They have a better laptop chip and will for the foreseeable future. I am waiting on yonah to get a new laptop and I have an x2 in the mail to replace the winchester in my sig. IMO intel for lappys and AMD for desktops... for now anyway
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
contoursvt said:Ummm you keep seeing many people say intel systems are more stable, but you somehow feel compelled to say its not more stable? Ok well next time maybe you should find a forum where people talk about the color of grass and you can tell them that its not really green either
Sorry I had to poke fun a bit. I'm going to write down every computer I've ever owned so at least this way I can say that in my opinion, intel is more stable...
Intel 386DX25 on a noname board with Opti chipset - this was pretty stable
Intel 486DX33 - on biostar motherboard - rock solid
Intel 486DX2-66 on asus board - bulletproof
Intel Pentium60 on asus board - bulletproof
Intel P120 on Amptron board - FX chipset... ok but not the most stable system
AMD K6-233 on P55T2P4 HX board (still have this). Amazing stability but some small compatability issues and some programs felt kinda slow
Intel P233 MMX on Asus P55T2P4 HX board. Very stable and definitly faster than my K6 of the same clock speed
Intel Celeron 300A on Abit BH6. Very stable and overclockable.
Intel PIII 450 on Abit BX6 rev2 - one of my best boards of all time
Intel PIII 800 on Abit BX6 rev2 ... just dont wanna give up this board
AMD Thunderbird 1Ghz on MSI board VIA KT133 chipset - very stable but slow IDE
AMD Thunderbird 1.33 on MSI KT266a board. Great system but still slow IDE
AMD XP1600+ on MSI KT266a board. Great CPU but somehow less stable now
AMD XP2100+ on Epox KT333 board. Best AMD setup I ever had
Intel P4 2.4b on ASUS 845 chipset board?? Dont remember. Very stable and impressed with the speed
Intel 2.4c on Abit IS7 mainboard - holy crap this is fast and stable
AMD Athlon64 socket 754 3000+ on Asus A8V board - stable but strange ethernet issues and somehow doesnt seem any faster than my 2.4c
Intel 3.0c on Abit IC7 max3 - holy crap again! I'm never switching to AMD ever again!!!
Intel dual xeon 3Ghz on Asus NCCH-DL mainboard - holy crap again!!! I love this box.
These are my boxes alone. I've built amd and intel boxes for friends and clients as well. All I can say is overall, the AMD boxes seem more quircky and not any faster, at least nothing that is noticable. Multitasking has always ALWAYS felt smoother on my intel boxes.
So in my opinion, I think intel systems seem more stable and less quirky and this is a big deal. I'm willing to give up a bit of speed to get this.
wee96 said:Intel systems arent more stable than AMD's, I just needed to say that because I keep seeing people claim this.
Sir-Fragalot said:The processors aren't, but Intel chipset based boards sure beat out alot of the cheap ass AMD compatible chipsets that are out there. The nForce series being the one exception to that rule.
stealthy123 said:Tualatin
robberbaron said:Do you have a Dually Tually?
stealthy123 said:no my tualatins twin brother was laid to rest last year sadly, however the good news is after a brief greaving period I got it up to 1.6 ghz on a single proc board.
I don't care what anyone says pound for pound its still the best proc ever!!!!
GO TUALLIES!!!!!!!!!!!
Sir-Fragalot said:The processors aren't, but Intel chipset based boards sure beat out alot of the cheap ass AMD compatible chipsets that are out there. The nForce series being the one exception to that rule.
chrisf6969 said:Problems with non-Intel chipsets.
NVidia
Nf1, NF2 & NF3 have made great progress
Nforce 4 is the best yet..... but still not "perfect"
http://forums.nvidia.com/lofiversion/index.php?t8171.html
specifically for the NF4 IDE/SATA problems & incompatibilities.
And unless you're doing a bit check comparison on all of your files you may never know about it.
VIA - do I even need to say anything
Sis/Uli - actually getting better all the time
E4g1e said:It also depends on the individual motherboard itself. When I had the D865PERL, it seemed much less stable than it should have been.
stealthy123 said:i am not an amd or an intel boy I use what works best at the time I use it.
However I am curious, I have had just as many problems with my intel machines as my amd ones, anyone think its just a law of averages that computers break regardless of whats inside it?
actually back in the socket 7 days I don't remember there being a difference at all
Sir-Fragalot said:In the socket 7 days, there wasn't a difference. They all used the same motherboards. If you had a good motherboard with an Intel chipset, you could have what ever you wanted CPU wise, although the AMD's weren't as fast typically as AMD claimed they were.
After, that when the Super7 boards came out, alot of junk VIA and SIS chipsets hit the market. There became a considerable difference in quality between Intel based machines, and AMD based machines.
stealthy123 said:wow i remember back then intel said that the socket was dead and that slot procs were the future.
amd even went with slot A and I though wow I will never see another new socket processor.
that lasted all of 6 months
what the hell was that slot thing about anyways
P-M uses the same architecture as most of their other CPUs, the P6. The first P6 chip was the Pentium Pro, so you see, there really is a lack of innovation on Intel's side. They just finally decided to go with the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" philosophy. Still one has to admit, P-M are great chips . I got one myself, in my laptop.Wrench00 said:I am an AMD fan but I do love the Dothan.. Pentium M is the shiznat, its the only reinovation Intel has done in 4-5 years.
bitter lies. even Intel-loving Tom has showed (and then tried to cover up) the fact that AMD is way more reliable than intel. Remember that 30-day stability test thing? The Intel rig went through 4 different boards, not to mention different video cards. It was also running undervolted, and at about 90C load (as both systems were supposed to bench 24/7).ozziegn said:what keeps me going to Intel? three words: reliability. reliability. reliability.
them AMDs are too damn screwy for my likes.
stealthy123 said:what the hell was that slot thing about anyways
is a blathering idiot.iddqd said:
Scotch77 said:because I trust Intels, They offer less problems. Intel donates alot of money to chartity and education, intels gives tons of scholorships and gives free technology to schools and promotes science and engineering where amd does none Intels are more stable and run better, they are smoother if you ask me.
all in all, I care about things like education and money given to scholorships and things like that. More important that a few more fps in a game.
amd continuies to suck.
Im building a new system now and It will be a Intel. i will never build an amd system, because they just flat out suck.,
stealthy123 said:supermicro mobo's are nothing short of bulletproof.
I wonder if they could make a good via chipset board?
DeChache said:I have had both AMD and Intel and inregards to stability i almost wonder if some of that is the OS on all three off my systems it has taken at least 3 installs of Win XP to have it be stable.
Just some food for thought. Im rather new to this game.
I had a PIII 500 for the longest time and that is still my favorite chip to bad to mobo burnt up.
I only have one AMD system and the rest are Intel so I shop and get whats best
KaptainBlaZzed said:not one damn thing, Intel sucks in my book
they are hotter than crap, the P-D's blow when compared to the X2's, and DDR2 gives no performance gains with the high latencies.
oh and intel is just all around crappy.
I am not an AMD fan-boy, I am just a fair weather computer user and i will use which ever is better and that is AMD for the moment. If intel comes out with something worth buying i will get one, but for the moment AMD is better.