Home

News

Forums

Hardware

CPUs

Mainboards

Video

Guides

CPU Prices

Memory Prices

Shop



Sharky Extreme :

 
Search
 



Latest News


- Outdoor Life: Panasonic Puts 3G Wireless Into Rugged Notebooks
- Averatec Launches Lightweight Turion 64 X2 Laptop
- Acer Fires Up Two New Ferrari Notebooks
- Belkin Debuts Docking Station for ExpressCard-Equipped Notebooks
- Logitech 5.1 Speaker System Puts Your Ears At Eye Level
News Archives

Features

- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with ATI's Terry Makedon
- SharkyExtreme.com: Interview with Seagate's Joni Clark
- Half-Life 2 Review
- DOOM 3 Review
- Unreal Tournament 2004 Review

Buyer's Guides

- September High-end Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- September Value Gaming PC Buyer's Guide
- October Extreme Gaming PC Buyer's Guide

HARDWARE

  • CPUs


  • Motherboards

    - Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 Motherboard Review
    - DFI LANPARTY UT nF4 Ultra-D Motherboard Review

  • Video Cards

    - Gigabyte GeForce 7600 GT 256MB Review
    - ASUS EN7900GT TOP 256MB Review
    - ASUS EN7600GT Silent 256MB Review
    - Biostar GeForce 7900 GT 256MB Review





  • SharkyForums.Com - Print: AMD vs Intel

    AMD vs Intel
    By sonictrend July 30, 2001, 06:18 PM

    Dear all
    Is Intel still in the lead ?
    I heard that the P4 will move back to SD-Ram.
    Which one is a better buy AMD or Intel ?
    In terms of overclocking abilities and performance ?
    Any tips or concerns are welcome

    regards

    By tio2k July 30, 2001, 06:20 PM

    quote:Originally posted by sonictrend:
    Dear all
    Is Intel still in the lead ?
    I heard that the P4 will move back to SD-Ram.
    Which one is a better buy AMD or Intel ?
    In terms of overclocking abilities and performance ?
    Any tips or concerns are welcome

    regards

    I smell another flame war!

    By KJY9 July 30, 2001, 06:22 PM

    quote:Originally posted by tio2k:
    I smell another flame war!

    (*sniff*sniff*) I think you're right..I'm outta this one!

    By dip027 July 30, 2001, 07:34 PM

    quote:Originally posted by sonictrend:
    Dear all
    Is Intel still in the lead ?
    I heard that the P4 will move back to SD-Ram.
    Which one is a better buy AMD or Intel ?
    In terms of overclocking abilities and performance ?
    Any tips or concerns are welcome

    regards

    everyone will tell you something different, but amds are the best value, and offer similar performance, even if (maybe) the p4 is faster at some things

    there

    no flames plz

    By Bolweval July 30, 2001, 07:53 PM

    Yes the P4's are WAY in the lead!

    The P4's are faster than the Athlons, you can get a 1.8ghz P4, but you can only get a 1.4ghz AMD, so if you want the faster chip go with the P4. ; )

    WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!

    quote:Originally posted by sonictrend:
    Dear all
    Is Intel still in the lead ?
    I heard that the P4 will move back to SD-Ram.
    Which one is a better buy AMD or Intel ?
    In terms of overclocking abilities and performance ?
    Any tips or concerns are welcome

    regards

    By Soldier_Of_Evil July 30, 2001, 08:00 PM

    .....I assume that was a joke post? quote:Originally posted by Bolweval:
    Yes the P4's are WAY in the lead!

    The P4's are faster than the Athlons, you can get a 1.8ghz P4, but you can only get a 1.4ghz AMD, so if you want the faster chip go with the P4. ; )

    WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!

    By Bolweval July 30, 2001, 08:01 PM

    ; )


    quote:Originally posted by Soldier_Of_Evil:
    .....I assume that was a joke post?

    By DataChild July 30, 2001, 09:15 PM

    I bet he wasnt. go on boys! decimate him! haha

    By Bolweval July 30, 2001, 09:28 PM

    pfffft..


    quote:Originally posted by DataChild:
    I bet he wasnt. go on boys! decimate him! haha

    By butcherbeard July 30, 2001, 09:47 PM

    quote:Originally posted by sonictrend:
    Dear all
    Is Intel still in the lead ?
    I heard that the P4 will move back to SD-Ram.
    Which one is a better buy AMD or Intel ?
    In terms of overclocking abilities and performance ?
    Any tips or concerns are welcome

    regards

    Do youre own research pal and figure it out for yourself. Asking that question on a forum is just plain silly. Go to toms hardware, ace's hardware, this site and the other thousand sites that can tell you which way YOU think YOU should go. Opinions are like assholes my friend EVERYONE HAS ONE.

    By Ganja July 30, 2001, 10:38 PM

    If your gonna buy intel dont but a P4 get a 1ghz P3 its a better made processor.
    If you wanna save money get an AMD based sytem.
    Its that simple and dont listen to the ones that tell you AMD arent stable thats pure bs.

