I'm leaving AMD camp

**iconoclastic** · 08-04-2003, 05:37 PM

Originally posted by Ammok
AMD incompatible with programs? which one pray tell?

This was the case for the AMD K6-3 series when running windows 2000, a patch was developed for the problem , which was not generally discussed, unless you were doing a drill down and had the chip you would never know what it was, ruined a dual boot linux and win 2K installation on me.

There was a discussion of windows being modified to accomdate the instruction set on the AMD K-7 chip when running longhorn (earlier betas) a error had cropped up that created a loop for some calculations related to graphics and screen repaints it was a matter of timeing the AMD had to be slowed down to level of the operating system

sometimes Bill Gates et al will build a beta with a chip deal in mind to increase sales, look back to the fraudulent DR dos history where win 3.1 for work groups would give an error if run over DR DOS

**Slade54** · 08-04-2003, 06:36 PM

Ok then, AMD had to have a problem patched up for an old processor.

And nVidia has a problem with FSAA in HL2.

Looks like we shouldnt buy from the leading graphics manufacturer (in terms of market share) because of a bug in one program (though one in teh OS is a big one) which will be resolved in the next version of DirectX

**iconoclastic** · 08-04-2003, 07:21 PM

Software can be patched, hardware problems may not be as easy to fix but nothing is unsurmountable with a little injunity
fools may say it can't be done ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, every one else can be sure that it will be done ,,,,,,,,be it with technology or magic there will be a breakthrough that will be implimented that will make high technology seem to be magic,,,,,,,,for only a few years,,, and then it will seem like it is something that is so simple we will not be able to conceive that it was never that way before

The first MB of memory as an upgrade cost a company I worked for $10,000, the first Hard drive cost $10,000, it had a capacity of 5 MB

The year was 1982, The computer was a MPM operating system,manufactured by Northstar it served 7 workstations networked across a 3 story building data was stored on 8 inch 180 kb flopies single sided

The processor was a 4 MHZ motorolia

The monitors were green phosper screens with about a 320x 300 resolution or worse I know that it flickered enough to damage my eyes

On that system the company published 4 magizines handeled accounts receivable/ payable, payroll and all client contact along with printing 50K mailing labels every week

It also broke down every other week

**zybch** · 08-04-2003, 07:54 PM

Theres the old saying that computers put people out of work.
Theres also another one which goes
"Every computer that has put someone out of work needs at least two people to keep it running"

The business with software not behaving well on different chips always makes me think that in the beginning (at least when good old win3.1 was around) programs wereoften writen to exploit some low level 'hacks' to make it work faster/better on the original Intel chips that were the only ones available at the time. As soon as these same little tricks are attempted on say an AMD or Cyrix chip a program might crash, even though the chip was completely compatible with the i86 design.

Many old DOS games would run quite badly on the new S3 range of cards as they had been optimised to run (using shortcuts and hacks) on cards like the Tseng ET400 etc.
S3 cards were new and nobody had learnt to squeeze every ounce of performance out of them yet.

Thats not to say that the S3 cards were no good, just that at the time, programmers were able to exploit other chips to run faster than they would if normal (standard) programming methods were used.

**python134r** · 08-08-2003, 01:51 AM

When it works its great and when it dont it sux. Regarding the initial post, I've built a couple score of new boxes for custoners with K7S5A pro and non pro and L7S7A2 's and had few problems besides the lost cmos issue with the former. If done right with the proper hardware and knowledge there stable and cheap. Im not gonna flame about n00b's and such.......I make a living off em. You can have the best hardware but if you dont know, you have heartache and frustration.

1st post here and happy to of found this forum!

**Jimstep** · 08-08-2003, 03:34 AM

Originally posted by python134r
...
1st post here and happy to of found this forum!

Welcome to SysOpt!

You'll find very helpful advice and some interesting conversations at this forum.

**Melov** · 08-08-2003, 04:54 AM

I love P4's. They are so much smarter.

**BipolarBill** · 08-08-2003, 10:27 AM

No CPU is "smart". Compared to a human (well, most humans), they are pretty stupid.

**Slade54** · 08-08-2003, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by Melov
I love P4's. They are so much smarter.

Wow, is that not the biggest troll comment.

**Rugor** · 08-08-2003, 12:39 PM

It's right up there.

How about "I love P4s they waste so many clock cycles?"

**Melov** · 08-08-2003, 02:20 PM

stfu newbies.

P4's are smart enough to slow down when they start to reach bad temperaters. ****ty AMD's keep going then blow up. gg

**BipolarBill** · 08-08-2003, 02:31 PM

Melov - are trying to get banned? If so, you're about to succeed. This ain't your playpen.

You left yourself open with a simplistic and erroneous statement. You deserve everything you get for that.

**Bigjakkstaffa** · 08-08-2003, 03:24 PM

P4's are smart enough to slow down when they start to reach bad temperaters. ****ty AMD's keep going then blow up.

Bzzzt, wrong answer, Nforce 2 motherboards have integrated thermal throttling and shutdown protection features for AMD CPU's.

Given that we now know you have no indepth knowledge of AMD CPU's, have you ever even used one?

--Jakk

**Rugor** · 08-08-2003, 03:42 PM

Intel puts thermal circuitry on the processor die-- AMD mandates it be installed on the motherboard.

Each has advantages and disadvantages.

Intel uses a heatspreader on the P4, AMD does not on the XP. The heatspreader provides an additional layer of physical protection. However it also provides a layer of thermal insulation being an extra step between the die and the HSF. Intel can get away with this because they have a larger die area which offsets the less efficient heat transfer.

P4 is better in high bandwidth applications. Athlon is better in applications that require raw FPU power.

Each has strengths and weaknesses.

Unsupported claims don't earn a lot of respect around here.

**genesound** · 08-08-2003, 03:59 PM

Unsupported claims don't earn a lot of respect around here.

Neither does a "stfu newbies." from a n00b poster

edit - sheesh, I started building these confounded contraptions about the time marvelous Melov there was born

Maybe I'm gettin to old for this

Thread: I'm leaving AMD camp

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

leaving amd camp

Re: leaving amd camp

Posting Permissions