🚀 go-pugleaf

Your absolutely right Larry. We're just toying around.

bye, Rick

"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
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>