# ZOMG AMD is crap



## SirKenin

I've worked on a few systems lately with the latest AMD processors in them, the X2s and Phenoms.  What total, absolute crap.  Garbage.  Dog slow pieces of junk.

What a sorry excuse for a processor/platform.  I can't believe people actually buy these things.  I built a P4 3.2 GHz system for a client a couple of weeks ago that absolutely destroys that Phenom in common tasks.  Slaughters it, not even a contest.

It was disgusting.  I told the guy to take the Phenom PC back and get a refund.  Unbelievable garbage.


----------



## ChrisW92410

i got a Athlon X2 5600+ never had a issue being slow or being as you put it a POS i guess you can say....had intel for a while and had nothing but trouble...but i guess everyones entitled to their own opinions .


----------



## TrainTrackHack

Talking about the Phenom-based dualies? Pretty much everyone knows that Phenom was largely a flop...performance-wise not a smart choice, but most of the errata has been fixed up (?). Just saying that it's not unheard of that early phenoms suck...


----------



## ChrisW92410

yeah i herd they havent had much good come out of them...thats what happens when you rush something to be released before it should be, could have taken another 6mo-12mo to do more testing and make sure everything was up to par....all companies do that though.


----------



## ThatGuy16

I'll have to disagree.

My old x2 5600+ ran at 3.3ghz for the longest time, and i can tell you the truth. That thing was not slow by any means, to be honest, in windows i couldn't see any performance increase with my E8400 at stock. It may have been better in gaming, not sure.

But for the price, i think they are pretty good. They're build like a rock, and can take voltage like candy 

But the phenoms, I'll have to say.. are a rip off.. without using the word garbage


----------



## TrainTrackHack

I think those are the "old" (=working and functional) athlons you(ThatGuy16)'re talking about. However, never Athlons are based on the Phenoms with 2 (defective) cores turned off. Just like newer semprons are phenoms with only 1 working core... for what I know, all CPUs based on Phenoms suck, maybe apart from the latest ones which have plenty of the major bugs fixed.


----------



## AcetheGamer

you've probably hated amd that much to say things like that,................


----------



## ThatGuy16

The athlons are not defective quad cores, the only one we think might be the "defective" quads are the tri core phenoms they were talking about releasing. 

Athlons are also 90nm, while the phenoms are 65nm. 

The only phenoms based off of a phenom, are the phenoms


----------



## AcetheGamer

phenoms,....yes they're not that perfect yet,...but athlon X2's? They almost beat every pentium d's arse to dust how about comparing p4's to athlon x2's....


----------



## hermeslyre

I have a X2 3800+ @ 2.8ghz. They're not as efficient as C2d's, guh, but they're not utter crap either. I dunno why you had the experience you did (expectations too high, mayhap?) but none of us will pay much mind to what you say if it goes so strikingly against what most _non-biased_ enthusiasts believe; intelligent people by their own right, make no mistake. 

Getting technical, the X2 architecture is anyway from 20-30% less efficient than the firstborn Conroe arch. This means thatguys 3.3 might have been equal to a 2.6 c2d and my own chip might hold ground against a 2.2ghz C2d. Things don't stay so concordant in every situation, obviously, variations little enough are expected, large ones less common. If you're seeing "discrepancies" regarding a Phenom and a _netburst_ P4, the latter coming out the victor, I'd say something has gone horribly asunder, and gods help me if I tried blaming the superior processor for said difficulties.


----------



## TrainTrackHack

ThatGuy16 said:


> The athlons are not defective quad cores, the only one we think might be the "defective" quads are the tri core phenoms they were talking about releasing.
> 
> Athlons are also 90nm, while the phenoms are 65nm.
> 
> The only phenoms based off of a phenom, are the phenoms





> The dual core K10 processors will still be named Athlon X2.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenom_(processor)

(Not trying to be anal or anything, but bear with me, sometimes I really come out as one)

According to that wikipedia article, phenoms with 2 defective cores will be marketed as Athlon X2s ("Kuma") and 3 defective cores as semprons/single-core athlons ("Sparta"/"Lima"). Those triple-cores are codenamed "Toliman" (just showing off *cough*my*cough* knowledge here!). This makes sense, too, since even if the CPUs got three defetive cores, it can still be sold for sweet, tasty profit AMD really needs right now.

P.S. I do *not* hate AMD!


----------



## SirKenin

I can be a bit more specific..

I think there's something the fanboys don't mention..  They like looking at fake, synthetic benchmark numbers and throwing those around, but there is something else I've noticed about them..   Disk access.  Loading times..   Terrible.  Horrible.  Aggravating.  Consistently bad.  Every single one of them that I've seen have had this problem.

So yeah..  Performance of them is crappy (unless you overclock them maybe.. but should you really have to push it out of spec to have it perform like it should?) and data i/o is crap.

Yup.  Hate them.  Crap.  Junk.  

By the way, that guy's Phenom was three weeks old.  That's why I told him to go get a refund.


