AMD was the pioneer of the low-frequency, high speed technology. It took Intel YEARS to catch up and realize AMD had outsmarted them. IMO, AMD is more interested in performance and customer satisfaction. Intel is more interested in money.
I would guess that far fewer PCs have gone belly up due to cooling issues with the AMD chips. Over the years, that is. Intel kept pushing their frequencies higher and higher because people believed they needed higher frequencies for better performance. Higher frequency=higher temperature....Meanwhile, AMD was producing chips with lower frequencies that performed as well (or better) than the Intel chips.
I will always stick with AMD. They may not have the top performing chip at the moment but they also don't have the highest price-gouging markup either. If you truly believe paying 3-5 hundred dollars more is buying you 3-5 hundred dollars worth of better performance, more power to ya.
AMD is losing money fast. They can't keep that up forever. If they don't find a way to become more competitive soon, there won't be a AMD vs Intel fight anymore(or ATI for that matter). They recently had to lower prices (again) because Intel was becoming more cost effective. If you don't go looking for that last .2 Ghz, Intel chips are only $50 more than AMD. I don't know where you get the $300-500 quotes.
ati actually have the most powerful card on the market at this moment in time, the 3870x2 is almost as powerful as 2 8800gtx in sli amd used to have pretty good processor, but inter are just killing them at the moment, with the 4 core processors they have and the soon to come 6 cores
Actually thats not true because the 3870x2 is just two cards smushed together with integrated circuitry. It's built in crossfire. It 'barely' counts as 1 card.
On top of that, two 7600GT's cost about $100 less then a single 3870x2, and beat the pants off it in higher resolution tests.
Thats two 9600GTs lol. They cost about $90 less than a single 3870X2.
I was very confused with your post until I went to your link lol.
-------------------------------- Desktop - AMD 8450 Tri Core, 3 gigs of DDR2 800 RAM, ATI HD 3200 Graphics, Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit Laptop (Dell Latitude E6400) - Intel P8400, 2 GIGs of RAM, Intel X4500, Windows XP Professional
-------------------------------- Desktop - AMD 8450 Tri Core, 3 gigs of DDR2 800 RAM, ATI HD 3200 Graphics, Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit Laptop (Dell Latitude E6400) - Intel P8400, 2 GIGs of RAM, Intel X4500, Windows XP Professional
"Look, AMD, I'm going to lay it all on the line. Intel and I are very satisfied with each other, but I'm in this for one person: myself. Intel understands that. She forges ahead, as does Nvidia, while you and ATI just kind of, well you don't seem willing to take charge like you used to. You might have lost the will to compete. You might have gotten lazy when you were the dominant one and tried to coast on your rep. Well, reputation only goes so far. You know I hate clichés, but as they say, if you talk the talk you gotta walk the walk. You've been crawling.
Now the good news: I'm still here for you. You and I can definitely stay in touch, and I'll keep tabs on all your new developments. It isn't easy writing negative things about you; it's not fun to have to tell people to avoid you. I'd rather give the world a grand choice between two glorious competitors; but I have to be honest with my readers and right now, I just cannot advise them to hang with you. I am, however, always willing to change that, as long as you are.
When you're ready to get serious, I'll be there. Until then, we'll just be friends."
I'm not sure you can use 2 x2s. It is already 2 3870s. It costs $400. 2 3870's would be about the same.
The drivers allowing 4 GPUs in crossfireX should be out this month.
-------------------------------- Desktop - AMD 8450 Tri Core, 3 gigs of DDR2 800 RAM, ATI HD 3200 Graphics, Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit Laptop (Dell Latitude E6400) - Intel P8400, 2 GIGs of RAM, Intel X4500, Windows XP Professional
AMD Processors are going to be good again pretty soon. Intel is boldly going where AMD was starting to put R&D 2 years ago. Ever notice how AMD lost its crown when AMD and ATI merged. They have been working on a better integration between PC components, as well as creating lower cost higher power platforms. Intel is just now looking at this when it forced a large set-back for AMD.
