[eagleclaw]

AMD or INTEL

[MatthewPapa]

AMD all the way baby.

[Taristin]

AMD

Intel can lick my size 24 hoof.

[GoulMeister]

AMD rocks the boat, but they should actually tell us the processor speeds as well as the intel comparrison.

[Taristin]

My 2800+ tends to fluctuate it's speeds... It's been 1.9 Ghz, and it's been 2.4 Ghz... I dunno what it is now... I haven't paid any attention to it once it started to level out at 2.4... >.>


Edit: Just checked, it's at 2.088 Ghz... Not bad.

[Grey Wolf]

As Intel just stopped giving actualy processor speeds, AMD isn't likely to start advertising MHz again. As for the processor I favor, it'd have to be the Athlon 64 line. Especially the 939 variants.

Raa: There is something seriously wrong with your computer. The 2800+ should be either at 2.25 or 2.08, depending on whether it's a Thouroughbred or a Barton. But 1.9 and 2.4 are just not right...

[Taristin]

No, I editted the post, I guess you missed it, i's at 2.08 now. It was fluctuating the first few days I had it in, but it's been good ever since.

[Nuke]

yea im gonna go amd next time. intel needs to be smaked arount abit wtith about a foot and a half of inch thick rebar. there proccessors were good 2 years ago, but its like they havent came up with anything new.  i dont get amd's naming conventions though. its totally alien to me.

[Grey Wolf]

AMD naming conventions are supposedly based around comparitive performance to the old Tbird core, but really compares to the Intel line, whereas Intel's new naming convention is just random numbers.

[MatthewPapa]

Yea, when I first started using Athlons I made a noobish assumption. I thought that a 2800+ meant 2.8 Ghz. I was pretty disappointed at first until I realized how versatile Athlon is and how well can be overclocked.

[Thorn]

I like whatever one I can get for the least amount of money.

[Nix]

I just barely upgraded from an Athlon XP 1700+ to an Athlon 64 3000+ and the performance is great as of now - 32 bit mode.  Some preliminary 64Bit tests I've done havent been phenominal, but then again I'm using XP 64bit pre release with all beta versions of drivers for my devices, as the dang OS isnt even finished yet.

[Fury]

Athlon 64, no competition here. Well maybe except Semprons which are A64's without 64-bit capability. Makes excellent low-end CPU.

It will be interesting to see both AMD's and Intel's dual core solutions in the near future.

[Clave]

IBM

http://www.apple.com/uk/g5processor/

[Setekh]

AMD on my laptop.

[karajorma]

AMD on every PC I've ever built.

[aldo_14]

AMD

Simply better value for money & performance.

[GoulMeister]

me want G5, but will it only come out for apples?

[aldo_14]

Yes' it's not a PC-compatible architecture (RISC, whereas as AMD/Intel desktops are CISC IIRC)

[mitac]

AMD Duron with Applebred (T-Bred B)-Core. Originally clocked at 1400 with 133 FSB, running just fine at 1800/200 FSB.

I've been running AMD processors for like eight years, and that won't change for a while. Intel CPUs cost too much and create too much heat.