    By Shade1475 July 30, 2001, 11:02 PM

    If you want bang for your buck, go with AMD. I don't think it can be refuted that pricing for an Athlon or Duron is very good for the performance that you'd get. Since the multiplier is freely open to manipulation, then you'd probably have better luck overclocking with it, too.

    If you want the highest clocked (please note that I didn't say highest/best performing: performance is very subjective and ambiguous and is a different thing to almost everyone) processor on the market today, then go with a P4. Impress your friends and yourself with 1.8 GHz of bit crunching power.

    Basically, it all comes down to what you want. Like I said earlier, performance is a very subjective thing. If you're careful with your benchmarks, you can get them to say whatever you want. You won't turn on whatever you have and immediately say "Gee, a -whatever- is scads faster than this jalopy!" Why? Because it'll be your machine. You won't know the difference unless you fool around with other computers and get a frame of reference. Heaven knows I don't: my PIII 600 with my brand new Visiontek MX400 seems plenty fast to me! I don't drop any frames in HL or Serious Sam, and I sure as heck don't notice a 50% increase in my MS Word find/replace as compared to a Celeron 300. So read around, consider what you'll be using the computer for, and the amount of money that you will have to spend.

    It really comes down to the fact that AMD and Intel both put out really great products, and I'd be happy to own either one. If I did get a new one, all I'd probably say is "this is a lot faster than my old one." And that's all that'll really matter.

    By KeeperMarius July 31, 2001, 02:56 AM

    quote: Dear all
    Is Intel still in the lead ?
    I heard that the P4 will move back to SD-Ram.
    Which one is a better buy AMD or Intel ?
    In terms of overclocking abilities and performance ?
    Any tips or concerns are welcome
    regards

    4 billion sperm and yours was the fastest....

    By Talek July 31, 2001, 03:05 AM

    The P3 is a very good processor.. The new tualatin(sp) at 1.2 ghz is supposedly a very good overclocker, but expensive and would require a motherboard replacement. I personally don't like the P4's at all, I believe they're overpriced and underperforming.

    You can get very low priced Athlons that are VERY fast for just about everything. I'm honestly suprised as hell that AMD doesn't have more of the market share.

    By sonictrend July 31, 2001, 05:20 AM

    Dear all.
    First of all, thank you very much for the replies.
    I had no intenion to start a flame on the list. I just wanted FEEDBACKS ! As most people still thinks that Intel is the superior over AMD, and most of the people who don't know much about computers still perfers Intel. Like most of the customer at work.

    By IntelSux July 31, 2001, 03:29 PM

    I highly recommend you get an Athlon

    By tio2k July 31, 2001, 03:53 PM

    quote:Originally posted by IntelSux:
    I highly recommend you get an Athlon



    YOu dont need to even post, look at your name!

    By Dirtylizard July 31, 2001, 04:01 PM

    http://www.anandtech.com/news/shownews.html?i=13822&t=wn

    Click for the new prices on P4s.
    Yeah just wait till later this month.
    Join the Darkside my friend.

    By akbar July 31, 2001, 04:31 PM

    quote:Originally posted by tio2k:

    YOu dont need to even post, look at your name!

    LOL

    By blppt July 31, 2001, 06:14 PM

    My opinion is this: If you dont mind tweaking things a lot and dealing with the occasional problem, get a Tbird. They're simply the best price/performance ratio cpu out there. No question there.

    My personal experience in the AMD world has been short-lived and painful. No matter what i do, i get lockups. Ive tried two KT133A boards (one refurbished, the A7V133, one factory sealed retail boxed KT7A) and both have had problems. The KT7A has got to the point now where windows will lock up within 3 minutes of just window resizing and scrolling. The A7V133 was stable for two hours, no more running UT. It would hard lock around the end of that time. Heat is not a problem. I have a OCZ Gladiator Copper- Gold Plated Limited Edition, and temps never get above 44C on my 1.33(not overclocked) on the KT7A. Latest 4.32 4 in 1s.

    On the other hand, the 1ghz P3 i have on an MSI 815E Pro has run flawlessly at 1.13 with no core voltage bump. It required absolutely no tweaking or patches on my part.

    Now, i realize the Tbird owners here arent going to be happy about the following statement, and i realize some of them have never had any problems whatsoever with their AMDs, but my conclusion is that if you want things to work straight out of the box, you have a better chance with Intel. I have never had any issues whatsoever with Intel or its chipsets. I refuse to believe i have two bad mobos (the refurbished one could have been, but what are the odds that i got a second bad board from a different company (ABIT) that was retail boxed and sealed?).

    By Bolweval July 31, 2001, 06:58 PM

    I agree with you 100%, the last 3 AMD systems I put together have given me headaches also. The first one I got, nothing but a blank screen, returned the CPU for another and then it worked fine. The second one would post and boot into windows, but would lock when trying to anything, exchanged the CPU and all was dandy. The third one, like the first, simply would not post, blank screen, exchanged the CPU and was good to go. I've put together lots of other AMD systems before and had no problems, but as of late it seems like they just keep ramping up the speeds and then putting fatter HSF on them without making any actual improvements on the stepping. Poor quality has always been AMD's downfall.

