🚀 go-pugleaf

I think anyone would be happy with either chip. AMD is cheaper, and Intel
is, bluntly, better, a proven fact. But that doesn't really matter, they
both get the job done, and the difference is *usually* negligible.
The computer hardware zealotry needs to stop. Do you people realize, that
you "pledge your allegiance" to a slab of silicon? This shows than humanity
is still tribal and easily lead. You people divide yourselves between AMD
vs. Intel, ATI vs. Nvidia, and even PC vs. Mac, perhaps, you should just
realize that you would *probably* be pleased either way.
So I do not sound biased towards Intel, I'm running on an AMD K7 Thunderbird
(800 MHz).

"Larry Yuan" <LYuan@Home.com> wrote in message
news:xuZP5.4917$pD5.91420@quark.idirect.com...
> Okay, hold up a sec.  Although I do agree that an Athlon system can be
more
> stable than a dual Intel setup,  you have to realize that the operations
of
> a computer are not 100% based on the CPU itself.  You don't need to be a
> rocket scientist, or have god-like experiences to realize that so many
other
> components come into play.  For example, if I go from my Dual P800 to a
> T-Bird 1GHz buy only switching the processor and the motherboard, there
> might be a chance that the new system sucks...why?  Maybe because the
> motherboard doesn't like the brand of PC-133 Memory I have in there.
Maybe,
> because of the fact that the Athlon proc. uses more voltage than the
Intel,
> my PSU (power supply) couldn't take the change, or can't distribute enough
> power because of my 4 U2W SCSI HDDs.  As you can see, there's a million
> permutations and combinations that can cause any system to be unstable.
And
> that's not even taking into account the operating system.
>
> Now everyone knows, they even though people tend to use Win9x/NT based
OS's,
> they are not exactly the most efficient in terms of robustness and
> stability.  If you guys REALLY want stability, go pay $20,000 for a
> UltraSparc or something....but wait...you can't play games!  Uh-oh...so
> we're back to Windows again.  At work, I run Win2k Advanced server with 8
> procs, and 4GB of ECC memory.  It runs stable.  Up time, currently, is the
> time between when we upgraded to SP1 until now, and it's still rock solid.
> I'm sure an Athlon can do that, but the fact is, it's not going to get the
> job done in that type of environment.  CHOOSE YOUR HARDWARE BASED ON WHAT
> YOU WANT TO DO WITH IT, NOT BASED ON HOW MANY SOCKETS YOU CAN FILL.
>
> You wanna talk games?  Okay...Let's talk games.  Okay, so Linux is more or
> less out of the picture.  I play some Quake3, NHL 2001, Rogue Spear,
> Half-Life, Baldur's Gate.  All the games work in Win2k Professional SP1 on
> my Dual 800MHz.  They work on my Athlon too.  They work on my PIII450 w/
> WinME installed as well.  I get better frame rates with my PIII450 w/ GTS2
> and WinMe.  If I had to choose an OS, I would still pick Win2k Pro because
> it's more stable.  I can still play the games, and honestly, it's not that
> much of a difference.  If you NEED more frames per second, go use Win9x,
but
> don't rave like a lunatic if your machine locks up once in awhile.
Today's
> games are VERY system resource intensive, and they do push most household
> systems to their limits.
>
> Everyone has different values when it comes to computing.  Some value
> graphics while others, they thing stability is more important.  Still
others
> want speed.  Do your research, ask the questions, and stop arguing about
> what processor is more stable, because nobody really knows which one is
more
> stable. :)
>
> Best,
>
> Larry
>
> "RMS" <rsavoie1@Kiss.my.grits.spammer.home.com> wrote in message
> news:73ZP5.38175$4U6.1894931@news1.rdc2.on.home.com...
> > Well if it ain't the village _ _ _ _ _
> >
> > Let me appologize for that right now, I just couldn't resist :)
> >
> > Now, to be slightly more serious (Not really, just my opinions).
> >
> > No, I'm just a regular smoe with a regular job. I don't have a super
grab
> > bag of experience, I just know when smoke is being blown up my arse. I
> will
> > tell you right now, that any Athlon chip is more stable than a dual
Intel
> > machine. The reason you hear of a few people with Athlon problems is
> because
> > we build, customize, and repair our own systems. The majority of the
> Wintel
> > group get their machines from Uncle Dell. He tell's you exactely what
> parts
> > to put in so their won't be trouble.
> >
> > Windows is based on the X86 architecture. AMD and Intel both use the X86
> > architecture. I'd explain the history for you, but that would take too
> long.
> > It looks like you are trying to say RISC instructions are a bad idea????
> If
> > this is true I won't dignify that with a comment.
> >
> > See below for the responses to your tirade.
> >
> > "COMPUTER VILLAGE" <INFO@COMPUTER-VILLAGE.COM> wrote in message
> > news:3A101FC5.18C8BA54@COMPUTER-VILLAGE.COM...
> > > Hey Rick...I dont doubt that your expertise is somewhere out there,
but
> R
> > u
> > > gonna tell us that the POC that the Athlon chip offers is more stable
> than
> > a
> > > solid Dual 600EB u gotta be smokin some good ass shi* ...anyways next
> time
> >
> > YES
> >
> > > limit your responses to your Athlon partners...by the way I could take
> any
> > Dual
> >
> > Just replying too the existing header.
