Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Cruis.In

Former Intel users

Recommended Posts

AMD users speak up. Im thinking of going AMD/Nvidia, which is weird since AMD bought ATI, or maybe AMD/ATI and leaving out Intel technology this time around...

I want 64 bit stuff, OS motherboard etc...so far most 64 bit is most widely available from AMD and not Intel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Grayfox

amd is nice. ive been going amd for a few years. ive tried nvidia but for some reason its uncompatible with about half my stuff so im sticking with ati. im definitely not disappointed.

an amd 64 is next on my upgrade list...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's your budget? You really can't beat the price for performance with the Core 2 Duo E6300 or the E6400. All of the equally performing AMD processors just can't beat the C2D series when it comes to price. They're fast, dual core, and 64 bit. For $222.00 you can get a CPU that easily beats or matches the $579.00 FX-62. It easily blows the AMD 64 line away.

Right now AMD isn't the way to go if you want performance. I went AMD last generation because they were actually better, but Intel knocked AMD off that stool when they released Core 2 last summer.

I've got very good experiences with Nvidia. I'm curious as to what compatibility issues Greyfox is talking about? I've personally had no problems with any of my Nvidia cards, although I skipped the Geforce FX days because they were crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like AMD. I switched to them a long time ago. Back then, it seemed you got more bang for your buck. I've stuck with them ever since.

Check my specs too. I'm running AMD 64, with 32-bit XP on it. The only 64-bit OS's I trust at the moment are Linux right now (I can dual-boot to SUSE). And Vista's scaring me about their "old games" support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Grayfox

http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?u...c;f=37;t=000567

thats the thread i started when i got my nvidia ti series, then i posted again when i got the big 512MB monster. for some reason even tho all my drivers were updated (mobo, video, sound, etc) it still wouldnt work with most games, and some apps... namely any video player unless it was embedded in a webpage.

meh, im happy with my setup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well i am one of those "brand name" people. dont hate me, it's just cheaper to order a computer from america than buy the parts here and assemble it and also there are many issues of parts which work best with certain parts... like a core 2 duo might be faster in a particular motherboard than another one, all these i trust to the people I buy it from.

i haven't seen any dell 64 bit systems tho, if its vista does that automatically mean its a 64 bit mobo and processor, i cant remember if vista is 64 bit only...which i doubt as the 32 bit market aint out of phase or anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Core 2 Duo is developed by Intel if you're worried about brand names. The Core and Core 2 lines are replacing the Netburst powered Pentium 4's very quickly, with amazing success.

Vista is 32 bit or 64 bit. To be honest, going 64 bit isn't advisable. Even with Vista, 64 bit drivers are harder to find, and you don't actually get 64 bit performance unless the application you're running is compiled for 64 bit. Unless you're running servers, there's absolutely no reason you'll need 64 bit at this time or the near future (or, in Windows-land, the distant future either... MS isn't exactly grasping onto this 64 bit idea).

You'll find Dell carrying computers with the Core 2 Duo these days. However, if you're going to buy a prebuilt, I'd recommend HP. Dell's support has gone down the shitter these past few years; it took us 3 months with an enterprise contract at work to convince them we had serious problems with motherboards dying at my workplace. Our contract is running out this year and we've already decided that if we go Windows again (although it looks like we might be going Apple) we're going with HP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the advice on 64 bit, after reading through multiple technical articles, you put it in perspective for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

whats the difference between this?

320GB Performance RAID 0 (2 x 160GB SATA 3Gb/s 7200 RPM HDDs) (320R0)

320GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache (320S)

what is the difference between those two. the above one is $30.00 bucks more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Performance RAID 0 may give you slightly more performance, but it really won't be killer. If the single SATA 320GB is cheaper go with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Cruis.In:

whats the difference between this?

320GB Performance RAID 0 (2 x 160GB SATA 3Gb/s 7200 RPM HDDs) (320R0)

320GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s (7200RPM) w/DataBurst Cache (320S)

what is the difference between those two. the above one is $30.00 bucks more.

Not to mention with the first option if you loose EITHER drive you loose all your data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×