....

32bit/64bit...

Rambus is developing a 64bit/single channel... what will the difference be there? any guesses?

sorry, don't want to sound like a computer bigot... i just like to know the details