    AMD is notorious for shipping bad chips, they need to fire there QA department and start actually testing there CPU's *before* they ship them. AMD doesn't know what the word quality means IMO.

    quote:Originally posted by blppt:
    My opinion is this: If you dont mind tweaking things a lot and dealing with the occasional problem, get a Tbird. They're simply the best price/performance ratio cpu out there. No question there.

    My personal experience in the AMD world has been short-lived and painful. No matter what i do, i get lockups. Ive tried two KT133A boards (one refurbished, the A7V133, one factory sealed retail boxed KT7A) and both have had problems. The KT7A has got to the point now where windows will lock up within 3 minutes of just window resizing and scrolling. The A7V133 was stable for two hours, no more running UT. It would hard lock around the end of that time. Heat is not a problem. I have a OCZ Gladiator Copper- Gold Plated Limited Edition, and temps never get above 44C on my 1.33(not overclocked) on the KT7A. Latest 4.32 4 in 1s.

    On the other hand, the 1ghz P3 i have on an MSI 815E Pro has run flawlessly at 1.13 with no core voltage bump. It required absolutely no tweaking or patches on my part.

    Now, i realize the Tbird owners here arent going to be happy about the following statement, and i realize some of them have never had any problems whatsoever with their AMDs, but my conclusion is that if you want things to work straight out of the box, you have a better chance with Intel. I have never had any issues whatsoever with Intel or its chipsets. I refuse to believe i have two bad mobos (the refurbished one could have been, but what are the odds that i got a second bad board from a different company (ABIT) that was retail boxed and sealed?).

    By Ganja July 31, 2001, 09:56 PM

    quote:Originally posted by blppt:
    My opinion is this: If you dont mind tweaking things a lot and dealing with the occasional problem, get a Tbird. They're simply the best price/performance ratio cpu out there. No question there.

    My personal experience in the AMD world has been short-lived and painful. No matter what i do, i get lockups. Ive tried two KT133A boards (one refurbished, the A7V133, one factory sealed retail boxed KT7A) and both have had problems. The KT7A has got to the point now where windows will lock up within 3 minutes of just window resizing and scrolling. The A7V133 was stable for two hours, no more running UT. It would hard lock around the end of that time. Heat is not a problem. I have a OCZ Gladiator Copper- Gold Plated Limited Edition, and temps never get above 44C on my 1.33(not overclocked) on the KT7A. Latest 4.32 4 in 1s.

    On the other hand, the 1ghz P3 i have on an MSI 815E Pro has run flawlessly at 1.13 with no core voltage bump. It required absolutely no tweaking or patches on my part.

    Now, i realize the Tbird owners here arent going to be happy about the following statement, and i realize some of them have never had any problems whatsoever with their AMDs, but my conclusion is that if you want things to work straight out of the box, you have a better chance with Intel. I have never had any issues whatsoever with Intel or its chipsets. I refuse to believe i have two bad mobos (the refurbished one could have been, but what are the odds that i got a second bad board from a different company (ABIT) that was retail boxed and sealed?).

    Dude I agree BUT just one thing man.
    Notice that thoese motherboards you had on you AMD sytems were VIA chipsets.That is the problem not AMD CPU itself.

    By Ganja July 31, 2001, 09:58 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Bolweval:
    I agree with you 100%, the last 3 AMD systems I put together have given me headaches also. The first one I got, nothing but a blank screen, returned the CPU for another and then it worked fine. The second one would post and boot into windows, but would lock when trying to anything, exchanged the CPU and all was dandy. The third one, like the first, simply would not post, blank screen, exchanged the CPU and was good to go. I've put together lots of other AMD systems before and had no problems, but as of late it seems like they just keep ramping up the speeds and then putting fatter HSF on them without making any actual improvements on the stepping. Poor quality has always been AMD's downfall.

    AMD is notorious for shipping bad chips, they need to fire there QA department and start actually testing there CPU's *before* they ship them. AMD doesn't know what the word quality means IMO.

    Where did you buys thoese supposedly faulty chips from?

    By jagojago12 July 31, 2001, 10:12 PM

    Hmmm..is the Pentium4 good or not? Well the new 1.2GHz Coppermine-T outperforms the Pentium4 1.5GHz in the majority of the tests.

    Pentium3 outperforming (generally) Pentium4? Oh my! Intel's kicked themselves in the ass with the P4's crappy IPC.

    By Motoman July 31, 2001, 10:16 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Ganja:
    Where did you buys thoese supposedly faulty chips from?


    No $hit. Ganja, I have no idea what was going on there...I have built dozens of computers with AMD and Cyrix chips, have never, ever had a bad CPU. I've probably built 30 or more just with AMD chips.

    By Bolweval July 31, 2001, 11:31 PM

    I bought all of the from Fry's Electronics. That may be the problem right there, who knows how those people handle them? I try to get them at local shops so in the event I get a bad CPU, (which seems to happen a lot) I can simply run back and exchange it. Most of my friends wouldn't be too happy if they had to wait 3 weeks for an exchange from an online vendor.


    quote:Originally posted by Ganja:
    Where did you buys thoese supposedly faulty chips from?