> >
> > > Athlon if it exists and smoke it with any PIII chip even lower in
> > > MHz...(remember that Windows is based on the Pentium architecture not
> the
> > AMD
> >
> > Hahahahahahahahahahahaha..... Ha!
> >
> > > -and the RISC instructions, one that by the way was not even in
anyone's
> > head
> > > at the time that P and W were making money out of us...   ;-)
> >
> > If you want to know what RISC is, visit Alpha processors, and see what
> speed
> > is.
> >
> > >
> > > Take that AMD kiddo
> > >
> >
> > Ouch!
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > RMS wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for your opinion. Since I think you are totally wrong about
> > virtually
> > > > everything, I'll let everybody know how it really works (IMNSHO).
> > > >
> > > > I have 3 systems, Athlon 800Mhz, PIII 550Mhz, and a K6-2 400Mhz
> (Enough
> > of
> > > > that.). I have been actually working in computer maintenance/network
> > admin
> > > > at a site that has 1200 clients for several years now (No MSCE,
ABCD,
> > or
> > > > anything else like that.).
> > > >
> > > > Facts:
> > > > 1) Dual processor systems are for systems that run multiple
> applications
> > at
> > > > the same time, anything else is a waste of CPU processing power.
(The
> > > > exception of course is high end servers with OS's that have real
> > symetrical
> > > > processing, at the kernel level, like Solaris or IBM AIX.
> > > > 2) Win NT is a joke of an OS compared to any Unix OS (Just ask a
real
> > > > administrator.) unless your main goal is to have everything
automated
> > and
> > > > "who cares about performance".
> > > > 3) Win NT is a joke of an OS compared to Win 98 for playing games
> (This
> > may
> > > > be changing with Directx 8.0).
> > > > 4) Hayes modem - Not,
> > > >  Netgear NIC - Not,
> > > >  Intel PIII CPU - Not,
> > > >  Creative DVD - Not !
> > > > 5) USR modem - Yes,
> > > >  3Com NIC - Yes,
> > > >  AMD Athlon CPU, - Yes
> > > >  Pioneer DVD - Yes !
> > > >
> > > > Maybe if you had purchased the right hardware instead of taking what
> > came in
> > > > the pre-assembled "box", you would have been able to run Win98.
Maybe
> if
> > you
> > > > hadn't wasted your cash on the 2 Intel PIII 550's, you could have
had
> a
> > > > totally stable Athlon 900Mhz for the same price. I understand that
you
> > > > wasted your bucks on that SMP because you wanted to be the coolest
guy
> > > > around, and now you have to use NT so it won't appear that your
> wasting
> > your
> > > > SMP money, but just live with it. Just out of curiostity, how long
did
> > you
> > > > have the dual PIII system before you were told by a friend that
Win98
> > does
> > > > not do SMP?
> > > >
> > > > Last note: If the best you can achieve is "crash less", you
slouldn't
> be
> > > > throwing your opinions around.
> > > >
> > > > So long to another Wintel clone, Rick
> > > >
> > > > "Mark Borton" <MarkBorton@DEEPSPACENINE.COM> wrote in message
> > > > news:974120262.409.0.nnrp-02.c1ed3851@news.demon.co.uk...
> > > > > I have 4 systems
> > > > >
> > > > > a Dual PIII500 thats NEEDS win2000 to utilize its SMP
> > capabilities...and
> > > > > this machine outshines my mates PIII800 at all but the really high
> end
> > 3d
> > > > > benchmarks where it equals them (Both off us have Geforce 2
ultras,
> > both
> > > > > using Detonator 3 drivers, mine win2k his win98SE)
> > > > >
> > > > > A PII350, and 2 P200MMX machines
> > > > >
> > > > > All the systems run faster, boot faster, crash less and are
> generally
> > > > nicer
> > > > > to work with now than undier 95/98....I have had no problems, no
> blue
> > > > > screens , and havent turned 1 system off since they were installed
> (my
> > > > > running time is now approching 3 months i think...possibly
> > longer...can`t
> > > > > remember when i bought 2k)
> > > > >
> > > > > As a long time user of winxx right back to V3, and as both an NT4
> and
> > > > win2k
> > > > > MCSE i can say that Win2k is the platform of choice for games and
> > serious
> > > > > work....i wish "High" street computer sellers would relise the
> > potentiol
> > > > of
> > > > > SMP systems, you can get a cheaper system of comparable performnce
> now
> > > > using
> > > > > SMP than you can buy a Ghz system that does the same thing..
> > > > >
> > > > > Win2k , if your not buying shoddy clone OEM hardware is the best
OS
> > for
> > > > > gaming...Get yourself an Nvida Graphics card, Creative labs sound
> card
> > and
> > > > > DVD decoder, a Hayes V90 "HARDWARE" modem, a couple of TRUE INTEL
> > > > Processors
> > > > > , a Gigabyte Dual Processor Board and a Netgear network adapter if
> > your
> > > > > networking (the TX310 is good) and youll never look back
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>