----------



## StrangleHold

Oh yea Intel with there Money-R&D-Fabs are the smartest cookie on the block. Lets see, drove Netburst for 4 years (Brain Dead). No onboard Memory Controller-No Hypertransport- No True Dual core to start with, still no true Quad core ( Horse glue Factory). Said they are not needed and a bad design. Oh but wait, there releasing a true Quad Core with a onboard memory controller and there own Hypertransport in the form of CSI. But wait doesnt somebody already have this and had it for 4 years. (Air sucking out of room with foul smell). What can we do, our processors have been slower than AMD for a few years, what to do. I know, we had a good processor in the Pentium Pro and Pentium III. Lets take a good processor we had and rework it. Lets take a design that we knew worked and rework it with the money theses suckers give us for the P4. It took Intel 4 or 5 years to make a processor to beat a AMD clock for clock and I,m suppost to be impressed. With the money and R&D wad they have I think its embarrassing. Oh how quick we forget how long we sat in the closet with the door shut. I think sitting in the closet in the dark for 4 years gives people the ability the forget the past when there hit by day light. Give it time, like the saying somebody said once. If you sit by the river long enough you will see the dead bodies of your enemies float by. Oh how quick people forget!


----------



## fortyways

paragraphs are nice


----------



## StrangleHold

hackapelite said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenom_%28processor%29
> 
> (Not trying to be anal or anything, but bear with me, sometimes I really come out as one)
> 
> According to that wikipedia article, phenoms with 2 defective cores will be marketed as Athlon X2s ("Kuma") and 3 defective cores as semprons/single-core athlons ("Sparta"/"Lima"). Those triple-cores are codenamed "Toliman" (just showing off *cough*my*cough* knowledge here!). This makes sense, too, since even if the CPUs got three defetive cores, it can still be sold for sweet, tasty profit AMD really needs right now.
> 
> P.S. I do *not* hate AMD!


 
Theres going to be 2 new Athlon K10 processors. One with L3, one without L3. But there not just a Quad core with defective cores, true some might be but most will not and will be true Dual Cores based on the Agena core. Same with the Sempron and I dought that any will be 3 bad core Agenas, but some might be a defective Athlon Dual core. Plus there coming out with a Dual core Sempron too. This is old news. AMD and Intel both have been doing this for years. When a processor doesnt meet standards they just kick the specs. down and recall it a lower end processor, nothing new!


----------



## _simon_

Can't complain about my X2 4600+, everything opens quickly and runs smoothly can't really ask for much more than that...


----------



## StrangleHold

fortyways said:


> paragraphs are nice


 
Concentrate real hard, same subject line one paragraph. What is it on this board, if you have more than 3 sentences in one paragraph people go brain dead! Memory and concentrating is a wonderful thing.


----------



## TrainTrackHack

SirKenin said:


> I can be a bit more specific..
> They like looking at fake, synthetic benchmark numbers and throwing those around, but there is something else I've noticed about them..   Disk access.  Loading times..   Terrible.  Horrible.  Aggravating.  Consistently bad.  Every single one of them that I've seen have had this problem.
> 
> So yeah..  Performance of them is crappy (unless you overclock them maybe.. but should you really have to push it out of spec to have it perform like it should?) and data i/o is crap.
> 
> Yup.  Hate them.  Crap.  Junk.



Not trying to start anything, or pretend to be a pro (chances are you're smarter than me in thes stuff, I admit it), but disk access and loading times... don't sound too much of a processor problem (to me, anyways). Unless someone tells me how CPU (significantly) affects disk performance or anything along those lines, I'd probably rather believe that every single AMD chipset you've come across had just been a flop or other piece-of-junk. Got a sempron here, at the time this comp was the cheapest in store, yet it doesn't load any slower than I'd expect any "normal" computer to.

For comparison, I have two exact same CPUs (P3 866mhz coppermines) on different mobos, i810 and some ASUS cheapo. Even though the ASUS comp's got double the memory (512 vs 256, same speed PC133), the i810 totally destroys the ASUS machine in just about any app&game. I still haven't figured out why - played around with memory timings and whatnot to the extent BIOS allows me to. Two old computers hardly do for comparison, but my point is that you can't always blame the CPU...

Even though we've clearly seen what intel can do, I wouldn't spit on AMD since they've done a great job creating something new rather than sticking to what's been around for decades (FSB, onboard memory controllers, whatnot). True, intel destroys AMD and AMDs recent CPUs have been a flop and they just can't seem to put up a decent fight, you might want to say that AMD sucks, is a piece of junk, crap, whatever...even if this was the truth, we owe them something. After all, If AMD didn't exist, we'd probably still have comps with 286s in them and a massive 512KB RAM! Good luck playing Crysis, people! (Help! Help! I'm playing Rogue and only get 0.0013fps...can anyone help me?)

P.S. I am no fanboy!


----------



## lovely?

SirKenin said:


> I can be a bit more specific..
> 
> I think there's something the fanboys don't mention..  They like looking at fake, synthetic benchmark numbers and throwing those around, but there is something else I've noticed about them..   Disk access.  Loading times..   Terrible.  Horrible.  Aggravating.  Consistently bad.  Every single one of them that I've seen have had this problem.
> 
> So yeah..  Performance of them is crappy (unless you overclock them maybe.. but should you really have to push it out of spec to have it perform like it should?) and data i/o is crap.
> 
> Yup.  Hate them.  Crap.  Junk.
> 
> By the way, that guy's Phenom was three weeks old.  That's why I told him to go get a refund.



lol my m8 has an athlon x2 overclocked to 2.7GHZ, it was as fast or faster then my e4500 at stock, and that thing had 1mb less cache. i dunno what your talking about, because his computer is solid as a rock.

oh and a dual core phenom... guys you must not know what your talking about if you think a phenom core isnt as good as an athlon core. even with errata, a single athlon core loses miserably to a phenom core.