    By Bolweval July 31, 2001, 11:33 PM

    I'm so happy for you. But that hasn't been the case for me.

    quote:Originally posted by Motoman:
    No $hit. Ganja, I have no idea what was going on there...I have built dozens of computers with AMD and Cyrix chips, have never, ever had a bad CPU. I've probably built 30 or more just with AMD chips.

    By blppt August 01, 2001, 12:12 AM

    quote:Originally posted by Ganja:
    Dude I agree BUT just one thing man.
    Notice that thoese motherboards you had on you AMD sytems were VIA chipsets.That is the problem not AMD CPU itself.


    But thats an inescapable fact of owning an AMD cpu, you cant get a rock solid intel chipset with them. The AMD 760 is nice, but its often bundled with that troublesome Via southbridge. ALI has had other problems. The only chipset in the athlon arena that i havent heard any negatives about yet is the SiS 735, and that could be because it just came out.

    If intel ever built a chipset for amd cpus, i'd ditch the P3 in a nanosecond.

    EDIT: minor correction

    By akbar August 01, 2001, 12:56 AM

    quote:Originally posted by blppt:
    My opinion is this: If you dont mind tweaking things a lot and dealing with the occasional problem, get a Tbird. They're simply the best price/performance ratio cpu out there. No question there.

    My personal experience in the AMD world has been short-lived and painful. No matter what i do, i get lockups. Ive tried two KT133A boards (one refurbished, the A7V133, one factory sealed retail boxed KT7A) and both have had problems. The KT7A has got to the point now where windows will lock up within 3 minutes of just window resizing and scrolling. The A7V133 was stable for two hours, no more running UT. It would hard lock around the end of that time. Heat is not a problem. I have a OCZ Gladiator Copper- Gold Plated Limited Edition, and temps never get above 44C on my 1.33(not overclocked) on the KT7A. Latest 4.32 4 in 1s.

    On the other hand, the 1ghz P3 i have on an MSI 815E Pro has run flawlessly at 1.13 with no core voltage bump. It required absolutely no tweaking or patches on my part.

    Now, i realize the Tbird owners here arent going to be happy about the following statement, and i realize some of them have never had any problems whatsoever with their AMDs, but my conclusion is that if you want things to work straight out of the box, you have a better chance with Intel. I have never had any issues whatsoever with Intel or its chipsets. I refuse to believe i have two bad mobos (the refurbished one could have been, but what are the odds that i got a second bad board from a different company (ABIT) that was retail boxed and sealed?).


    I feel sorry for ya dude but did you ever consider that apart from CPU/MObO ur other stuff could be defective?....try putting parts from ur P3 into the Amd system and check if its working fine or not...And im sure you have installed the latest 4in1 drivers....any way hope ur system gets fixed soon !..ByE!

    By LostGod August 01, 2001, 01:19 AM

    About quality of product.

    I work as a Head PC tech for a major Retailer. (Best Buy) I see at least 30+ systems a day minimum. Sometimes much more. These computers are mostly major brands, but about 10% are personal built machines. IMHO Most computer problems are not in the proccessors them selves. In fact that is rarely the case. Major computer problems are usualy in the motherboard. From what ive noticed far more AMD machines come out of the box bad.( Usually bad MoBo but sometimes its the chip) Out of the computers that are say over nine monthes old Intel and AMD machines are about even on problems. The times i see bad CPUs its ussually the Heat Sink Fan that died, and the CPU followed. Dead HSF always kills Athlons. P3 and P4s survive. I havent seen a bad P4 yet.
    I would say as far as reliability goes. In the home use market (repeat HOME use) there isnt much difference in quality. Corprate market is a very diferent story.

    I am worried about AMDs future though. They need to at least make money. Without AMD I would have to pay three times as much for my INTEL chip.

    By butcherbeard August 01, 2001, 01:38 AM

    quote:Originally posted by LostGod:
    About quality of product.

    I work as a Head PC tech for a major Retailer. (Best Buy) I see at least 30+ systems a day minimum. Sometimes much more. These computers are mostly major brands, but about 10% are personal built machines. IMHO Most computer problems are not in the proccessors them selves. In fact that is rarely the case. Major computer problems are usualy in the motherboard. From what ive noticed far more AMD machines come out of the box bad.( Usually bad MoBo but sometimes its the chip) Out of the computers that are say over nine monthes old Intel and AMD machines are about even on problems. The times i see bad CPUs its ussually the Heat Sink Fan that died, and the CPU followed. Dead HSF always kills Athlons. P3 and P4s survive. I havent seen a bad P4 yet.
    I would say as far as reliability goes. In the home use market (repeat HOME use) there isnt much difference in quality. Corprate market is a very diferent story.

    I am worried about AMDs future though. They need to at least make money. Without AMD I would have to pay three times as much for my INTEL chip.

