from what i see, 1st link is a HP related matter.

2nd link you posted was hardware related when your post was about program compatibility.

3rd link you gave shown there's a fix, so it's not a problem. (just as what you posted)

4th link was dated 1999. not a worthy article to quote.

weak argument is better than nothing i suppose.

btw i repeat again.better get a high clock duallie than a low clock quaddie.

My point is, why do u have to take the hassles to download the 'AMD compatibility' software.

If you use Intel, the probability for you to get advises such as 'pls download patch for Intel system' is like, none?

Yeah, the 1st link is about HP and OS related matter, correct. But like I said, most programmers, their priority would be writing mostly and mainly for Intel system. That is why Intel is more stable.

i dont think that kind of 'problem' still happen now.

Yeah, you don't find that kind of problem now.
But based on history, and the theory of probability, in the future, a new problem might occur and AMD user have to download the patch specially made for AMD system.

Any of you guys heard before regarding, 'Intel user, please download patch for Intel system to solve etc etc problem'. I don't think so..

so far my experience with using AMD for past 10 years is

1. Windows i have no problem
2. Games i have no problem
3. Adobe softwares no problem.

so tell me, how often is it that people face problem using AMD rig? my work rig is AMD powered, never had problems.

4 links you quoted. 1 is HP related, 1 is hardware related. 1 has fix (which actually shoots your own point since there's a fix) and 1 is outdated.

if your 4 links can't even support you correctly, i don't see how your claims after that holds water.

That was my point actually.

Why must you buy sumtin that u know it has a history of compatibility where u must download patches to fix it.
Why don't just buy sumtin that don't need any patches or have never in history that requires u to download patches?

Why you cannot let go of history?

-pWs-

Coz we all know that history can repeat itself. Don't they?

But there is no guarantee that the same thing will not happen in Intel. Isnt it?

-pWs-

Well you might be right.
Let me ask u a question.
Bus driver A have a few accident records and Bus driver B don't have any accident record.
That doesn't mean bus driver B will not have accident in the future.

But who would u prefer to be the bus driver? A or B?

This post has been edited by hazairi: Jun 10 2009, 03:38 AM

I will drive myself.

-pWs-

Haha. But i would definitely sure that you will choose a bus driver with the cleanest record.
And most of us all do that.

Intel has a better clean record than AMD.

bus driver analogy doesn't work quite well here.

anyway IMO you're just exaggerating the matter, AMD has all the while been one of the cost-effective options out there.

so are you saying you're willing to pay more when you could actually consider paying less, knowing that the chances of problems happening are slim and in most cases, solvable just by a simple download.

I've been using AMD platform for work and games, and over multiple Windows generations and I rarely face problems. those that have, well they're fixed in the end.

too bad we can personally choose a bus driver so i dont think that argument is valid.

btw i would support your point if AMD options would

a) cost my a lot of $$$ in the end
b) cost my life, or put me in danger

but so far it isn't so. AMD option has all the while been cost-effective for me and have not been causing any problem. cases are really isolated.

I do agree that with the same price, in terms of performance, AMD is better.

Anyway, maybe it depends on the person. I choose Intel because it's more stable; if you study the history.
And maybe I was phobia because last time in 2001 my friend bought an AMD system and it always hang.

Bollocks.

What about the FDIV bug in the original Pentiums? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_FDIV_bug

What about the stopped launch of the Pentium III 1.13GHz after hardware site editors (TomsHardware, HardOCP, Anandtech) found that it was very unstable? They were ready for shipment... http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/...iii-113ghz.html

They're pretty much the same today, and if you want to bring up history well there's some for you too on Intel's side.

This post has been edited by bgeh: Jun 10 2009, 04:00 AM

Aiyo..another AMD vs Intel thread..

Seriously i've been using AMD cpu for as long as i can remember...pls don't say that AMD cpu no good, my first PC which is an AMD K62-450Mhz still can run today!! That is more than 10 years ago, how come u say AMD no good!!!
I've been told by many person from the day i bought my first AMD rig that AMD cpu has many problem such as PC hang, cpu overheat and many more but those things just didn't happened to me, instead those comments only strengthen my support for AMD cpu. After K62, i continue to buy Athlon 1600+, Athlon 2600+, Sempron 64 - 2800+, Athlon X2 - 5600 and i just recently bought Athlon X2 - 5000...

As i said, i've been using AMD cpu for all these years and i can proudly say one thing....IT HAS NEVER FAILED ME BEFORE AND I WILL ALWAYS SUPPORT AMD, NO MATTER WHAT OTHER PEOPLE MIGHT SAY!!!

tis tread getting hot already now wor..
for all amd fan,i will build up a new amd rig =)
wanna try the power of amd
for intel fans,i already hv my quaddie =)
peace