Why do most postings involve AMD?

[chapmc]

I am new to this forum and relatively new to building/repairing PCs. I have been reading postings here off and on for several days and I notice that most questions relate to AMD products. I see very little about Intel. Is this intentional and perhaps part of the purpose of the forum? Or do people who build their own PCs tend to use AMD? And if so why? I have no prejudice one way or the other although I have never owned anything but Intel based. That's not quite true because I have a Cyrix I have been using for a few weeks. If this is a silly topic please ignore me.

[Thud]

Simply put, I believe it's because most on here are smart and do their research, and have found that right now, AMD offers the best "bang for the buck" when it comes to putting together a new system. So, that's what lots of folks on here are using.

That's my opinion. Welcome to Sysopt!

[randy48]

Not silly! AMD is less expensive and IMHO far superior to Intels processors. I use both and have found AMD processors will out-crack RC5 code http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif Much faster http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/smile.gif

[giant69]

You have a valid question there chapmc. Presently, AMD simply has a superior price to performance ratio over Intel. As a large portion of users here overclock there machines, they can generate much higher performance substantially cheaper with AMD products than they can with Intel. It also seems to be a cyclical thing with both companies taking turns being on top. Some users also root for the underdog (AMD) over the giant (Intel). I feel that if Intel were to match prices and technology with AMD's products that it could swing the other way. The only winner is the consumer as manufacturers have to release faster and more efficient products to stay on top of the market. One large mis-step (or several small ones even) can doom a company to death.i.e. 3dfx. Stay tuned to the direction of forums as they provide a great glimpse of the future of the puter industry as a whole !!!!steve .
p.s I am presently running rigs with cpus' from both sides of the fence. http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/wink.gif

[OuTpaTienT]

As already stated, currently AMD has the best "bang for the buck". Not only are AMD chips cheaper than Intels (for the same Mhz) but they are also generally faster than Intels (for the same Mhz). It's difficult to past that up...whether you like AMD or not.

When (or if) Intel gets back on top with a superior chip then you'll start seeing more people post about Intel (or VIA, or whoever is making the best CPUs).

[Dputiger]

If you look back about six months you'll find tons posts about the Celeron which, until the Duron, was the big 'bang for the buck' chip.

[RLT65]

If AMD was not around (or cyrix), most of us would probably not even be on the internet, because we could not afford to buy PC's! Intel could (and did) charge very high CPU prices.

Rhonda

[sharder8]

Chapmc --

In my case, I have used both Intel and AMD, but when it came to owning, I bought an AMD because of the price. Later when I up-graded, I stayed with AMD and bought an Athlon system, not for price, but rather for performance.

I still watch what is going on at Intel, (and I worked on an Intel account), but in the last year, I've watched as Intel has stumbled out of the blocks more times that not. AMD has consistantly came out of the blocks running and never looked back.

[TechJumper]

Many of the users on SysOpt feel that AMD is the underdog that has a chance in this industry. Yaa, maybe they don't advertise as much, but it is my opinion that they operate better, and they are much cheaper.


Mike

[Axel]

bottom line -
EVERYTHING is tested on an intel standard - so there are less problems with intel chips generally speaking -
because of this - intel costs a third again to twice as much as an AMD product. It also takes longer to get to market which is why advanced micro devices usually comes out with the fastest thing going - if not the most reliable.

next - Intel locks down their chips - they are not easy to overclock to higher clock cycles. AMD, on the other hand can be easily overclocked until you fry the chip - two reasons why people come here asking a lot of AMD questions.

next - AMD isn't tested with as many things as intel is - so you have more conflicts and problems which no-one in public has seen before - but in the millions of chips sold- we, the users and abusers - will find the problems enough times to draw attention to them.....