    Man these post always lead to the same bs. Ive got both(amd and intel) And seriously guys weither you want to admit it or not the amd systems are more of a pain in the ass. NOT BECAUSE OF THE FREAKING CHIPS THEY ROCK but the bs that comes with the boards you have to buy IS a problem. NO ONE IS SAYING THE THE CHIPS ARE BAD even though they do run a tad bit hot. Its just that putting on all the extra via four in ones, supposed problems with sound blasters, this and that yadda yadda yadda can get to be a pain in the ass. Ive put together intel systems and amd systems. THE AMDs are more of a pain in the ass PLAIN AND SIMPLE. The chips ARE awesome no doubt about it. BANG FOR BUCK they DO take out the intels no question. Still u have to admit they are a pain in the ass.(WHEN THE NORTHWOOD COMES IM HEADING BACK TO GOOD OLD INTEL AS MY MAIN SETUP.)

    By butcherbeard August 01, 2001, 01:45 AM

    quote:Originally posted by Bolweval:
    I'm so happy for you. But that hasn't been the case for me.

    No kidding one of the local shops here no longer carry oem amds because of how many theyve had to return. They order them for me but they tell me that they dont give the same guarantee with the oem AMDs as with the oem Intels. Why because the AMDs have been such a pain in the ass for them.

    By Bolweval August 01, 2001, 02:15 AM

    Yep I agree. The T-Birds are defiantly without a doubt screaming fast chips. But having one on a Via chipset is like putting a Mopar 426 Hemi in a AMC Gremlin.


    quote:Originally posted by butcherbeard:
    No kidding one of the local shops here no longer carry oem amds because of how many theyve had to return. They order them for me but they tell me that they dont give the same guarantee with the oem AMDs as with the oem Intels. Why because the AMDs have been such a pain in the ass for them.

    By blppt August 01, 2001, 11:54 AM

    quote:Originally posted by akbar:

    I feel sorry for ya dude but did you ever consider that apart from CPU/MObO ur other stuff could be defective?....try putting parts from ur P3 into the Amd system and check if its working fine or not...And im sure you have installed the latest 4in1 drivers....any way hope ur system gets fixed soon !..ByE!


    Thanks for the help, but i'm using the same psu, hsf, video card, memory, sound card, cd drive, hard drives, and floppy drive. They all work fine when the P3 mobo are in there, so i'm forced to conclude that it has something to do with the tbird or the mobo.

    EDIT: Yes, the power supply is 300W AMD appoved before anybody asks. :-)

    By Archknight August 01, 2001, 02:54 PM

    Yes Via is a little problem, but anyone work with the AMD chipset yet?

    Flame Wars, please just answer my question to the point and don't light up this flame war further.

    By blppt August 01, 2001, 04:40 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Archknight:
    Yes Via is a little problem, but anyone work with the AMD chipset yet?

    Flame Wars, please just answer my question to the point and don't light up this flame war further.


    I cant say that i have. I probably should have gotten an AMD760/761 to begin with. But i wanted to 'save money'. LOL. $250 down the drain on Via mobos. (cries)

    By gaffo August 01, 2001, 08:25 PM

    quote:Originally posted by blppt:
    My opinion is this: If you dont mind tweaking things a lot and dealing with the occasional problem, get a Tbird. They're simply the best price/performance ratio cpu out there. No question there.

    My personal experience in the AMD world has been short-lived and painful. No matter what i do, i get lockups. Ive tried two KT133A boards (one refurbished, the A7V133, one factory sealed retail boxed KT7A) and both have had problems. The KT7A has got to the point now where windows will lock up within 3 minutes of just window resizing and scrolling. The A7V133 was stable for two hours, no more running UT. It would hard lock around the end of that time. Heat is not a problem. I have a OCZ Gladiator Copper- Gold Plated Limited Edition, and temps never get above 44C on my 1.33(not overclocked) on the KT7A. Latest 4.32 4 in 1s.

    On the other hand, the 1ghz P3 i have on an MSI 815E Pro has run flawlessly at 1.13 with no core voltage bump. It required absolutely no tweaking or patches on my part.

    Now, i realize the Tbird owners here arent going to be happy about the following statement, and i realize some of them have never had any problems whatsoever with their AMDs, but my conclusion is that if you want things to work straight out of the box, you have a better chance with Intel. I have never had any issues whatsoever with Intel or its chipsets. I refuse to believe i have two bad mobos (the refurbished one could have been, but what are the odds that i got a second bad board from a different company (ABIT) that was retail boxed and sealed?).

    I concur totally!! AMD's chip is NOT the culprit here. It's VIA substandard chipset and only them to blame. Unfortunately then VIA has a virtual monoploy in the Athlon chipset business, there's not alot of choices out there. If you go with AMD (which I support totally), get an Ali, or AMD based chipset!!! or the SiS in September. For me I had nothing ubt trouble with my MSI board (6-months of hell - poor audio, herky-jurky multi-tasking, and faulty IDE controller which gave numerous bad burns (the 686 southbridge is shit)). After TWO motherboards, and 8-months I now have a stable VIA based Athlon system. moral of the story is two-fold:

    1. I never should have needed to get a second board, nor bother the millions of chipset bug-fix patches from VIA. The board should ahve worked "out of the box", simple as that.

