• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Going back to AMD

marscay said:
maybe the program is a heap of ****???

try encoding through CCE and you'll feel the power of the quad str8 away, the same goes for encoding lossless music to lossy/mp3 with Lame for example.

the quad is only as useful as the software used and the operator using it.
Click to expand...

I am merely pointing this one example out.

The fact that the very same program can run 4 instances of itself better on a 2-core setup than it can on a 4-core setup... Read into what I said properly.

Whether or not the program is or isnt any cop is completely irrelevant I feel.

I mean... when I had the E6300, I ran Folding at Home 2 times - one on each core right... I was still able to run ConvertXtoDVD 4 times and convert all 4 video filas over from AVI on E: to DVD on D:.

Then, I moved up to the Q6600 and I ran 4 instances of F.a.H ( One to each core ) and I used 4 editions of ConvertXtoDVD, assuming that the 4 cores will each get one go at Folding and ConvertXtoDVD and the 2.4Ghz of the 6600 over the 1.8Ghz of the 6300 would alos prove helpful, but this was never to be seen.

Same hadware etc, and in fact, it was simply a CPU change, but the whoel system did not respond anywhere near what I thought it would.

I gave up!


I then bought a Q9450 and this was a useable CPU for sure, but I still find that quad core is really no better than a good dual core... Im not impressed at all anymore and so I am finding the AMD call too much.

I now have everythgin ready, except the Mobo.

For those who remember my rantings on when I moved from the AMD to the E6300, might remember how I felt that even back then, the AMD had somethign over the Intels, and now many are saying it again, its only strengthening my desire to try AMD out again.
 
This thread got me puzzled with some of the responses in it so me and my friend had a little compare amongst ourselves me with my p45 and q9450 and him with his am2+ and 9850be. On convertxtodvd mine beat his by 2 minutes using a 700mb avi file, on 3dmark o6 my score was 700 points higher then his we both have the same amount and type of memory ie 800hz dd2 and we both have 74gb raptor drives as our main os drive.

As far as games went we only tested two (all that we have in common lol) on css i managed 12fps more then him and on cod4 we were basically the same give or take 3-4fps to either of us. So final comparison was that we both actually had good systems that we were happy with and did everything we wanted so whether it is intel or amd if your happy with what you've got who cares what other people think. There may be differences but really are they that large to really argue about let alone insult people *cough* immortalgeek *cough*.
 
immortalgeek said:
No im not! , im merely saying that experience was a lot faster using the phenom. Your just a ***** that is typing one liners in the hope people will like you!

Diiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiick
Click to expand...


Oh dear, any credibility has just been chucked out of the window.
 
immortalgeek said:
Ok....
Firstly... Im a qualified I.T Manager so know what im talking about
Click to expand...

you gave any credibility away you had (?) right there.

immortalgeek said:
Fourthly its a known fact to people in the know that the phenom has the memory controller built onto the die as intel has to use the fsb.
Click to expand...

that didn't exactly help you either, anyone whose been following the industry for the last few yrs since A64 was released knew that ...it's not exactly new to Phenom or insider information :)

immortalgeek said:
I question your claim that you work in IT as you obviously dont know what your talking about. My intel setup was as good as it could have got. I had 8gb ram, fatality board, mint cooler, fast hard disk and it took 25 mins to install flight sim. My phenom took just 8 mins , hardly a miniscule improvement!!
Click to expand...

and this just proves your delusion, the fact that a similar system was 3 times faster for a game installation suggests the intel box had a major problem somewhere ....and that you took this difference as performance related shows you have a lot to learn ...both about pc technology and manors toward others who have more knowledge than you.
 
Last edited:
Seems like it's the MSI K9A2 Platinum 790FX at the moment, it's around £90 for what seems like a very nice board.
Don't know if this is likely to change in the next month or 2, still waiting for proper release dates for new boards. :(
 
immortalgeek said:
No im not! , im merely saying that experience was a lot faster using the phenom. Your just a ***** that is typing one liners in the hope people will like you!

Diiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiick
Click to expand...

I'd forgotten that the schools had broken up for the holidays... :rolleyes:
 
Hmmm.... Clearly a Neutral post!

I think to be fair, that we have AMD fans and intel fans ( I wont quite go as far as to say fanboys, so please dont think thats what I am saying ) and clearly some wont be swayed no matter what you say, some will.

