this is unrelated to your post, i just wanted to chime in and say.
ROLL TIDE
Why will I be moving? Because the new Apple Macs use them.
And to which one? Clearly the Intel version.
Chers
sadly, you will never see the awesomeness that would be AMD X2 with OS10
the amd x2 is an obviously superior chip, OS10 is an obviously superior OS. Its a shame we wont ever get to see them paired.
Amazon.com is offering a $150 rebate on the Intel machine!
Yes I will definitely be moving most my office over to dual core in the next 6-8 months. You ask why the wait,
1) MS has not announced the hardware required to run the next version of their desktop OS, or their next version of MS Office.
2) unless Intel surprises us and thinks outside the box, I plan to use the new AMD M2 socket. The prospects of a dual core, 64bit, M2 CPU sound promising.
3) Video cards should also metamophisize over the next year to support the new OS and Office requirements. That is not even mentioning the new "PhysX" video accelerator by Ageia or the dual core processors made just for video cards!
4) Will we see (by mid-fall 2006) the new IDE hard drives (SATA or PATA) that support the onboard non-volatile memory to cache part of your OS for almost instantaneous reads? Oh yeah, and the special mobo's and chipsets to support them?
I believe the changes in the hardware environment are going to be coming faster than usual this year, buying equipment now (unless you have no other choice) would not be a sound expenditure (and hardware very rarely is a sound investment as it is usually replaced in a year or less with superior technoogy)
Buying hardware right now with all the upcoming changes wouldn't be too prudent. Better to wait until the new specs come out for the new MS OS\Office.
I am a devote AMD Even though I know "anything is possible" Who knows, maybe Intel will turn their "core duo" aka Yonah into a desktop version, then put it on sterioids? Nah, I think for now I'm stuck on AMD.
And it will be hand built and have the Intel Duel Core.
I have never used an AMD chip, know people from the past that have had over heating issues.
Beside their(AMD)commercials suck.
Price is the biggest reason. These dual cores are the way to much money for me.
Also, just how much 64-bit software is out there? I mean besides operating systems like Linux and Windows people. I haven't seen enough of reason for to upgrade yet.
I don't fall into AMD's, Intel's, or any computer parts faster speed trap. I can't keep up with my current computer computing speed. I played that game before; it's an expensive game.
n/t = no text
Because it is time to upgrade my pc and I figure I might has well have all the bells whether I use them or not. And simply because I am a techno-*****.
Dual-core AMD X2 4600. Already have it and is being built now. ALL the benchmarks say the X2 beats Intel hands down. And I mean ALL. Connected with the right motherboard (ASUS) and video (ATI-PCIe) and memory (OCX platinum) and SATA (Raptor 74gb 10K rpm) this baby is going to sing, sing, sing. Enough said! ![]()
and life goes on...
Jack
I have the AMD 64 X2 4600+. I wanted the best but still had to consider price, basically I weighed out the differences and found a middle ground. Quite frankly I am appauled at Intel, I can not understand where they get the nerve producing an inferior product and charging so much more for it. I can understand some people want to stick with Intel, it's a big, conforming name. They advertise heavily and some people are so suseptable to such advertising ploys. I always like to use this example as a reference; look at diet pepsi, pepsi free, and pepsi one, they are all diet pepsi, the same exact recepie, same exact ingredients ( with the new exception of adding splenda to one of their products ) and yet they are able to capitalize on it due to different adds. I can not believe that there are people out there who believe they are drinking a different product. But any way back to the topic at hand, it is kind of scarey to me that no matter how much research is offered and how much test data is available, there are still people who believe that Intel is the better product. Go ahead and spend $1100 on a chip that is inferior to a $600 chip, it's your perogative and your money. At least you have the Intel name on your product. Performance, price, servcice, AMD all the way.
I have an Intel 4 dual core 3.2GHZ. I have had no trouble and it runs superbly.
Will be buying new Apple
The Macbook pro is sick and that is dual core and I am going to get one hopefully so I wil be siwtching to dual core. MACS RULE
got no money and don't see the point in spending huge amounts of money of brand new technologies. let all the geeks that have nothin better to do but buy the new computer parts buy them, then in 6 months when the price has dropped seven-fold, i might consider buying a processor that could only double my performance anyway.
| Forum legend: | |
| Locked thread | |
| Moderator | |
![]() |
CNET staff |
![]() |
Samsung staff |
| Norton Authorized Support team | |
| AVG staff | |
| Windows Outreach team | |
![]() |
Dell staff |
| Intel staff | |