----------



## Gareth

I can't complain about my AMD PCs, fast, cool, quiet and most importantly, they can game the games I like to play with a decent FPS. Although I considered Intel, I am still very, very happy with AMD.


----------



## ghost

_simon_ said:


> Can't complain about my X2 4600+, everything opens quickly and runs smoothly can't really ask for much more than that...



2nd that, have had it for years and OC'd to 3ghz with watercooling at one point.
Runs vista flawlessly.

Alot better than any P4's ive ever used...


----------



## fortyways

StrangleHold said:


> Concentrate real hard, same subject line one paragraph. What is it on this board, if you have more than 3 sentences in one paragraph people go brain dead! Memory and concentrating is a wonderful thing.



If you organized your thoughts better, you may be able to get away without paragraphs. As it stands, no.

edit:

Oh, and it doesn't help that you ask questions without question marks, don't know the difference between their and there, etc. I shouldn't have to "concentrate" to try to decipher your slop.


----------



## ChrisW92410

cant complain about my X2 5600+, best running cpu ive had yet, and to be quite honest gaming wise, surfing, etc is amazing IMO


----------



## OvenMaster

I retired my 2700+ and FIC board two weeks ago and replaced it with an X2 4200+ and a Biostar mobo and I gotta admit that I'm totally pleased. Fast, cool-running, 100% stable, and cheap, cheap, cheap. Zero complaints.


----------



## funkysnair

i went from a core2duo e6400 to the x2 6000+...

i couldnt notice a decrease in any speed, more of an increase


----------



## ellanky

Ive always used AMD no problems :3  just because one of their products isnt perfect yet doesnt mean the company or their line of cpus are garbage! >:[


----------



## hermeslyre

hackapelite said:


> P.S. I am no fanboy!



Don't worry I believe you, but to some people you are going to be regardless. If you ever argue a point for a specific platform expect to be mislabeled, especially if you're dealing with people whose points are less than evident (no-one in particular! )

To throw in my love, well awkward to do so because If I had the money I'd love to get a P35, wolfsdale/quad, 4 Gb of DDR2-whatever, a 8800gts.. but I had a old S939, DDR1 memory, etc, and several bills to help pay, so I felt it prudent to go the cheap route. I don't regret the decision, like most the rest of my fellows.


----------



## ThatGuy16

hackapelite said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenom_(processor)
> 
> (Not trying to be anal or anything, but bear with me, sometimes I really come out as one)
> 
> According to that wikipedia article, phenoms with 2 defective cores will be marketed as Athlon X2s ("Kuma") and 3 defective cores as semprons/single-core athlons ("Sparta"/"Lima"). Those triple-cores are codenamed "Toliman" (just showing off *cough*my*cough* knowledge here!). This makes sense, too, since even if the CPUs got three defetive cores, it can still be sold for sweet, tasty profit AMD really needs right now.
> 
> P.S. I do *not* hate AMD!


Exactly thats the "Kuma" processors. The 5600/6000+ are Windsor 90nm cores. 


SirKenin said:


> I can be a bit more specific..
> 
> I think there's something the fanboys don't mention..  They like looking at fake, synthetic benchmark numbers and throwing those around, but there is something else I've noticed about them..   Disk access.  Loading times..   Terrible.  Horrible.  Aggravating.  Consistently bad.  Every single one of them that I've seen have had this problem.
> 
> So yeah..  Performance of them is crappy (unless you overclock them maybe.. but should you really have to push it out of spec to have it perform like it should?) and data i/o is crap.
> 
> Yup.  Hate them.  Crap.  Junk.
> 
> By the way, that guy's Phenom was three weeks old.  That's why I told him to go get a refund.




I'm by far not a fanboy, i can tell you they're not junk. I'm not speaking for the phenoms however..


----------



## deveritt

I just made my first personal build a few weeks ago. Now I put a lot of research and what not into it, trying to keep cost as low as possible. So I decided to go with the 6400+ and I must say that is remarkably greater than my previous desktop (a P4). Everything is very fast, but the only problem I had for the first couple weeks was high temps. But now that the paste has set in and I'm not using the stock cooler, the temps have dropped to acceptable temps (32 idle/50-55 orthos full load). I can't say I have ever tried a C2D to compare but I see no problem with the AMD I got.


----------



## Shane

I personaly have no complaints about AMD....i think they make great processors but it seems this past year everything has gone downhill for them especialy with what happned with their quads which is why i went intel.

My old Sempron rig is still quite nippy for its age


----------



## voyagerfan99

I've started wishing I had saved up more money and built a core 2 duo machine. I bought my current (sig) machine in August and put it together.

It beats a 1.0 Ghz Celeron though.


----------



## hermeslyre

voyagerfan99 said:


> It beats a 1.0 Ghz Celeron though.



lol, yeah it does.


----------



## SirKenin

Meh.  My E8400 is being delivered tomorrow with a bunch of other goodies..  So I don't care 'bout no stinkin' AMD...  lol


----------



## Vizy

http://www.computerforum.com/115975-intel-amd-help.html

a recent discussion. btw, amds rule and i dont have a problem with mine, and ive never really had problems with Intels.