    2. The theoretical 3-percent speed advantage VIA chipset has over Ali's is not worth the real world headache of getting the sh!t chipset to work. Go with a chipset that works: Ali, AMD760, SiS (not out, but look better than VIA already).

    3. VIA hasn't made a good chipset since the darkages - or never.

    VIA can bite my butt - bastards ;-(.

    By gaffo August 01, 2001, 08:34 PM

    quote:Originally posted by Motoman:
    No $hit. Ganja, I have no idea what was going on there...I have built dozens of computers with AMD and Cyrix chips, have never, ever had a bad CPU. I've probably built 30 or more just with AMD chips.

    Bad chips are very rare. I've gotten one - a centuar winchip-2 a few years ago. Usually the bad chip will work, but give more errors - sometimes very subtle and only in intensive FPU type apps - usually not so subtle (like alot of BSOD's, error messages when booting into the OS). A bad chip will almost always run without error when you UNDERclock it. My bad winchip-240 run stable at 200!!!!. Of course I returned the chip for another. The replacement worked as advertized.

    Centuar's fabber - IDT did not have AMD's supperior process technology. I would be VERY surprised to find AMD chips shipping alot of bad ones. Prob like 1/1000 are bad - or less.

    By blppt August 01, 2001, 11:26 PM

    quote:Originally posted by gaffo:
    I concur totally!! AMD's chip is NOT the culprit here. It's VIA substandard chipset and only them to blame. Unfortunately then VIA has a virtual monoploy in the Athlon chipset business, there's not alot of choices out there. If you go with AMD (which I support totally), get an Ali, or AMD based chipset!!! or the SiS in September. For me I had nothing ubt trouble with my MSI board (6-months of hell - poor audio, herky-jurky multi-tasking, and faulty IDE controller which gave numerous bad burns (the 686 southbridge is shit)). After TWO motherboards, and 8-months I now have a stable VIA based Athlon system. moral of the story is two-fold:

    1. I never should have needed to get a second board, nor bother the millions of chipset bug-fix patches from VIA. The board should ahve worked "out of the box", simple as that.

    2. The theoretical 3-percent speed advantage VIA chipset has over Ali's is not worth the real world headache of getting the sh!t chipset to work. Go with a chipset that works: Ali, AMD760, SiS (not out, but look better than VIA already).

    3. VIA hasn't made a good chipset since the darkages - or never.

    VIA can bite my butt - bastards ;-(.

    You know, i shoulda learned with the crappy Via board i had for my old 700E, with all the problems i had then. But you read all these glowing reviews for KT133A boards on Anandtech and Sharky and Firingsquad and Hard OCP and etc etc, and you figure that (a) maybe the bad experience i had was limited to one board or (b) Via finally got around to making a decent, solid chipset (c) Maybe the problems were isolated to my old setup. I see i was wrong on all counts.

    BTW, dont a lot of the 760s come with that crappy 686B? That was a concern of mine to begin with. See, i was considering dropping an extra $50 on the 760 and another $100 on 512 megs DDR to avoid Via, but the boards i was looking at had that troublesome southbridge anyways. And i saw how the DDR Magik got beat down by even an SDR KT133A in games, and i figured it wasnt worth $100 (to replace my current 512 SDRAM) to be behind the Via 133A. I guess i should have put all reasoning aside and just got the ALI or the AMD760. Oh well, too late now. After nearly $1200 in computer purchases in the past two months, i'm just going to have to live with a 1133MHZ P3 that is rock stable. I guess thats not too bad. :-)

    Oh yeah, and i also bought a PS2 to wipe out the last of the money i made at my job this summer. I'm starting to think that consoles are simply a better use of my funds. Just pop in a game and it plays. The only thing i miss is 1024X768 res. :-)

    By akbar August 01, 2001, 11:27 PM

    quote:Originally posted by butcherbeard:
    Man these post always lead to the same bs. Ive got both(amd and intel) And seriously guys weither you want to admit it or not the amd systems are more of a pain in the ass. NOT BECAUSE OF THE FREAKING CHIPS THEY ROCK but the bs that comes with the boards you have to buy IS a problem. NO ONE IS SAYING THE THE CHIPS ARE BAD even though they do run a tad bit hot. Its just that putting on all the extra via four in ones, supposed problems with sound blasters, this and that yadda yadda yadda can get to be a pain in the ass. Ive put together intel systems and amd systems. THE AMDs are more of a pain in the ass PLAIN AND SIMPLE. The chips ARE awesome no doubt about it. BANG FOR BUCK they DO take out the intels no question. Still u have to admit they are a pain in the ass.(WHEN THE NORTHWOOD COMES IM HEADING BACK TO GOOD OLD INTEL AS MY MAIN SETUP.)


    Man calm down , let the other chipsets like Nforce and Sis735 come out, then perhaps you wont choose intel. as you said ur self the processors dont suck , the chipsets do !...AS SIMPLE AS THAT !!!!

