BUYING A NEW PC-- WHICH PROCESSOR???

[jmil24]

I know this question has probably been visited, re-visited, and visited again, but I really need an answer to it.

I'm in the market for a new PC. Ok, for high-end graphics AND text applicatins, which is more effective AND more reliable- the NEW AMD T-BIRD 1100 or the INTEL 1000? Obviously with the higher clock speed the T-bird is faster but is it just as compatible with software in comparison Intel processors?

I've read the T-BIRD wins in graphics but then again slows down in other Windows applications because these programs are not optimized for 3DNOW! Is this true??? Overall, and ignoring price, do you have any recommendations as to which is the MORE EFFECTIVE PROCESSOR to buy?

I'm am not building the unit but will instead be buying- and like any other user want the "best" processor outthere.

Can anyone help me with this??? - Thanks.

[BloodRed]

Personally, I'd go with Intel. AMD makes good chips, but I don't want to have to look at compatibility lists before I buy hardware so I know it'll work with my CPU. I just have to say it, build it yourself!

------------------
-BR
The Slaughter House - Files & Links & Stuff

[jmil24]

Originally posted by BloodRed:
Personally, I'd go with Intel. AMD makes good chips, but I don't want to have to look at compatibility lists before I buy hardware so I know it'll work with my CPU. I just have to say it, build it yourself!

I would build it myself, but I think I've ruined enough good computers in my time...

Anyway can any AMD defenders go against this?

Any other opinions???- thanks again.

[Diamond*Viper]

I can vouch for AMD. I just built my own computer a few weeks ago. I got a Thunderbird 800mhz. The only problem I have is that my Fan/Heatsink isn't transfering heat well...but this problem can be avoided by getting a good heatsink/fan. For your money AMD is the better choice.

[jmil24]

And I'm guessing you haven't had any compatibility slowdowns, i.e. something that wouldn't happen with an Intel Processor???

[Fungus]

There have been issues (for builders) with the new Socket A (Duron and Thunderbird) AMD processors and heatsink/fan compatibilities.

A friend recently put together a 1GHz Thunderbird system and fried the processor.
This guy is an experienced systems builder and I couldn't believe he was having the problems he had.

Also the new Thunderbirds and Duron are very fragile.... but since you are BUYING a complete system (with a 3 year warranty right???), I'd let the manufacturer worry about it... get the AMD system, you're getting more for your money.

Best of luck... and STAY AWAY FROM COMPAQ! (unless you are buying a server)

Fungus

[Phoenix]

I agree, I just built my Thunderbird 900 system and haven't had any real problems. The only thing was that the chip came with a few bent pins, not a big problem and the chips did seem a bit fragile, you have to be careful when putting the heatsink on it, but you shouldn't have to worry about that if you aren't putting it together yourself.

[Sagittarius]

this TBird frying experience happens because people tend to use socket7 cooler, these coolers leave 2mm or so between die and heatsink, leaving the CPU destroyed within 8 s!
the only good SoA cooler i know of is the 'Silver Orb'..

[Mr_Q]

I like the new Tbirds,but I tend to go for Intel ,mostly because compatibility issues and because I enjoy building my own systems and in this case its much easier to use an Intel, wich is also usually more overclockable than AMD counterparts.

[mpitts]

Originally posted by jmil24:
I would build it myself, but I think I've ruined enough good computers in my time...

Anyway can any AMD defenders go against this?

Any other opinions???- thanks again.

I have an AMD Athlon and can tell you the only things you really need to be worried about are the Power Supply of the case you are going to use and the RAM. Athlon motherboards are picky, and the CPU's are power hungry. If you can get an Athlon-approved PS, and some GOOD RAM, you should have no problems buidling an AMD based system.



------------------
"Everyone knows the best bands are affiliated with Satan."

[mpitts]

Originally posted by jmil24:
And I'm guessing you haven't had any compatibility slowdowns, i.e. something that wouldn't happen with an Intel Processor???

Could you go into detail about this? I can't stand it when people talk about the "compatability issues" that AMD has, but then can't go into any detail about it.




------------------
"Everyone knows the best bands are affiliated with Satan."

[mpitts]

Originally posted by Sagittarius:
this TBird frying experience happens because people tend to use socket7 cooler, these coolers leave 2mm or so between die and heatsink, leaving the CPU destroyed within 8 s!
the only good SoA cooler i know of is the 'Silver Orb'..

Exactly. How hard is it to do some research before building a system?




------------------
"Everyone knows the best bands are affiliated with Satan."

[mpitts]

Originally posted by Mr_Q:
I like the new Tbirds,but I tend to go for Intel ,mostly because compatibility issues and because I enjoy building my own systems and in this case its much easier to use an Intel, wich is also usually more overclockable than AMD counterparts.

Again, can you elaborate on these "compatability issues"? People who have never built an AMD based system are usually the ones who use this excuse.




------------------
"Everyone knows the best bands are affiliated with Satan."

[Arcadian]

Originally posted by mpitts:
Again, can you elaborate on these "compatability issues"? People who have never built an AMD based system are usually the ones who use this excuse.

People don't know for certain whether an AMD processor is at fault for incompatability problems. For most people, a computer crash can be easily blamed on Microsoft, or at least chalked up as a fluke. You never know if the processor is behind it. The truth is, though, that AMD spends far less time in validation than Intel. They have an issue with "time to market", and they need that to stay competetive. Of course, this could be attributed to a more advanced and efficient validation process, but it's also possible that they cut out corner cases by eliminating configurations that are rarely used. Intel makes a strong effort to hit all possible corner cases in their validation process.

Also, AMD doesn't have as many OEMs and other independant vendors testing out their systems. To put it another way, AMD is not in the spot light like Intel is. Their mistakes are easily forgiven and forgotten, while Intel's mistakes are scrutinized as they are the industry's bellweather. AMD hopes to compete with Intel as equal companies, but if they are to succeed, they will have to account for more reliability if they want the industry to trust them. While I admit that their Athlon processor has less issues than their processors in the past, I can't believe it's perfect. And frankly it surprises my that the AMD webpage does not include errata lists like Intel does, which makes me wonder what it is their hiding.

While AMD is a comperable choice to Intel, it does not guarentee that their chips are as compatable. While some people can claim good reliability from first hand experience, that doesn't guarentee compatability with other configurations. Intel has the sense to recall parts that are prone to problems, and I have never seen AMD do the same for parts that have given people trouble.

I can't say one way or another, but these are just observations of mine. Take them how you will....

[jmil245]

The phrase "compatibility issues" was only referrring to what I have heard from people in the industry and from customers who responded in other forums, along with articles I've read elsewhere. Some have said games skip due the imcompatibility conflicts with video drivers and the T-Bird. Other have mentioned that those who use Auto-CAD and work with high-end graphics recommend the PIII because most designers build their programs to be compatible with it. I'm not dismissing AMD, but is this what I've been told. It has been suggested that I stick with Intel for now, which is why I came here to listen to other advice.

Furthermore, I don't appreciate being criticized for merely asking for your opinions. I was not making "an excuse" as one of you has said; instead, I am repeating what has been said to me.

If I bought (not built) an AMD PC today, would I have any troubles with the processor itself? Does AMD still perfom better than Intel's PIII (with the T-Bird)?

-thanks for any help.