----------



## Motoxrdude

That's strange, i have had relatively good sucess with phenoms. One of my clients at a medical facility had one installed. I put medisoft on it and it has been working fine. There's about 15 workstations working off the server and it hasn't given us any problems thus far. The database though is garbage! I have never seen such crappy software in a "professional" application. It seems like every week a sector goes bad the entire database corrupts! I can't figure it out. I have used reliable hard drives from my experiences and the database will corrupt and runs at snail rate paces at times. It doesn't make any sense how such unreliable software can be sold.


----------



## Vizy

Motoxrdude said:


> That's strange, i have had relatively good sucess with phenoms. One of my clients at a medical facility had one installed. I put medisoft on it and it has been working fine. There's about 15 workstations working off the server and it hasn't given us any problems thus far. The database though is garbage! I have never seen such crappy software in a "professional" application. It seems like every week a sector goes bad the entire database corrupts! I can't figure it out. I have used reliable hard drives from my experiences and the database will corrupt and runs at snail rate paces at times. It doesn't make any sense how such unreliable software can be sold.



its cuz AMD's rule.


----------



## Kewl Munky

I have a 3.2ghz 6400+ X2 from AMD and it runs fine. Wish I would have waited about a month though because a month after I bought it core 2 quads dropped a lot and I could have boughten one.

Wouldn't trade this AMD for any Intel dual core though.


----------



## SirKenin

Motoxrdude said:


> That's strange, i have had relatively good sucess with phenoms. One of my clients at a medical facility had one installed. I put medisoft on it and it has been working fine. There's about 15 workstations working off the server and it hasn't given us any problems thus far. The database though is garbage! I have never seen such crappy software in a "professional" application. It seems like every week a sector goes bad the entire database corrupts! I can't figure it out. I have used reliable hard drives from my experiences and the database will corrupt and runs at snail rate paces at times. It doesn't make any sense how such unreliable software can be sold.


 
First, I'll bet it's Access, and second I'll bet you're using an nVIDIA southbridge and THIRD I'll bet my dollars to your donuts you're not using ECC RAM.  Not to mention the chances are good the cabling is not up to spec and you're not using a managed switch.  And, of course, you're probably using WD Caviar drives which absolutely can NOT handle that environment.

The only drives you should have in there are Raptors or Maxline IIIs.  Otherwise you built something that was inherently flawed in design right from the start and destined to fail.


----------



## Motoxrdude

SirKenin said:


> First, I'll bet it's Access, and second I'll bet you're using an nVIDIA southbridge and THIRD I'll bet my dollars to your donuts you're not using ECC RAM.  Not to mention the chances are good the cabling is not up to spec and you're not using a managed switch.  And, of course, you're probably using WD Caviar drives which absolutely can NOT handle that environment.
> 
> The only drives you should have in there are Raptors or Maxline IIIs.  Otherwise you built something that was inherently flawed in design right from the start and destined to fail.



No way in hell i would use WDs. Those things have given my so many headaches it is rediculous. I am using 4 raptors in raid 3 atm. The ram is ECC and i am not using a nvidia chipset. I can't remember what it is off the top of my head but i know it is not nvidia. And yes, it is on a managed switch. You would actually thing i would use a router? Way too much overhead...


----------



## SirKenin

An unmanaged, smart and managed switches are three totally different animals. What model of switch is it exactly?

Second, you don't use RAID 3 for databases, you use RAID 5. RAID 3 is good for performance, but some error checking is compromised.

Chipset could be a 7 series AMD chipset.

Also, you didn't answer if it's Access or SQL. I'm betting it's Access. It should be ported to SQL, because the overhead with that many users on Access would beat the living crap out of your backbone. That's too many concurrent users for Access. Even Simply Accounting has ported over to SQL this year.

So, there are several flaws in your design if I'm right.. But it's good you're using the Raptors (which are WDs...  So you have me a bit confused there) and ECC.


----------



## Motoxrdude

Yeah, i meant to say wd cavier. Yeah, trust me, i would have never used raid 3 if it was up to me. The servers at the office where managed by an idiot before me. The database is used by the software and since the software is proprietary, we can't touch the database. I do beleive it is sql atm. When the office closes for about a week I am going to be doing an overhaul of that server. everyone is fed up with the intermittent servers. Sometimes they work great, other times they go as slow as rosie o'donal. we still can't figure out why it is so slow sometimes, so we are just going to replace it.


----------



## Crimsonite

Athlon64 owns P4 EE regardless of speed; X2 owns Athlon64 and Phenom owns Athlon64.  Then you say P4 3.2GHz owns Phenom.

You have no facts, obviously lacking knowledge and logic.

ZOMG another Intel fanboy!


----------



## Crimsonite

SirKenin said:


> I can be a bit more specific..
> 
> I think there's something the fanboys don't mention..  They like looking at fake, synthetic benchmark numbers and throwing those around, but there is something else I've noticed about them..   Disk access.  Loading times..   Terrible.  Horrible.  Aggravating.  Consistently bad.  Every single one of them that I've seen have had this problem.
> 
> So yeah..  Performance of them is crappy (unless you overclock them maybe.. but should you really have to push it out of spec to have it perform like it should?) and data i/o is crap.
> 
> Yup.  Hate them.  Crap.  Junk.
> 
> By the way, that guy's Phenom was three weeks old.  That's why I told him to go get a refund.




