AMD or INTEL

[BeoR]

---

i'll gladly take that challenge werty... so what's at stake? if I remember correctly, ARCtech already took on a similar challenge... I don't think I need to disclose which system lasted longer. they did that "system stability contest" @ Southwestern University... the vendor whose system lasted longer won the contract... I think you know what powers ARCtech

[werty]

@beor : kinsa man na mga system builder ang nagapil ato?

[muzikfreakah]

Let just not disclose that bec we dont want to enemies within competitors

But beors right, we did test, one week complete burn in with all the burn in and benchmark softwares you could think of.. first overnight test, competitor broke down, they requested for a retest bec of the price difference, so we said go ahead, still the same problem...

Its actually not a matter of whats in it, but how you get about to doing it the proper way. For all the companies that go not even the extra mile but just do itby the book, im sure they will succeed. But for those that go the extra mile will definitely stand out. ARCtech plug: "We do go the extra mile"

Anyway back to topic, heres something all AMD lovers with celebrate on, PLEASE READ (I read it over and over and love it hehehe)


Why Intel's Prescott will use AMD64 extensions

It’s the operating system, eedjit


By Charlie Demerjian: Friday 26 September 2003, 08:14

ONE OF THE the biggest stories out of the AMD launch comes not from AMD itself, but from Intel, or at least about Intel. Since we told you about Prescott being 64 bit last week (see here), the burning question in everyone's mind is what instruction set will they use? Would it be Itanic, AMD64, something new and different, or one changed just enough to be incompatible like SSE and 3DNow were.
If you think Intel would eat its own shoes before it adopted AMD64, guess again, it will be compatible with AMD64. If you doubt this, think about one thing, why this is happening. It is not Intel's doing, not by a long shot. While it may use a different name, like the old x86-64, or even Extended x86, it will run all the software that AMD does. Mmmmm, shoes are tasty.

So, why is this again? Simple, MS. Microsoft will not support a different 64 bit platform, and frankly I don't blame it, it costs a lot of money to do that. MS gave Intel the choice, support AMD's instruction set, or do without Windows. MS won that battle pretty handily.

ARTICLE TAKE FROM:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11781

[zi0n]

AMD team... way to go!

Intel® team... looooosers! hehehe

no offense, but that's the way it is right now. An exerp from a magazine from Singapore: "Athlon 64 FX - the fastest desktop PC yet!" PC animators are now shifting to the 64bit platform of AMD. Intel has got to swallow its pride and follow; the road less taken is an impractical solution.

[CrasHBURN]

How about Low End Match anybody hehehe... Celeron VS Athlon XP / Athlon FX.. hahahaha!!! NO MATCH!!!

[zi0n]

celeron vs. duron!

[CrasHBURN]

Duron has been phased out months ago...

Duron VS P3 <- fair match...

Duron was very cheap... cheaper than all athlon XP and all Celeron...

Athlon XP 1800+ a high end processor is cheaper than any low end Celerons out there...

Athlon FX -> mid-range processor... but it is the same Athlon with 256kb L2 Cache...
ambot nalang kung low end ta mag compare...

[darkwing]

Yup Athlon XP 1800+ is cheaper and faster tag 3000+ raman ni no? pila man ang Intel P4 1.8?

[Visual C#]

K6 v.s. Pentium II!

[zi0n]

K6 v.s. Pentium II!

na! to a