Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD CPU's bugged, patch degrades performance.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • replied
    Originally posted by MajikMyst
    It copied Intel when it came out with Slot 1. AMD called it Slot A. AMD has always been copying Intel and trying to keep up. Histroy speaks for itself, it is only there for others to read and learn.
    AMD and Intel have cross-patent agreements. The inventor has 2 or 3 years to explore the invention commercially, only then the other can use it also. Ex: Intel created the SSE2 multimedia instructions and used them on the Pentium 4 while AMD could not do that for at least the first Athlon XP. AMD created the 64bit instructons introduced on the Athlon 64, and Intel only started to use them on the last Pentiums.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by Tarantella View Post
    Well the op is deliberately being provocative, titling the thread "AMD cpu's bugged" instead of "phenoms bugged" but we all know that anyway and as far as gamers should be concerned its nothing to be triumphalist about as all it does is allow intel to keep their top cpu prices higher for longer.
    Yep. Those quad core Intel cpu's won't come down in price too fast until AMD provides a good competitor. I remember back in the Pentium II days at how disappointed I was in price changes in Intel processors over a year's time. Won't be good to anyone if we go back to those days

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Well the op is deliberately being provocative, titling the thread "AMD cpu's bugged" instead of "phenoms bugged" but we all know that anyway and as far as gamers should be concerned its nothing to be triumphalist about as all it does is allow intel to keep their top cpu prices higher for longer.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Majikmyst. Who gives a ****? I guess i do, but just a little. What is your question? Do you need help? I get what i can afford. I don't care too much. amd and intel are just 2 big companies trying ta make money. So what? Would somebody pleez delete this post.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    I have a 6400+ Black, its right on par with the e6750, and I have no problems. When I bought this chip it was 200$ compared to the e-6750 at over 400$.(6 months ago) Everybody knows that Intel is better at the moment. In almost every review that I have read it states that if you are using the processor for games only, there is very little difference. Now if your doing alot of things at the same time then you will. The only point I can see from this thread is to **** people off that allready have AMD's. From what I read in the forum rules you should be banned and this post deleted for your statements.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    You AMD folks are funny! You people really need to learn not to believe everything you read.

    Cel: If rumors were tumors, we would all have cancer?

    Who invented the x86 platform? Say it loudly now?

    You people can think what you want. Like a religious cultist, nobody can reason with you or show you any facts that you believe. You see what you want to see.

    Old: Yup! It was back in the socket 7 days. I think I kinda of said that. I kind of stated that with "I remember the OLD days..."

    None the less, my point holds! It did happen! AMD has always been a problem child. It copied Intel when it came out with Slot 1. AMD called it Slot A. AMD has always been copying Intel and trying to keep up. Histroy speaks for itself, it is only there for others to read and learn. If you want to spend your money on an AMD then that is your choice! Don't get pissy when you get what you pay for. Do you spend all your money with the same philosophy as you do computer processors?

    They rushed to be first at something and went to market with their quad cores without proper testing? Now Intel is wiping the floor with them on all bench marks quad to quad. AMD has faulty CPU's and this isn't going to hold well with business that bought their products.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by MajikMyst View Post
    I remember the old days when Intel and AMD could use the same main board and having to put an Intel chip in a computer to install windows. Once windows was installed you could swap it out for an AMD chip. Otherwise windows would crash during the hardware detection portion of setup.

    I honestly do hope that AMD does come around and ends being a serious competition to Intel. It would be awsome. I might even buy an AMD based computer. But until they come up with a CPU that has the over all performance and stability of an Intel, my money stays with Intel.
    That was way back when CyriX was involved in competing wuth Intel and AMD. The Cyrix chips were much less expensive. That was like 1994? Building Cyrix versions of 486 and PI computers because the chips were like less than half the price of the Intel. I had a Intel 286-16MHz and then a 486-25MHz with intel chips. Then several 486, PI, and PII, all with Cyrix chips. Then the PIII was super socket 7 AMD 450MHz that would OV to 550MHz, way cheaper then the Intel PIII 550 at the time. The the PIV cam out followed bu the AMD XP series. The XP1700+ was super cheap compared to the equivilant Intel chip. All the AMD XP chips were much less expensive than the Intel equivilents. Then the AMD64 entered the scene and AMD had better performing chips than Intel and they were much leass expensive. AMD wins the round, but the Intel inside advertising was on every TV and radio station every 10 minutes for several years brainwashing everyone. Then, finally, Intel brought out the C2D. AMD price per performance was still very competitive until the OC friendly stepping came out. Then Intel launched a 3rd wave of chips like the E6750, E6850, and Q6600 and it was game over baby. Now AMD is hurting and the Phenom has issues, but ATI is making a comeback. I guess we will see what comes next.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by cel4145 View Post
    Hmmm....this would be the same Intel that did not plan to provide x86 emulation until AMD's success in the market with 64bit cpu's forced them to as they were playing catch up in providing 64bit cpu's in the first place? And the same Intel that used wonderful RDRAM with their CPU's? And the same Intel whose price/performance ratio was worse than AMD's for a number of years. And the same Intel who is currently being investigated by the EU and the State of New York for monopolistic business practices. Yeah. They definitely sound like they are always a better choice of a company. Get a grip. These are hardware companies in competition with each other. Each has made gains back and forth over the years to exceed the technological advances of the other. And for good innovation, I hope it continues that way. But enjoy your fantasy.