Two new rigs comparison side-by-side:
==================================
*Rig#1-*
AMD X2 5000 BE @3.31GHz
ASUS M2R32-MVP
4x1GB GeIL Esoteria DDR2-1084Mhz 5-4-4-13
WD RaptorX
HD3870 Crossfired

______________V.S.________________________

*Rig#2*
Intel C2D E6750 @3.0Ghz
Abit AB9 Pro
2x2GB GeIL EVO-ONE DDR2-1100Mhz 5-5-5-15
WD RaptorX
8800GT
===================================

The AMD rig always POSTs quicker, boots into Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit faster, desktop/quicklaunch all load up sooner.  Right after the AMD rig gets in Windows and you click the Firefox icon five times it will open up all the Firefox browser windows in about 3 seconds.  The Intel rig takes 5 seconds to even be able to open up one IE browser window.  Well, according to most of the reviewers and benchies, this C2D E6750 is supposed to chew up the X2 5000 BE despite the 300Mhz difference.  But in reality, it seems more like the Benchmark scores on recent Intel rigs are fake.  So you're right, there are many things the Intel fanboys won't ever mention or admit.




fortyways said:


> If you organized your thoughts better, you may be able to get away without paragraphs. As it stands, no.
> 
> edit:
> 
> Oh, and it doesn't help that you ask questions without question marks, don't know the difference between their and there, etc. I shouldn't have to "concentrate" to try to decipher your slop.



Completely off-topic.  Thank you.


----------



## Motoxrdude

Crimsonite said:


> Two new rigs comparison side-by-side:
> ==================================
> *Rig#1-*
> AMD X2 5000 BE @3.31GHz
> ASUS M2R32-MVP
> 4x1GB GeIL Esoteria DDR2-1084Mhz 5-4-4-13
> WD RaptorX
> HD3870 Crossfired
> 
> ______________V.S.________________________
> 
> *Rig#2*
> Intel C2D E6750 @3.0Ghz
> Abit AB9 Pro
> 2x2GB GeIL EVO-ONE DDR2-1100Mhz 5-5-5-15
> WD RaptorX
> 8800GT
> ===================================
> 
> The AMD rig always POSTs quicker, boots into Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit faster, desktop/quicklaunch all load up sooner.  Right after the AMD rig gets in Windows and you click the Firefox icon five times it will open up all the Firefox browser windows in about 3 seconds.  The Intel rig takes 5 seconds to even be able to open up one IE browser window.  Well, according to most of the reviewers and benchies, this C2D E6750 is supposed to chew up the X2 5000 BE despite the 300Mhz difference.  But in reality, it seems more like the Benchmark scores on recent Intel rigs are fake.  So you're right, there are many things the Intel fanboys won't ever mention or admit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Completely off-topic.  Thank you.



You know bootup time has almost nothing to do with processor? Obviously you dont know that so I wouldn't be giving info on the matter. And plus, desktop environments are totally different then server environments. Also, for his given situation a P4 is outperforming a phenom; you don't know the situation, variables and hardware related. You can't judge off someones person opinion...

Anyways,
Yeah, i meant to say wd cavier. Yeah, trust me, i would have never used raid 3 if it was up to me. The servers at the office where managed by an idiot before me. The database is used by the software and since the software is proprietary, we can't touch the database. I do beleive it is sql atm. When the office closes for about a week I am going to be doing an overhaul of that servers. everyone is fed up with the intermittent servers. Sometimes they work great, other times they go as slow as rosie o'donal.   It is most likely poor software and it doesn't place nice with our hardware.


----------



## reddevil6

AMD are not crap my 6000+ is faster than any intel me or my dad have ever owned muck more reliable, every intel me or my dad have owned have had nothing but problems.

                                                  AMD RULE


----------



## fortyways

Crimsonite said:


> Completely off-topic.  Thank you.



Tough.

Your post was also off-topic.

Your "comparison" was ambiguous, petty, and foolish. Nobody cares that you opened IE slower on one computer than FireFox on another computer.


----------



## SirKenin

Well, my reference point is stuff that most people only dream of.  As I do sales *and* service, I deal with everything from the $300 PC to the $30,000+ server and everything in between.  Currently we are developing $20,000 + home theater systems with a PC at the heart.

You've overclocked the bejesus out of the AMD, your o/c on the Intel sucks.  You use a POS board on the Intel with an antique chipset, a current gen board on the AMD.  You compare opening Firefox on one to IE on the other.  You compare an apple and an orange and I'm supposed to be impressed?  Did you disable NCQ on the Abit?  Oh.. You don't even know what the hell that is, nor the fact that the Abit has NCQ, the Asus doesn't and the WD Raptor 1500ADFD does, in fact, have NCQ.

Of course you also wouldn't have know that drives with NCQ enabled in single user environments take a performance hit, as opposed to a multiuser environment.

Believe me, I don't care if your firefox opens a second or two faster than IE.  I DO care that you're an idiot that doesn't know what he's talking about.


----------



## StrangleHold

SirKenin said:


> I've worked on a few systems lately with the latest AMD processors in them, the X2s and Phenoms. What total, absolute crap. Garbage. Dog slow pieces of junk.
> 
> What a sorry excuse for a processor/platform. I can't believe people actually buy these things. I built a P4 3.2 GHz system for a client a couple of weeks ago that absolutely destroys that Phenom in common tasks. Slaughters it, not even a contest.
> 
> It was disgusting. I told the guy to take the Phenom PC back and get a refund. Unbelievable garbage.


