Phoenix Network Forums

I realy liked amd before they started producing those semprones. I was disapointed when I heard that there is no more barton cpu...

AMD, get an X2 and watch the speed

Pinkbyte wrote:Pentium(or Celeron) is better for me. Why? Look at tomshardwareguide.de and you understand why. If you can transform one AMD processor to a better model with silver lacquer, superglue, cutting knife and some other things, you must understand, what s*** they produced!

Err.. Or perhaps you'll see why AMD is cheaper, not studding their processors with rubies.

i think both of procesor are good for me.. cuz i tried them already.. i dont see any defferent on two precesors..

Samppa, of course AMD processors are cheap. But do you sacrifice stability for money? I do not!

Erm.. When has it been proven AMD are unstable?

Pinkbyte wrote:Samppa, of course AMD processors are cheap. But do you sacrifice stability for money? I do not!

Samppa wrote:Erm.. When has it been proven AMD are unstable?

Since when have Intel processers been stable?

the answer - tomshardwareguide.de

I did not say that Intel processors are stable, i only sayed that AMD are unstable!

I'm not searching through that site, show me

If you're referring to the better model transformation, that proves nothing about unstableness. Besides, who knows if you could do the same witth intel?

I mean that on this site you can find some videos, that proves that AMD processors are unstable and they are failed in some situations

I won't believe you until you show links, I don't have the time to trudge through the site.

I bet they don't do the same with intel, only show amd?

Rubbish, theres no difference between the two in terms of stability. It's more a matter of having appropriate cooling systems based on what you're doing.

My Ath64 X2 4400 has been online for 45 days now never using less than 43% of the CPU and constantly using more than 1gb of ram, if AMD made unstable CPU's I would have gathered that my uses would have caused this one to crumble.

I'm also glad you linked us to such a crediable website which doesn't exist. I do however, assume that you mean www.tomshardware.com but if this website is spouting crap like AMD processors are less stable than Intel ones then I don't think its worth my (or anyone elses) time.

Pinkbyte wrote:I did not say that Intel processors are stable, i only sayed that AMD are unstable!

Saying that AMD processors are unstable in a discussion which only includes 2 parties is definetly saying you believe Intel processors are stable.

When i said "stable", i meant that when cooling system broke down, AMD processor broke down too, except some new models. And Intel processor survive...

Also rubbish, new age processors will all die if the cooling is missing for x hours/days. If you're talking about P2's and stuff then you might be right, I never used AMD processors back then.

If systems didn't require cooling to operate then cooling would be absolutely useless wouldn't it (unless you just wanted a cold case for some reason...).

I have 3 Athlon type systems running around the clock here, none of ever failed and since we got the first AthlonXP we have had 2 P4's fry. My experience suggests that it is actually the opposite to what you're saying but like I said, that is my experience, it will be different for everyone based on operating environments and such.

Agreed. All of my AMD chips survive longer than my Intel ones.