Discussion in 'Hardware' started by cloasters, Oct 18, 2020.
The only reason I purchased AMD is because they were cheaper and still fast.
Hopefully they don't bump up the prices now.
Can we say you bought AMD because it was simply better? Ya see, I always root for the underdog.
Sure, I definitely root for the "under dog"
But they were cheaper...
If they start raising prices above Intel then I'm not sure what I would buy.
I'm glad AMD finally decided to follow suite and go with the pin-less CPUs with contacts instead.
But I'm never out to get the fasted CPU, fastest Memory and fasted video card.
I've always purchased budget components and upgraded later when the prices drop.
Unfortunately video card prices have not dropped because of bitcoin mining. Sucks for us gamers.
I was thinking of their CPU's. Apologies, this durned virtual money mining is apita for GPU enthusiasts.
Ha ha, did you even read the article?
Ha ha, yes I read it before linking to it. But I didn't read it slowly enough, mea culpa. Personally, if it came down to a choice of CPU's with the same performance for the same price I'd choose AMD. Intel STILL hasn't fixed its vulnerabilities afaik. Their attitude bothers me. Hi, we're Intel and we are the big dog so we refuse to address the core problems with our CPU's. Hope you don't like it!
Consumers caught on and said Advanced Micro Devices have more power at less cost. And AMD never had the security horse crap that Intel still has. IIRC.
So yes, even after the price increases I vote for AMD. My next PC will sport an AMD processor.
I forgot about those security vulnerabilities. I'll stick with AMD too.
My best AMD is
AMD FX(tm)-6300 Six-Core Processor × 3
Six cores is awesome and I never have performance issues... unless its a game beating up my GTX 1060
I have two other AMD 3-core processors that rock as well.
As I 'm pretty sure I've built my last computer, I don't really have a dog in this fight
Top quality and price very seldom go together. When they do jump on it.
Unless Intel comes under very different management they are letting AMD have it's short term gains and will drop a bomb at a time of their own choosing that will have consumers clambering for the Intel latest.
They can rely upon their installed user base to carry them past any AMD advances until Intel
makes the next big jump.
But this has been our past, I know little to nothing about the future.":O}
Intel doesn't fix bugs when they don't really impact it's installed user base.
You have an Intel Chip, George, how have you suffered at Intel's hands.?
Me I don't cry until I'm hurt by these things.
Reminds me of Disney
Other studios are creating amazing movies and animation.
Disney will release their own movie on the same weekend.
Then buy out the studio.
Personally, I always vote for the underdog. If this includes the Trump, this doesn't mean it. Or him, if you must. Intel never ever gave any performance gains away for less than serious change. I remember what shining stars those Celerons we used to settle for were. Sure, we OCed them, and OCed them good. But what did it really matter? Their performance was crap as they sported no L2 Cache iirc.
The Athlon 64 changed everything. Did we not spend a darned cold early morning hoping to get one for free? I know you and I voted for AMD's Athlon 64 with our wallets. And were happy to do so. I find your loyalty to Intel puzzling. Wth did Intel EVER give you?
With a lot of luck AMD's latest CPU's will outperform Intel's for two full years, just like the Sledgehammer did, even if their price is raised to equal Intel's.
I don't really know if this is my last PC. I'm not in need of a system upgrade yet, and this Core 5 box is three years old. I'm not sure that a faster running machine will make any difference because my alleged 100 Mbps download bandwidth, which it really is the great majority of the time seems to mean very little practically speaking. All of my Linux Update downloads never exceed 7 Mbps.
If I build a new computer it will sure as sugar sport an AMD processor. Vidcard? Quite possibly not an AMD, afaik AMD STILL hasn't come up with decent drivers for AMD video cards in Linux. AMD is not perfect, who's to argue that?
Interesting take on AMD vs Intel.
I read an article about the CEO of AMD and how he dragged the company down. Wish I had a link... not sure if its true or not, but Intel has always been the "big brother" in the CPU world until ARM processors came about. Specially when they contracted with Apple... that was HUGE!
Now that Apple is going to start developing their own ARM processors I bet Intel will start hurting a bit. Just a little bit because I know their technology is in everything.
I have avoided AMD video cards for years because I've always read the drivers in Linux are a mess, but recently Daerandin said the Open Source drivers are amazing!
Things are changing in the CPU world and I'm loving it!
Now if I had the money to build a new system...
Dr Lisa T. Su has really been good in the CEO spot at AMD. Creating a solid new CPU family that outperforms Intel's best offerings makes me very happy. And for a good deal less than what I call the other (not IBM) Big Blue's cost, what's not to like? Looks like the considerable price break has come to an end. I believe that AMD's CPU's are worth buying without a price break. I can't expect AMD to loose money, they need it because they are a TINY company compared to the Big Thug, Intel.
I'm glad that Daerandin says that new Open Source drivers work with AMD's GPU's well!
I thought that ARM processors were quite weak, yet they performed their task well and drew very little power.
Looks like they've become a good deal more capable?
The errors that Intel's processors are subject to are buried deep within their CPU's. Maybe we couldn't detect them if we tried? How have I suffered in Intel's hands? By not being able to afford a Pentium processor and having to settle for Celerons. Without that overly priced L2 Cache Celerons were crippled.
Separate names with a comma.