 


SirKenin said:


> I can be a bit more specific..
> 
> I think there's something the fanboys don't mention.. They like looking at fake, synthetic benchmark numbers and throwing those around, but there is something else I've noticed about them.. Disk access. Loading times.. Terrible. Horrible. Aggravating. Consistently bad. Every single one of them that I've seen have had this problem.
> 
> So yeah.. Performance of them is crappy (unless you overclock them maybe.. but should you really have to push it out of spec to have it perform like it should?) and data i/o is crap.
> 
> Yup. Hate them. Crap. Junk.
> 
> By the way, that guy's Phenom was three weeks old. That's why I told him to go get a refund.


 
Now this is how it got started and how it got turned into what it has, I have no idea. Started out a couple of X2 and Phenom systems then turned into building servers and home systems.

New paragraph so fortyways will not get confused. I built about 90% AMD systems for 11 years. And really had more problems out of the 10% Intel systems then all the AMDs put together. Lets get real here the P4 as far as the clock performance was way under performing compared the the Athlon 64.

Back to the Core 2. Im not fanboy to anything. Whatever has the best performance is the best period. Right now the Core 2 clock for clock outperforms the X2 and Phenom. You have to be kinda brain dead not to think so. But that still does not mean the X2 or Phenoms are crap. (B2 stepping not included) Intel has had there share of Errata too. If you go by that logic we need to find whoever has the fastest computer on the boards and everybody else's is crap.

Back to the P4. You have to admit by design it was slower clock for clock, no Hypertransport-no onboard memory controller. It was completely out classed by the Athlon 64. I,m just suprised of how quick people forget (the crap as you call it) how they were kicked around by Intel with there P4. Intel finally got there ducks in a row with the Core 2, so I guess all these people that had P4s and dreaming can now finally vent there frustration at Intel but point it in the wrong direction.


----------



## Crimsonite

I guess my point was taken then.  

OP makes a statement flaming AMD with no facts no proof and many of you seem to agree with him up to some extent.  I jump in to make a similar statement in similar ways but backing up AMD, and some of you get all crazy on me.  Tough.  Right.

Priceless.


----------



## fortyways

The difference is that everyone already knows Intel is better right now, the OP was just building on common knowledge.

You, however, are trying to defy common knowledge, so you're going to need more than your opinion.


----------



## Sir Travis D

Alienware is selling some of their desktops with phenom processors..


----------



## SirKenin

Crimsonite said:


> I guess my point was taken then.
> ...Priceless.


 
The only point you made is that you're clueless.  If that's the point you wanted to make, then yes, you aced it.


----------



## StrangleHold

Crimsonite said:


> I guess my point was taken then.
> 
> OP makes a statement flaming AMD with no facts no proof and many of you seem to agree with him up to some extent. I jump in to make a similar statement in similar ways but backing up AMD, and some of you get all crazy on me. Tough. Right.
> 
> Priceless.


Your getting picked on because the problem is that there is alot more going on then a few seconds on boot up and how long it takes Firefox/IE to open. You really need more experience than that.



Sir Travis D said:


> Alienware is selling some of their desktops with phenom processors..


What has that got to do with anything?



SirKenin said:


> The only point you made is that you're clueless. If that's the point you wanted to make, then yes, you aced it.


Now, Now dont be mean


----------



## diduknowthat

Sir Travis D said:


> Alienware is selling some of their desktops with phenom processors..



Does that really prove anything? No. The fact is that Intel's quad core is completely dominating phenoms and AMD is doing well only in the budget sector.


----------



## Sir Travis D

I'm not saying it's good, i'm saying it's not absolutely horrible - they wouldn't get away with selling it if it wasn't good for at least some gamers..


----------



## Kornowski

Here we go again, I really wouldn't have expected anything less from SirKenin, typical!


----------



## StrangleHold

Sir Travis D said:


> I'm not saying it's good, i'm saying it's not absolutely horrible - they wouldn't get away with selling it if it wasn't good for at least some gamers..


 
The problem AMD is having is price point, hell its a good processor but its slower clock for clock and doesnt overclock as well. Intel can lower prices and not lose their --- so much better than AMD because of production cost. Example 9850 at 2.5 vs. Q6600 at 2.4, The Q6600 beats it in just about anything plus it overclocks better and they are the same price around 239 bucks. The only way AMD can even compete with Intels slowest quad the Q6600 is if the 9850 was about 199 or maybe 209 bucks.

Dont misunderstand me, the Phenom (B3) is a good processor. Its 10 to 15% faster clock for clock than the Athlon 64 but at the price point it just isnt competing. And I,m talking about the 9750 and 9850 the only 2 that even comes close to the Q6600, like I say if they knocked about 25 bucks off then they would be a good deal.


----------



## djcon

SirKenin said:


> I've worked on a few systems lately with the latest AMD processors in them, the X2s and Phenoms.  What total, absolute crap.  Garbage.  Dog slow pieces of junk.
> 
> What a sorry excuse for a processor/platform.  I can't believe people actually buy these things.  I built a P4 3.2 GHz system for a client a couple of weeks ago that absolutely destroys that Phenom in common tasks.  Slaughters it, not even a contest.
> 
> It was disgusting.  I told the guy to take the Phenom PC back and get a refund.  Unbelievable garbage.



AMD Athlon 64 3500+... never had a problem... I guess you just got a lemon out of the bunch.


----------



## ThatGuy16

Kornowski said:


> Here we go again, I really wouldn't have expected anything less from SirKenin, typical!



typical, indeed.


----------



## 2048Megabytes

So what is the latest and greatest dual core processor AMD is manufacturing currently?


