|
Post by Xanth on Dec 17, 2005 12:26:09 GMT -5
If anyone is buying a new computer for Christmas, or getting a new one in the near future I would like to make a reccomendation. Intel by far leads the market in processors manufacturing, but AMD puts out a more reliable product. For my past 3 computers I have only used AMD processors and have been very happy with them. Don't be fooled by the GHZ either. A 2.8 GHZ AMD processes data faster than an Intel 4.0 GHZ. GHz is misleading when it comes to performance. Even though the Intel chip is going faster in MHz, it is doing less work per clock cycle. This results in more clock cycles being required to produce the same results, and therefore its net output is something less than the MHz value alone would indicate.
I highly reccomend AMD over Intel. I think you will be happier with the superior performance.
|
|
|
Post by peaceman on Dec 17, 2005 21:31:33 GMT -5
Full agreement here. I built my PC with am AMD Athlon XP 2000+ about 3 1/2 years ago, and since then I've replaced every component in it except for the case - but I'm still using an AMD CPU. Can't recommend them enough. With the right cooling, I have a processor that nominally runs at 2.34 Ghz overclocked to 2.8, which leads to much happiness there.
|
|
|
Post by Highlord on Dec 18, 2005 10:33:23 GMT -5
Yeah, we just bought a laptop with an AMD 3700+, and it smokes (not literally). If I am not mistaken, Pentiums are already overclocked, and that is why they run so hot. Now you might be able to tweak them to get a little bit more, but not much. If you get into overclocking, the AMD has a lot more potential.
Pentiums are excellant, no doubt, but you do have a legitimate alternative with the AMD's. I think this 3700+ runs with a 4 ghz P4 in terms of Pure data proc speed, or maybe even faster. The AMD's are more affordable as well.
The laptop is a Gateway (yes, I know their rep went to shit, but it is better in the last couple of years) with the AMD 3700+, DVD-R, 1 gb of ram, 90gb hard drive, and (the best part) ATI Mobility x600 64 Video Card for $1050. This thing plays WoW SOOOO much better than my desktop which is a P4 2.5ghz, 1gb ram and a GeForce FX 5500 (256mb) card.
The laptop is MUCH smoother, infact, as smooth as you can get.
|
|
|
Post by THEPAT24 on Dec 18, 2005 10:51:38 GMT -5
I don't care what Gateway's rep is. I have always came pout well with their products.
|
|
|
Post by peaceman on Dec 18, 2005 13:31:38 GMT -5
Gateway has a bad rep mainly because of dumbasses. Same thing with HP. Dells are a little more dumbass-proof.
With people who have some modicum of intelligence and don't click on every "install me please" link they see, they generally have a decent product. I don't blame Gateway for morons.
|
|
|
Post by Xanth on Dec 18, 2005 18:27:31 GMT -5
Derrick a great accesory for your lap top is an Antec laptop cooler. It is about $35 and has an aluminum top and two fans. One draws away warm air and one draws in cooler air. It plugs into a USB port, but has an adapter so you do not lose the USB port. It has a hi and lo setting. It really is great if you like to sit the lap top on your lap, couch, or bed etc... as it greatly reduces chance of over heating. You can get it at Staples, or maybe Office Depot.
|
|
|
Post by Highlord on Dec 18, 2005 22:41:19 GMT -5
Good info xanth!
|
|
|
Post by THEPAT24 on Dec 19, 2005 9:38:01 GMT -5
You know I really feel that with all of the knowledge on this board that I would never ever have to go anywhere is for tech help. The combined knowledge beast from this board would be impressive.
|
|
kiara
Full Member
Posts: 201
|
Post by kiara on Dec 19, 2005 9:51:00 GMT -5
I have an Intel P4 It works ok, but I do have some problems with freezes, and crashes. My friend said something about getting a dual core. I'm not sure what that is. Is that a good thing to get?
|
|
|
Post by THEPAT24 on Dec 19, 2005 10:02:17 GMT -5
What OS are you running?
|
|
|
Post by Xanth on Dec 19, 2005 10:34:51 GMT -5
She more than likely has XP, unless they installed Linux. Your freezes and or crashes are probably software conflicts, or if you have added any hardware your drivers may not be updated. Also as Highlord put it earlier Intel chips run hotter and over heats alot easier.
Now let me adddress a dual-core. A dual-core CPU combines two independent processors and their respective caches and cache controllers onto a single silicon chip, or integrated circuit. IBM's POWER4 was the first microprocessor to incorporate 2-cores on a single die.
Right now you don't get much bang for your buck. By 2008 you will see huge performance boost over standard CPU processors. I wouldn't worrry about upgrading just yet. You just wouldn't be able to tell much of a difference for the price you will be paying.
|
|
|
Post by Highlord on Dec 19, 2005 11:10:20 GMT -5
Yeah Kiara, I agree with Joe. Freezez while browsing are not a symptomatic of a problem with processing power with a P4. It will handle any browsing you throw at it. It could be a memory problem, but I would think with a p4 system, you should have plenty of memory, unless you are running graphic intensive programs at the same time you are browsing, at which point video capacity could be the problem. I will say that if you are running XP, you'll want at least 512mb of ram for good performance.
|
|
|
Post by Meatball on Dec 19, 2005 11:51:15 GMT -5
I'd say buy whichever is overall cheaper when you look at CPU/MB/Memory combinations.
|
|
|
Post by Meatball on Dec 19, 2005 12:01:41 GMT -5
I put a Home Theatre PC together a couple of months back and it has a P4 530J www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116200 and I'm running Windows XP Media Center Edition. That box has been running 24x7 for over 3 months now and I've had no lock-ups or heat problems.
|
|
|
Post by BIGKEV on Dec 19, 2005 12:04:18 GMT -5
New build of Longhorn shipped last week, looks to have some new tools for duel-core ops, but still in its infancy. My guess is that it will go the way of the doo-doo in "mundane" boxes, hot builds and truly nerded out boxes on the other hand will be raged out on who can parallel duel-cores.
|
|