I have both AMD and Intel. As I'm more interested in using the equipment rather than trying to overclock and constantly fix things and patch things - I prefer intel - but that comes with a grain of salt - I make a good living and will pay for peace of mind.... I can afford it.... many other builders can't - so they put up with a cheaper alternative - that or they wanted the fastest screaming machine out there - and since AMD releases new speeds first generally speaking - that's what they buy -

but when you buy the newest thing - expect problems - the "newest thing" buyers are everyone else's beta-testers - same reason I won't buy or install the latest microsoft operating system - let 6 million other people buy it and beta-test it - I'll wait for service pack 6 to come out - then I'll start putting it on my systems knowing any problem I hit has been seen and well documented by at least a million other users before me....

[photobug]

I'm new to SysOpt as well and regarding this topic, heres my $.02

Intel is the proven leader but it's also the "establishment" and that always draws some resent. I don't buy that their technology lags AMD's. Yes, they have made their boo-boo's (e.g. the 820 chipset solution), but I believe that the new P4-850 platform will quickly become the industry standard. I realize that recent reviews and articles point out that AMD's 760 266MHz DDR solution is a better one, but where is it?

Anand Shimpi (aka AnandTech) recently wrote "its almost painful to put money down today on an obsolete 100MHz FSB/PC133 (Athlon) platform" and he goes on to suggest that the smart way to go is with the new Via KT133A chipset. But just like DDR, the 266MHz FSB Thunderbirds and KT133A chipset motherboards are also not available!

And if a P4-850 solution is too expensive because of the high cost of RDRAM, what's wrong with a P3EB on a D815EEAAL or CUSL2 motherboard, which results in a true 133MHz FSB solution (no overclocking required)...

[amd_guy]

I'll put it in Gamers' terms -- AMD r0x0rz j00r s0x0rz. Understood? =P

[photobug]

amd_guy:

I'm not a gamer, so I don't understand that.

To each his (her) own, but I spend most of my PC-time on my digital photography hobby (not that there's anything wrong with playing games).

[DemonKnight]

I think he said "AMD rules your ****" or somthing like that. (personaly I cant stand it when people use that "gamers Talk" or "Cracker Speak" mumbo jumbo.

[BFlurie]

Not many @ Sysopt buy packaged systems -- at least not on their home systems. The low prices of AMD CPU's (& Celerys also) are irresistable to the "builder" when there's good track info & experience available. Also, AMD leaves their CPUs purposely tweakable -- another plus for builders.

[Dputiger]

Frankly, I've never bought the whole 'AMD's are less stable' ****.

I've built eight AMD systems in the last year, based around both Socket-7 and Duron CPU's. I've not had a problem with either. Frankly, most of the time, when I see people complaining about AMD compatibility, it's usually because their using some other cheap-*** component--a lousy motherboard, bad RAM, etc.

Besides--even if AMD chips are slightly more flaky than Intel ones, the fact that a 1 Ghz AMD chip costs about 40% of the 1 Ghz P3 and outperforms it is enough for me.

As to Intel being an industry leader...sadly this is no longer true.

There was a time when new Intel technology wasn't scrambling to stay ahead of the competition. When the P2 came out it buried anything else on the market--hard.

Now? We hear blather about 'P4 optimized code.' Four years ago, we didn't NEED optimized code--but that's what happens when marketing, not engineering, runs a chip design company.

[tcul72]

dputiger..i totally agree with you. most people that have stability issues with their rigs automaticly think it's a problem with the cpu or motherboard.but most of the time it is a driver issue, or a hardware issue that can be resolved with a little investigating. the only problem i ever had with my duron/a7v setup was the first night i got it. it would lock up as soon as i started playing any 3d game. all it took was removing one card at a time to find out what the problem was. my montego2 a3d 2.0 sound card. searched the net for about 10 minutes got the latest drivers. installed them and problem solved. never had a problem after that. except when i fried my duron 650 http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/frown.gif but that was my fault http://sysopt.earthweb.com/forum/wink.gif

[doctj]

Hey photobug, read this article before stating the P4 is going to be an industry standard. http://www.emulators.com/pentium4.htm