----------



## Gareth

They're offering Triple Core and Quad Cores. The latest dual core is 6400+


----------



## Shane

Garethman!!` said:


> They're offering Triple Core and Quad Cores



i simply do not understand why AMD are making a Triple core when they have quad 

it just seems stupid to me it would be like making a new single core cpu and releasing it even though they have dual cores


----------



## StrangleHold

There Dual cores are going to be the lower end. Even when the Agena Dual core comes out theres going to be one model with L3 and one without. Plus a Sempron Dual Core. Since there slower clock for clock I think there setting up the X3 to compete against Intels Core 2 Dual. Think there just stuck with the clock speed of the Barcelona/Agena core. They can probable tweak it a little more and get the clock speed up and mhz. I,ve read some reviews that said that theres not even going to be a B4 stepping, that their trying to get the 45nm. into production.


----------



## Shane

StrangleHold said:


> Plus a Sempron Dual Core.



A sempron dual core ,i think that they will be pretty nice 

Semprons are not as bad as people make them out to be


----------



## StrangleHold

They already have the Brisbane X2 Sempron
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103260


----------



## TrainTrackHack

Nevakonaza said:


> i simply do not understand why AMD are making a Triple core when they have quad
> 
> it just seems stupid to me it would be like making a new single core cpu and releasing it even though they have dual cores



If the quad-core has one defective core, it would be a waste to throw it away since it's still got 3 working cores... so they just disable the defective one and make some profit out of the working bits of the chip. Makes sense? And if it's got 2 defective cores, it's sold as a dualcore and if it's got 3 defective cores it's sold as singlecore and if it's got 4 defective cores...

I don't know about this but it would also make sense (to me) to disable a working core of a quad if it's stuck at low mhz, since such a core would hold the 3 other ones back... so you could sell a CPU with lesser cores and faster mhz. No clue if they do this, though.


----------



## maroon1

Intel have celeron dual core E1200
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116064&Tpk=E1200

It cost $5 more but it performs slightly better than the sempron dual core

And on May E1200 will be replaced by E1400 which have 400MHz higher stock speed


----------



## zer0_c00l

my phenom 9600 B.E.  was always stable,as was my x2 5600+ and my X2 5000+ b.e. ohh cant forget my  athlon 2800+ still going...


----------



## computeruler

i agree that amd is crap intel ftw!


----------



## Bob Jeffery

i say just use the 8 core ps3 processor. No im not kidding that would be awsome. The ps3 only uses 7 of the cores   there 3.2ghz each i think


----------



## Sir Travis D

but intel's quad core's are faster than amd's opticores...


----------



## Vizy

Bob Jeffery said:


> i say just use the 8 core ps3 processor. No im not kidding that would be awsome. The ps3 only uses 7 of the cores   there 3.2ghz each i think



i didn't even know that they had 8 core processors out.


----------



## Crimsonite

Typical Intel fanboyism.  I never denied that Intel outperforms AMD right now.   Looks like you missed the point.  The OP made a no-facts based claim that his P4 destroyed AMD X2's and Phenoms.  I made a similar statement but more conservative on X2 5000 vs E6750.  The obvious is only seen and understood by those who don't have so much pride and ego.  The clueless one is you, boy.


----------



## Bob Jeffery

well its actually a cell processor so i guess it wouldn't count, but still awesome!


----------



## Sir Travis D

oops, I mean intel 8 core is better than amd 16 core

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRtFNxNShts


----------



## Vizy

Crimsonite said:


> Typical Intel fanboyism.  I never denied that Intel outperforms AMD right now.   Looks like you missed the point.  The OP made a no-facts based claim that his P4 destroyed AMD X2's and Phenoms.  I made a similar statement but more conservative on X2 5000 vs E6750.  The obvious is only seen and understood by those who don't have so much pride and ego.  The clueless one is you, boy.



Your talking to SirK right?


----------



## fortyways

Crimsonite said:


> Typical Intel fanboyism.  I never denied that Intel outperforms AMD right now.   Looks like you missed the point.  The OP made a no-facts based claim that his P4 destroyed AMD X2's and Phenoms.  I made a similar statement but more conservative on X2 5000 vs E6750.  The obvious is only seen and understood by those who don't have so much pride and ego.  The clueless one is you, boy.



You're an idiot, and every post you make makes that more and more clear. You, obviously, are an AMD fanboy, and I, obviously, care very little either way. I get what's cheapest and still performs well, and that happens to be the Pentium Dual Core series.

I was only pointing out that your comparison was absolutely stupid. I don't care in the slightest which processor you like, moron.


----------



## SirKenin

Crimsonite said:


> Typical Intel fanboyism. I never denied that Intel outperforms AMD right now.  Looks like you missed the point. The OP made a no-facts based claim that his P4 destroyed AMD X2's and Phenoms. I made a similar statement but more conservative on X2 5000 vs E6750. The obvious is only seen and understood by those who don't have so much pride and ego. The clueless one is you, boy.


 
No facts? And you counter with "no facts" and yet somehow that's ok? Not only do you counter with no facts, you "compare" an apple and an orange? And that makes you "special"? The definitive source? The comparison that was so badly flawed that even the most obtuse could easily see that your farts sound more factual than you do?

You're "special" alright. So special you take the short bus to your "AMD Fanboi School of Irrelevancy" classes. 