    By gaffo August 02, 2001, 12:48 AM

    quote:Originally posted by blppt:
    You know, i shoulda learned with the crappy Via board i had for my old 700E, with all the problems i had then. But you read all these glowing reviews for KT133A boards on Anandtech and Sharky and Firingsquad and Hard OCP and etc etc, and you figure that (a) maybe the bad experience i had was limited to one board or (b) Via finally got around to making a decent, solid chipset (c) Maybe the problems were isolated to my old setup. I see i was wrong on all counts.

    BTW, dont a lot of the 760s come with that crappy 686B? That was a concern of mine to begin with. See, i was considering dropping an extra $50 on the 760 and another $100 on 512 megs DDR to avoid Via, but the boards i was looking at had that troublesome southbridge anyways. And i saw how the DDR Magik got beat down by even an SDR KT133A in games, and i figured it wasnt worth $100 (to replace my current 512 SDRAM) to be behind the Via 133A. I guess i should have put all reasoning aside and just got the ALI or the AMD760. Oh well, too late now. After nearly $1200 in computer purchases in the past two months, i'm just going to have to live with a 1133MHZ P3 that is rock stable. I guess thats not too bad. :-)

    Oh yeah, and i also bought a PS2 to wipe out the last of the money i made at my job this summer. I'm starting to think that consoles are simply a better use of my funds. Just pop in a game and it plays. The only thing i miss is 1024X768 res. :-)

    Hi - aceshardware has a link to an Elitegroup SiS-735 board rewiew. This is the first review of a production board!! and it is the fastest one in the review. SiS looks to have a winner here for sure. Esp. if the first board out is the fastest!, just imagine how fast the SiS based boards will be in 6-months (after a little board/chipset tweeking). I'd like to see another SiS-635 review though (Tom's showed slow/Aces' the fastest socket-370 (I personally think Tom's was a bad board - my thinking is that since both chipsets have a similar design, the SiS-635 should be the fastest p-3 based chipset)).

    My next system will be one of the SiS based board for sure. Maybe the SiS-635 with the CX5? just for the heck of it (if it performs well ( ~ p-3).

    Hell, by next spring one of these boards will cost 50-bucks, and the Tualatin will be a Celeron and (should)/will be a cheap chip too. Prob be able to assemble that or a duron/735 system for 300 bucks!!! ;-).

    By ssjgoku4ever August 02, 2001, 01:22 AM

    quote:Originally posted by gaffo:
    Hi - aceshardware has a link to an Elitegroup SiS-735 board rewiew. This is the first review of a production board!! and it is the fastest one in the review. SiS looks to have a winner here for sure. Esp. if the first board out is the fastest!, just imagine how fast the SiS based boards will be in 6-months (after a little board/chipset tweeking). I'd like to see another SiS-635 review though (Tom's showed slow/Aces' the fastest socket-370 (I personally think Tom's was a bad board - my thinking is that since both chipsets have a similar design, the SiS-635 should be the fastest p-3 based chipset)).

    My next system will be one of the SiS based board for sure. Maybe the SiS-635 with the CX5? just for the heck of it (if it performs well ( ~ p-3).

    Hell, by next spring one of these boards will cost 50-bucks, and the Tualatin will be a Celeron and (should)/will be a cheap chip too. Prob be able to assemble that or a duron/735 system for 300 bucks!!! ;-).

    AMD IS HANDS-DOWN A BETTER CPU AND WAY CHEAPER- NOW DOUBT ABOUT IT. Why buy a p3 1gig for 300 Canadian + tax, when you can get a 1.2gig ATHOLON T-BIRD for 189.99 + tax????

    By Hateslife August 02, 2001, 01:42 AM

    I'm getting sick of people insulting AMD processors because third-party chipsets suck ass.

    Go get a AMD 761 mobo and everything is peachy. Unless you want to use netgear NIC's. But really, if you have the money to buy things like food and motherboards, why thge $!@# are you buying Netgear NIC's anyway?

    By Elxman August 02, 2001, 01:45 AM

    you can't run a system with just the cpu, and I do blame amd for just making the cpu until recently.

    By gaffo August 02, 2001, 03:29 AM

    quote:Originally posted by Hateslife:
    why thge $!@# are you buying Netgear NIC's anyway?

    I bought Netgear because they had a Linux driver and cost 10-bucks each!!!!!!!!!!! and work great on my VIA based system. Whats the deal with 760 and Netgear???

    BTW whats wrong with Netgear? - are they bad or something?

    By Ganja August 02, 2001, 04:07 AM

    quote:Originally posted by blppt:
    But thats an inescapable fact of owning an AMD cpu, you cant get a rock solid intel chipset with them. The AMD 760 is nice, but its often bundled with that troublesome Via southbridge. ALI has had other problems. The only chipset in the athlon arena that i havent heard any negatives about yet is the SiS 735, and that could be because it just came out.

    If intel ever built a chipset for amd cpus, i'd ditch the P3 in a nanosecond.

    EDIT: minor correction
    Intel chipsets?
    LOL
    *cough* nForce *cough* no more VIA *cough*

    By Ganja August 02, 2001, 04:15 AM

    quote:Originally posted by Hateslife:
    I'm getting sick of people insulting AMD processors because third-party chipsets suck ass.

