"Why you should seriously consider an AMD PC" Opinion from techradar's Jeremy Laird
View Single Post
October 4, 2012, 05:21 PM
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: midland, ontario
Originally Posted by
Just to throw my $0.02 into the fray... Crosshair IV motherboard. Used it with my 1090T and got 4Ghz stable. Using it now with my 8150, and I've got two threads extra and 4.5Ghz stable. That seems like longevity to me and a pretty decent offering.
Granted FM1 didn't last long, but it was also the first desktop board ever for APUs, which are a pretty new thing. To err is to be human and AMD has err'd in the past, but they fix their issues and I don't seem them changing sockets again so quickly on the APU side.
Between AMD and Intel for gaming, the best point there is ther over 60fps comment. Once you've above that mark, who gives a crap? I play all the time with Intel users and notice no difference for games. Sure, there are things Intel does better, but the are some that AMD does better too (like integrated graphics / APUs).
At the end of the day it doesnt really matter who you pick. But just remember that if Everyone picks Intel, AMD could die. If AMD dies, longevity of the platform or not... we're all screwed. Intel has fixed prices before in order to try to bury AMD when they were "ahead", then got slapped with a billion dollar fine for it. You really think they wouldn't do it again?
Food for thought.
My head hurts.
Originally Posted by
Exactally, and I have told people time and time again that I want all companies to do well because the second there is no competition, we all end up losing.
And these are the points i've only ever tried to make peaple see/realize
...... Once you kinda get past the i guess what i feel is the whole e-penile thing .... we are technicaly at a point right now where I feel the staunchest of intel supporters at times like to make this preformance diffrence a mountain from a molehill metaphore. I mean this is like saying like we use to say back in the day how terrible cyrix cpu's where vs AMD/Intel ones at the time .. And to me i dont see nothing from amd only being 50% of the preformance of the intel equivelent.
To me this isnt AMD or whomever tryin to "dummy" peaple down ... this is simply the reality of technoligy that things are no longer becoming about the power of the cores themselves but the amount of cores & how they do so. Just look at the trinity scores vs 2 core + 2 thread intels ..
My System Specs
Win 7 64-bit
View Public Profile
Send a private message to terrybear
Find all posts by terrybear