I can see the itinerary now:

9:00 AM Group hug
9:15 AM Group confessions. "Hi, my name is.......and I spend more for less"
9:30 AM Group hug
9:45 AM Coloring session "256 Shades of Red"
10:00 AM Group session "The Importance of Falsifying Data"
10:30 AM Group hug
11:00 AM Group session "How to glaze over the fact that you have the only processor that needs it's own patches"
11:30 AM Group session "How to overclock your processor to make you feel better AND give the illusion of e-peen in your forum sig at the same time" 
11:45 AM Visual presentation "The importance of putting @ {clock speed} in your signature and how to ignore the fact that nobody else bloody cares"
12:00 PM Group hug
12:20 PM Nap time
12:30 PM Lunch "Yes, you could have had a much better burger for $2.00 less, but that's not the AMD way"
1:00 PM Group hug
1:15 PM Group session "3D Mark...The importance of useless, synthetic benchmarks"
1:45 PM Group hug
2:00 PM Nap time
2:15 PM Group session "How to operate a company in the red for 15 years..The importance of fanboyism"
3:15 PM Group hug
3:30 PM Group session "How to make irrelevant comparisons to make you feel better for wasting your money on a piece of crap"
3:45 PM School chant. "It's not about the clock speed. And now it's not about the price/performance, efficiency, thermal dissipation, lack of fabs, process, the complete waste of money on acquisitions we couldn't afford or the fact that we're not making any goddamn money either"
3:50 PM Practice session at your favorite forum
4:00 PM Short bus comes to take you home. Fortunately it's not an AMD bus, otherwise it would take twice as long to get home, chew twice as much gas, belch twice as much smoke and only run on three cylinders because the fourth one crapped out at the factory.


----------



## TrainTrackHack

AMDs scale better than Intels, thanks to HyperTransport... and in some post I already mentioned that even lower-end AMDs have VT enabled, unlike cheap Intels...I'm not being a fanboy of any kind, and which one scales better or has VT makes absolutely no difference to most people anyway, but just pointing out that sometimes AMDs are better than intels. I admit that atm Intel's the way to go, and I'm with Intel, they do destroy AMDs, yes, but I though I'd say this just because AMDs are getting battered and spit at so bad... it's so mean *sniff*

You might want to say Phenom is retarded. Many would say NetBurst was retarded. Nobody is perfect, afterall. Intel fanboys have had their own bad moments, now AMD fans are having theirs... but you never know what's going to happen...


----------



## Bob Jeffery

can someone just stfu! Its a computer! SirKenin is a perfect example of a intel fanboy. Amd has there bad times. Intel has there bad times. whatever.......


----------



## funkysnair

but my life depends on the fact that other people think my computer is a pos cos i have a amd cpu in it...

i have the rope ready to hang myself.........

as if im bothered what people say, god man-get a grip people pmsl


----------



## funkysnair

am i being sarcastic or mature i cant decide so ill just be imiture and say everyone else's computers sucks apart from mine lol....

wait, has this already been posted?

is that sarcasm again?

im confused


----------



## SirKenin

Bob Jeffery said:


> can someone just stfu! Its a computer! SirKenin is a perfect example of a intel fanboy. Amd has there bad times. Intel has there bad times. whatever.......


 
I'm not a fanboy.  I'm in the business of giving people the best value for their money...and AMD just isn't it.  Period.  Nothing fanboyish about it.  Deal with it.  It's ok.  You can still hug your AMD.


----------



## Kornowski

Funny how trouble follows you isn't it...


----------



## Computer_Freak

Bob Jeffery said:


> i say just use the 8 core ps3 processor. No im not kidding that would be awsome. The ps3 only uses 7 of the cores   there 3.2ghz each i think



just to show where we are gonna end up in a year or 2....

guys this thread has gone on long enough....

ill set things straight.

AMD vs Intel

Both are good as they provide competition to keep prices down.

Second, fine intel might be better now but AMD had their time, and might have it again

Third, alot of people here are and arent fanboys. To the people that arent, and they get whats best, good for you as you getting whats best.
to the people that are fanboys, you missing out on the better cpus, depending on who has it (AMD or Intel)

Fourth who the hell cares... each person has their own opinion, what they think is better, isnt that what matters.... 

please guys it pointless to carry on.

one is better at a certain time than the other. Period. right now its intels time.

Eg i had a friend who swore on AMD, but has now switched cause he acknowledges that Intel is now better. AMD will bring something out that will take the crown, and then AMD will be better


----------



## dragon2309

Computer_Freak said:


> just to show where we are gonna end up in a year or 2....
> 
> guys this thread has gone on long enough....
> 
> ill set things straight.
> 
> AMD vs Intel
> 
> Both are good as they provide competition to keep prices down.
> 
> Second, fine intel might be better now but AMD had their time, and might have it again
> 
> Third, alot of people here are and arent fanboys. To the people that arent, and they get whats best, good for you as you getting whats best.
> to the people that are fanboys, you missing out on the better cpus, depending on who has it (AMD or Intel)
> 
> Fourth who the hell cares... each person has their own opinion, what they think is better, isnt that what matters....
> 
> please guys it pointless to carry on.
> 
> one is better at a certain time than the other. Period. right now its intels time.
> 
> Eg i had a friend who swore on AMD, but has now switched cause he acknowledges that Intel is now better. AMD will bring something out that will take the crown, and then AMD will be better


and that sir... is that, thread closed


----------