    Go get a AMD 761 mobo and everything is peachy. Unless you want to use netgear NIC's. But really, if you have the money to buy things like food and motherboards, why thge $!@# are you buying Netgear NIC's anyway?

    What does netgear have to do with all this and whats wrong with netgear anyways?
    I have a netgear NIC in my celeron system and it works fine.

    By blppt August 02, 2001, 11:50 AM

    quote:Originally posted by ssjgoku4ever:
    AMD IS HANDS-DOWN A BETTER CPU AND WAY CHEAPER- NOW DOUBT ABOUT IT. Why buy a p3 1gig for 300 Canadian + tax, when you can get a 1.2gig ATHOLON T-BIRD for 189.99 + tax????

    I think i just explained why i did so in several posts. ;-)

    By blppt August 02, 2001, 11:52 AM

    quote:Originally posted by gaffo:
    I bought Netgear because they had a Linux driver and cost 10-bucks each!!!!!!!!!!! and work great on my VIA based system. Whats the deal with 760 and Netgear???

    BTW whats wrong with Netgear? - are they bad or something?

    Not that ive ever heard of---the FA310TX has been highly recommended to me by several people.

    By blppt August 02, 2001, 11:54 AM

    quote:Originally posted by Ganja:
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by blppt:
    [b] But thats an inescapable fact of owning an AMD cpu, you cant get a rock solid intel chipset with them. The AMD 760 is nice, but its often bundled with that troublesome Via southbridge. ALI has had other problems. The only chipset in the athlon arena that i havent heard any negatives about yet is the SiS 735, and that could be because it just came out.

    If intel ever built a chipset for amd cpus, i'd ditch the P3 in a nanosecond.

    EDIT: minor correction
    Intel chipsets?
    LOL
    *cough* nForce *cough* no more VIA *cough*

    [/B][/QUOTE]

    Whats wrong with Intel chipsets? And who knows with a radical new design how many bugs the nforce will have. It may look Via look like a walk in the park with firmware updates. :-)

    By meat322 August 02, 2001, 07:01 PM

    I've looked at the benchmarks i think intel has adopted cyrix's pr rating or something because AMD has kicked there ass on most of the test for instance put a 1.4 athlon against a 1.4 p4 the thunderbird walks all over it so where do they come up with the clock speeds? It takes a p4 1.7 to even come close to a Thunderbird 1.4. Does anyone else see this as i do or what

    By Ganja August 02, 2001, 07:08 PM

    quote:Originally posted by blppt:
    Whats wrong with Intel chipsets? And who knows with a radical new design how many bugs the nforce will have. It may look Via look like a walk in the park with firmware updates. :-)



    I seriously doubt thats gonna happen(with the nForce).
    Why do u think it hasnt been realeased yet?Cause manufactuerers are prototype testing and they are getting rid of the bugs dude.And judging by how easy nVidias vid cards worked out of the box and thier universal drivers I think the nForce is gonna be a hit,mark my words.
    And I laugh at the intel chipsets cause tell me what chipset would Intel make for AMD?

    By blppt August 02, 2001, 07:38 PM


    "I seriously doubt thats gonna happen(with the nForce)."

    Why not? Nvidia hasnt even built a single motherboard in the past, whereas even Via has made many chipsets before the KT133A.


    "Why do u think it hasnt been realeased yet?Cause manufactuerers are prototype testing and they are getting rid of the bugs dude."

    Ummm, like Via didnt think they got the bugs worked out before releasing the KT133A? :-)

    "And judging by how easy nVidias vid cards worked out of the box and thier universal drivers I think the nForce is gonna be a hit,mark my words."

    Yeah, but Nvidia has had years of producing video cards and drivers under their belt. Remember the Riva 128? That wasnt even their first video card chipset, and it had awful rendering problems and bugs. I know because i owned one (Diamond Viper V330). I hope you are right, but you being so sure of it really doesnt have a lot of merit.

    "And I laugh at the intel chipsets cause tell me what chipset would Intel make for AMD?"

    Well, of course intel would never build a chipset for AMD. My comment was made merely in jest. But if there was an Intel chipset out right now that the tbird was compa1tible with, i wouldnt even consider a P3. Nor would probably anybody else on this board.

    By Bolweval August 02, 2001, 07:51 PM

    Did ANYONE in this thread say ANYTHING about the T-Bird being slow???


    quote:Originally posted by meat322:
    I've looked at the benchmarks i think intel has adopted cyrix's pr rating or something because AMD has kicked there ass on most of the test for instance put a 1.4 athlon against a 1.4 p4 the thunderbird walks all over it so where do they come up with the clock speeds? It takes a p4 1.7 to even come close to a Thunderbird 1.4. Does anyone else see this as i do or what


    Contact Us | www.SharkyForums.com

    Copyright 1999, 2000 internet.com Corporation. All Rights Reserved.


    Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.46

    previous page
    next page




    HardwareCentral
    Compare products, prices, and stores at Hardware Central!


    Copyright 2002 INT Media Group, Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. About INT Media Group | Press Releases | Privacy Policy | Career Opportunities