I have always been a stout AMD supporter ( Stout? - oh haha! ) but seeing the sheer raw speed the E6300 had over my fastest AMD was just too much and I instantly moved over.

Now AMD have caught up, sure, the intel supporters cannot all hack this and I see too much silly bickering and quite honestly childish taunts coming from here there and everywhere ,and its really getting silly.

If you like AMD then great, go with AMD, if you like Intel, thats great too, go with intel.

I am now neutral I feel or at least I hope I am. I have had a good few Intels as of late and I now fancying giving AMD another turn... Which I am doing with a fannymom Quad.

If I find it better to use than my Q9450, then it will take its place, if not then it will be my No2, simple as.
 
Fair enough to be honest.

I may have missed out on suggestions that people have made as the thread has gone a bit messy but if you want to go the AM2+ route, I'd strongly recommend waiting out a few weeks for the motherboards with the new SB750 southbridge to appear. Anandtech, while they aren't the greatest for AMD based reviews especially for overclocks, they've shown that it does make a difference. The current SB600 southbridge is getting on a little bit and was never exactly tailored for Phenom as such. 790GX/SB750 boards (Gigabyte 790GX DS4) are appearing in the states for $139 and I suspect the top end 790FX's will be paired with SB750 later on in the month. The gap between the two platforms aren't as big as they used to be and I for one want to try out Phenom myself simply as they look like they're actually half interesting to overclock.

Perhaps while you wait for SB750 based boards to appear, you can keep an eye out for more Intel Nehalem/Bloomfield benchmarks to appear. You may even want to go this route instead in October time, although it'd set you back more.

Edit- Apologies, found mention of SB750 on Page2. Sorry for the slight regurgitation of info :o
 
Last edited:
Get a 4870 and you're half way there! Thats AMD hardware ;) Seriously tho. Stay away from their cpus, liking AMD stuff it not a good enough reason if you can get somethin' faster and better :)

Get good affordable hardware and don't fanny fanboi around!
 
Last edited:
MUL:
Yes, I ordered a DS3 Mobo for the Phenom, however, under advise, I got shiot of it and I too am waiting for the 750 boards - I will hang on a tad longer till I get a good round up of info / reviews and go for one thats holding itself well.

I only went for the DS3 because with the Socket 775, I got a DS3, an S3, and a DS4 and they are rock solid boards, but it seems this is NOT a good idea when crossing platforms.

BFAR:
What have you got against the AMD CPUs?
 
bfar said:
Get a 4870 and you're half way there! Thats AMD hardware ;) Seriously tho. Stay away from their cpus, liking AMD stuff it not a good enough reason if you can get somethin' faster and better :)

Get good affordable hardware and don't fanny fanboi around!
Click to expand...

Intel stuff isn't "affordable" relative to most of the X2s, actually. Price\performance isn't as lopsided as you think, unless you manage to seriously overclock the lower end Core 2 Duos.
 
sr4470 said:
Intel stuff isn't "affordable" relative to most of the X2s, actually. Price\performance isn't as lopsided as you think, unless you manage to seriously overclock the lower end Core 2 Duos.
Click to expand...

I'd have to agree with that comment.

My X2 4200+ cost £28, and AM2 motherboards (particularly Matx ones) are noticeably cheaper than the LGA775 equivalents. The CPU and Mobo in my second system cost £56, and that was new.

I've managed to overclock it to 2.5Ghz from 2.2Ghz, which isn't great, although the motherboard has very limited OC options, but it's the basis for a speedy, quiet and low power system for the cash.

I've built a good half dozen systems based around low end core 2's in the last year, but just for a change I thought I'd try and set up a low end AMD system this time, and I've been quite impressed!

I have no particular alliance to AMD or Intel, I just buy the best I can afford at the time for the budget I have. I also have a high end Intel system, and for everything but gaming, the AMD system does everything the Intel one does and I can't tell the difference.
 
Last edited:
atpbx said:
You are no manager.
Click to expand...

...that boy couldn't manage his own rucksack. ;)

Now, I am an actual real manager, incredible stuff I tell you. :eek:

We did UAT of desktop machines based on both Intel and AMD processors, we sat down 57 employees, gave them scripts and asked them to follow and execute the exact same scenarios in many major desktop apps.

The end result went in favour of AMD by nearly 2-to-1, with noteworthy comments being 'smooth' and 'responsive' BUT if push came to shove most suggested there was little difference between the systems.

The results were interesting and tbh not what we expected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom