Should I switch from AMD to Intel?
Oct 30, 2002 at 1:17 AM Post #16 of 38
Uh, not quite "stock-earbud-to-Orpheus" level, but more like jumping up from the 'overpriced' StreetStyles to the HD600/RS-1 class.
 
Oct 30, 2002 at 1:17 AM Post #17 of 38
Quote:

Originally posted by LobsterSan
Wow... that's like going from stock buds and jumping up to an orpheus! Lucky you... wish i could get 10,000,000 FPS @ highest settings like you
smily_headphones1.gif


I worked a year and didn't upgrade my old computer at all and got a new machine instead. So I pushed the boat out as far as I could as it's need to last me 2 years in college. Got 1024 MB RAM too, just in case.
 
Oct 30, 2002 at 1:21 AM Post #18 of 38
Quote:

Originally posted by dhwilkin
Whether or not AMD can get out the latest Athlons in a timely fashion shouldn't factor into a decision to buy now. The trend is, after a few years, your motherboard is going to be incompatible w/ whatever the newest design is, so you'd have to make this entire choice of AMD vs Intel over again. And my vote is to stay w/ AMD, simply because it's more convenient if you already have one.


the thing is, if you're buying anew, I'd go for a p4 now, not AMD.
 
Oct 30, 2002 at 3:09 PM Post #20 of 38
Quote:

the thing is, if you're buying anew, I'd go for a p4 now, not AMD.


I'd purchase nothing at this time. When the next big thing rolls around in Q3/03 all these folks are going to have buyers remorse over their freshly obsolete stack of PCB's.
 
Oct 30, 2002 at 3:33 PM Post #21 of 38
Problems with AMD processors??? Come on, the AMD processors are 100% compatible. I have been using Intel and AMD processors for a long time, Intel since the days of 8088 and AMD since 486DX2-66 and 486DX4-100 and I NEVER had any compatibility issues with AMD. I have build hundreds of computers and supervised even more when I had my computer store for 6 years or so about 5 years ago. If there are problems then its one or a combination of issues: motherboard, chipset, drivers, software, compatibility between components and the way someone builds the computer. There have been issues with VIA chipset and Sound Blaster cards but that has been resolved with updated drivers and new bios. I also had issues with almost every brand of motherboards but this in no way is a problem with AMD compatibility. My latest upgrade to my main rig (AMD 1800) is 100% stable. Had some issues with drivers for my video editing card and normal Microsoft OS issues but that is it. If you chose good solid components and build it right, you will not have problems. I use my systems very intensely, running about a dozen applications in the same time, I do application development, video editing, graphics, animations, all fine on AMD based systems. Why would someone want to pay more for INTEL? Maybe because they like the name. I do have three Intel based web and application server but thats because these are dual processor Compaq prolients and one IBM server.

Besides, use what you have, its pointless to keep upgrading if you don't take advantage of the hardware you already have. Unless its the bragging rights.

Anyway, why talk about computers when there is all this cool audio hardware to play with
biggrin.gif
 
Oct 30, 2002 at 3:55 PM Post #22 of 38
you want to upgrade from an athlon xp 2000+?! man, i wish i had money to blow on useless upgrades like you.

if you really want a faster computer, get a an x15.3 scsi hard drive. this has been the biggest performance upgrade i've yet experienced. my box is two years old now and i find it still runs like a hardcore beast. i do obscene amounts of loads on it and it hasn't failed on me yet. if i can live with a dual pentium3 933 while i'm encoding dvds, i'm sure you can live with a 2000+ while playing some game.
rolleyes.gif


buy books, music, or dvds instead!
 
Oct 30, 2002 at 3:57 PM Post #23 of 38
Nope, I'm planning to step sideways, not upgrade.

And as far as SCSI hard drives, they have an issue with Windows XP (at least the pre-SP1 version): Their performance is surprisingly sluggish under that OS. Moreover, I would have to fall WAY down as far as capacity for the $$$ is concerned: 15k rpm hard drives now go up to 73GB (but they will cost me almost $1,000 apiece), and 146GB 10k rpm hard drives are available (again, at an astronomical amount of $$$).
 
Oct 30, 2002 at 9:23 PM Post #24 of 38
Quote:

Originally posted by Eagle_Driver
Nope, I'm planning to step sideways, not upgrade.


either way, it's a waste of money when you'll be getting next to nothing in return.

Quote:

And as far as SCSI hard drives, they have an issue with Windows XP (at least the pre-SP1 version): Their performance is surprisingly sluggish under that OS. Moreover, I would have to fall WAY down as far as capacity for the $$$ is concerned: 15k rpm hard drives now go up to 73GB (but they will cost me almost $1,000 apiece), and 146GB 10k rpm hard drives are available (again, at an astronomical amount of $$$).


yes, there is/was a problem. making each drive dynamic helps. either way, xp is now leaps and bounds faster than it was with my ide drives. the "sluggish" speeds you talk about still smoke ide drives left and right.

when i say "buy a scsi drive," i don't mean "sell all of your ide drives and then buy a scsi drive." i mean "buy a 15k rpm scsi drive IN ADDITION to your current setup and install your operating system (and page file!) on it."

buying 150gb on a scsi drive is a stupid waste of money (unless of course you're a gigantic corporation running a massive server, specific situation, etc.). i was saying, spend the $200-$300 and get yourself a nice u160 adapter and 15k rpm 18gb drive for your system. keep your older ide drives for storage of mp3s and whatever else you need that much space for.

it makes a huge difference, i assure you.

[size=xx-small]p.s. *cough*AWESOME DEAL*cough* http://www.storagereview.com/cgi-bin....pl?viewhl=896[/size]
 
Oct 31, 2002 at 1:09 AM Post #26 of 38
Sorry, grinch, but 18GB is way too small for my needs. All of my programs - which take up more than two-thirds of that space - all require that they be installed on the same volume as the operating-system files in order for them to work at all. And when I fill up that SCSI (or other small-capacity) drive that full, performance will suffer very greatly. And in my price range I couldn't afford even a SCSI controller, let alone a controller plus drive combo. (What am I doing paying more $$$ for a SCSI controller suitable for primary system drives alone than even the largest-capacity IDE hard drive on the market - and one that will require an astronomically expensive whole-system upgrade just to even use at all?)
 
Oct 31, 2002 at 3:12 AM Post #27 of 38
Quote:

Originally posted by Eagle_Driver
After reading acidtripwow's remarks about AMD in this thread:

http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/showt...threadid=18833

I am thinking about scrapping AMD altogether - and going with a Pentium 4.


[reads thread]

Are you serious???
confused.gif
confused.gif
 
HiBy Stay updated on HiBy at their facebook, website or email (icons below). Stay updated on HiBy at their sponsor profile on Head-Fi.
 
https://www.facebook.com/hibycom https://store.hiby.com/ service@hiby.com
Oct 31, 2002 at 3:25 AM Post #30 of 38
The trouble is, "I don't want to spend 400 friggin' $$$ just on a videocard right now. And my CCs are all nearly maxed out, too. So I have to pay cash on any future purchases, thus I have to buy locally - at full MSRP."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top