    But then again, why should anyone listen to someone who is interested not in inquiry and discussion, but who has the juvenile goal of "smear[ing] it in the faces of the AMD crowed?"
    Amd has been exellent over the years but the main reason intel is better right now is this.. In short they fired the head usa intel guy that was in charge of making processors, testing.. whatever.. not exactly sure.. and replaced him with some indian guy who apparently tried a pentium m (laptop processor) in a desktop.. it ran cooler/more efficient etc.. and they have been the better processor to get ever since.. does amd suk now? no.. but they just havn't had something happen like intel has to make them put out a kickass processor.. they are still good price/performance ratio.. but intel is too.. especially when you can get a cheap core2duo and overclock the hell out of it for basically the same price anyway.. Intel is just the better architecture right now.. Everyone thought the phenom was going to be incredible because amd has a good track record.. the first one is about 30percent slower than the q6600.. If they expect to be successfull the phenom has to be better or a lot closer to the q6600.

    The newer ones will be closer/better but then you got the penryn coming out etc.. I've had both types of system about half and half.. got the athlon 64 when it first came out etc I just get whats good.. not a fanboy.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by HereComesDeath View Post
    Yeah, I like AMD, but the other day, I was playing UT3 on my friend's quad core rig(2 GB ram, and an 8800GTS), and MAN what a difference in speed and fluidity it has compared to my little dual core....When I build my gaming rig, in the next few months, im gonna get a Quad core, 4Gb ram, 2x 8800gt's....you know...the works...I CANT WAIT!!
    I've read benchmark articles stating that having 2 8800gt's over one isn't that much of a difference.. Just thought i'd let you know.. I don't have the article but I think it's pretty easy to find.. i'm at work.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    There's that whole business of Intel trying to derail the OLPC project too, which is despicable beyond words.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    lmfao.. well said cel

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by MajikMyst View Post
    Don't get pissy because someone asks you to back your claims up. But hey! Thanks for going back a decade to prove your point? Ummm? I mean lack there of. I never claimed Intel was perfect, just better. And they always have been better.
    Hmmm....this would be the same Intel that did not plan to provide x86 emulation until AMD's success in the market with 64bit cpu's forced them to as they were playing catch up in providing 64bit cpu's in the first place? And the same Intel that used wonderful RDRAM with their CPU's? And the same Intel whose price/performance ratio was worse than AMD's for a number of years. And the same Intel who is currently being investigated by the EU and the State of New York for monopolistic business practices. Yeah. They definitely sound like they are always a better choice of a company. Get a grip. These are hardware companies in competition with each other. Each has made gains back and forth over the years to exceed the technological advances of the other. And for good innovation, I hope it continues that way. But enjoy your fantasy.

    But then again, why should anyone listen to someone who is interested not in inquiry and discussion, but who has the juvenile goal of "smear[ing] it in the faces of the AMD crowed?"

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Originally posted by spyte View Post
    Hmm, you on a smear campaign Majik? Did an AMD processor rape you in your sleep or something??

    http://www.intel.com/support/processors/pentium/ppiie/

    http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/w...ly/010398.html

    I just googled 'intel erratum' and there are countless articles of them having problems over the years.
    Don't get pissy because someone asks you to back your claims up. But hey! Thanks for going back a decade to prove your point? Ummm? I mean lack there of. I never claimed Intel was perfect, just better. And they always have been better. It is just nice to smear it in the faces of the AMD crowed for a change because you morons crow about price difference and the illusion of better performance. I went to an AMD seminar not that long ago, I saw an ATI display? Showing of their top end card while comparing it to an Nvidia card that came out 3 years ago? Guess ATI has learned something from AMD. When your stuff sucks, compare to your competitions stuff that was out years ago.

    I also have some personal experience on the issue. Can anyone name an Intel certified power supply? Oooops! Sorry everyone, any power supply will work with Intel, that is AMD that forces you to spend more money on a power supply that will work? Wait? What was that about price difference?

    There isn't a CPU in the AMD lineup that hasn't had issues of some kind or another. Special power supplies, special ram, special mainboards, heat issues, ect. ect. I remember the old days when Intel and AMD could use the same main board and having to put an Intel chip in a computer to install windows. Once windows was installed you could swap it out for an AMD chip. Otherwise windows would crash during the hardware detection portion of setup.

    I honestly do hope that AMD does come around and ends being a serious competition to Intel. It would be awsome. I might even buy an AMD based computer. But until they come up with a CPU that has the over all performance and stability of an Intel, my money stays with Intel.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Please no more fanboy analysis. Here are legit reviews. The good, the not so good, and the really not so good.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/..._athlon_64_x2/

    http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/..._motherboards/

    http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/...dies_for_jobs/

    All must hope AMD turns things around and returns to competition. Competition is very good for the consumer, monopolies are not.

    Leave a comment:


  • replied
    Intel errata? Intel processors never have errata because at Intel, quality is job 0.99989960954!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X