Intel is bad, really really baaaad...

yaggayagga Havn't you heard? ... New
edited July 2004 in Hardware
First they introduce this new socket design, well actually it was second, but I don't care. All messed up.

Now they come out with these impossible to understand labeling system, woo hoo!

Oh, and I guess I forgot about the Nuclear Meltdowns they created.

Well, tata forever Intel! The only thing that would "encourage" me to come back is if they reinstate smp in all there main cpus.

Comments

  • TurambarTurambar
    edited July 2004
    yeah this is my last intel, i think im gonna go with a A64 next time which probably wont be till the end of the summer
  • yaggayagga Havn't you heard? ... New
    edited July 2004
    Yep, the ONLY way I'd buy an Intel is if I wanted to up the speed of my current 2.8 sometime, but it probably won't be worth it because the extreme editions are never gonna be reasonably priced and they are about done with speed.
  • drowddrowd Texas
    edited July 2004
    i mean, i am an amd fanboy through and through, but they arent THAT bad. i choose amd more as a personal preference more than anything. arent some folks hitting 5 GHz on air with the latest 3.0+ intel's? (not that GHz matters, as amd proved :D )
  • yaggayagga Havn't you heard? ... New
    edited July 2004
    yeah, I guess they aren't horribly bad, they are just making poor decisions that any person somewhat knowledgable would be turned off by it. I still don't understand why they need some stupid code system for there products, its much simpler if you get the straight speed, fsb, and cache fast and without researching it, even if the overall speed isn't the most important thing.

    Oh, and yet another thing, aren't they implamenting an oc lock on the fsb now? Yep, while the average person who walks to Best Buy and buys a pc on what the "trained to sell with zero real knowledge" sales people tell them may buy Intel, most others won't.
  • TurambarTurambar
    edited July 2004
    drowd wrote:
    i mean, i am an amd fanboy through and through, but they arent THAT bad. i choose amd more as a personal preference more than anything. arent some folks hitting 5 GHz on air with the latest 3.0+ intel's? (not that GHz matters, as amd proved :D )
    Im not totally sure but i think they only hit the 5 GHz mark with either dried ice or liquid nitrogen but i may be wrong thats jsut what i read on a review at www.tomshardware.com
    edit: Yes i checked the review and they got up to 5.25 GHz on a 3.2 GHz Pentium 4 with liquid nitrogen.
  • ZuntarZuntar North Carolina Icrontian
    edited July 2004
    Yah, ta hell with Intel! :fu:

    * Zuntar snickers as he primes the AMD pump and recalls the last intel chip he bought was a 133Mhz POS.
  • yaggayagga Havn't you heard? ... New
    edited July 2004
    The only good thing about Intel right now is probably that A: I have one, and B: Hyper Threading probably helps fold quicker. (BUT WHO KNOWS, MAYBE IT IS MORE LIKE IT FOLDS SLOWER WITH IT OFF?) I tested a couple times how long it took for each step on one WU and it was 6 min intervals with HT turned off, but only 8 minutes turned on with a whole nother WU working! So from that I can guess that HT gives about 150% performance boost over not having HT on.
Sign In or Register to comment.