Also I wouldn't really call the 3870x2, 2 3870 stuck together. There is an architectural difference. The 3870 doesn't perform as well at higher resolutions, yet the benefit of the X2 comes at the higher resolutions. Incase you are wondering about nVidia sticking 2 8800 together. Its called the 9800x2 done on the g92 chipset. And it performs... the same as the 3870x2.
Comments
I am not a CPU lover, but a power/efficiency lover! And right now INTEL is it.!
When AMD comes up with something that will give INTEL Peryn a run for its money, I'll check it out! Right now they are a few generations behind INTEL.
AMD was the pioneer of the low-frequency, high speed technology. It took Intel YEARS to catch up and realize AMD had outsmarted them. IMO, AMD is more interested in performance and customer satisfaction. Intel is more interested in money.
I would guess that far fewer PCs have gone belly up due to cooling issues with the AMD chips. Over the years, that is. Intel kept pushing their frequencies higher and higher because people believed they needed higher frequencies for better performance. Higher frequency=higher temperature....Meanwhile, AMD was producing chips with lower frequencies that performed as well (or better) than the Intel chips.
I will always stick with AMD. They may not have the top performing chip at the moment but they also don't have the highest price-gouging markup either. If you truly believe paying 3-5 hundred dollars more is buying you 3-5 hundred dollars worth of better performance, more power to ya.
three2six
three2six
http://www.soundcloud.com/three2six
For me paying 3 or 4 times more for a bit of performance is nonsense.. because the next year i end up buying new stuff anyways....
AMD is losing money fast. They can't keep that up forever. If they don't find a way to become more competitive soon, there won't be a AMD vs Intel fight anymore(or ATI for that matter). They recently had to lower prices (again) because Intel was becoming more cost effective. If you don't go looking for that last .2 Ghz, Intel chips are only $50 more than AMD. I don't know where you get the $300-500 quotes.
Actually thats not true because the 3870x2 is just two cards smushed together with integrated circuitry. It's built in crossfire. It 'barely' counts as 1 card.
On top of that, two 7600GT's cost about $100 less then a single 3870x2, and beat the pants off it in higher resolution tests.
source: http://www.thinkdigit.com/forum/showthread.php?p=763052
Thats two 9600GTs lol. They cost about $90 less than a single 3870X2.
I was very confused with your post until I went to your link lol.
--------------------------------
Desktop - AMD 8450 Tri Core, 3 gigs of DDR2 800 RAM, ATI HD 3200 Graphics, Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit
Laptop (Dell Latitude E6400) - Intel P8400, 2 GIGs of RAM, Intel X4500, Windows XP Professional
Whats the average price of the 3970X2 crossfire edition????
2 3870x2s would run you about $900.
--------------------------------
Desktop - AMD 8450 Tri Core, 3 gigs of DDR2 800 RAM, ATI HD 3200 Graphics, Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit
Laptop (Dell Latitude E6400) - Intel P8400, 2 GIGs of RAM, Intel X4500, Windows XP Professional
I'm not sure you can use 2 x2s. It is already 2 3870s. It costs $400. 2 3870's would be about the same.
I loved AMD until the Intel Core 2's came out.
Here's a nice segment from an article
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,2260255,00.asp
"Look, AMD, I'm going to lay it all on the line. Intel and I are very satisfied with each other, but I'm in this for one person: myself. Intel understands that. She forges ahead, as does Nvidia, while you and ATI just kind of, well you don't seem willing to take charge like you used to. You might have lost the will to compete. You might have gotten lazy when you were the dominant one and tried to coast on your rep. Well, reputation only goes so far. You know I hate clichés, but as they say, if you talk the talk you gotta walk the walk. You've been crawling.
Now the good news: I'm still here for you. You and I can definitely stay in touch, and I'll keep tabs on all your new developments. It isn't easy writing negative things about you; it's not fun to have to tell people to avoid you. I'd rather give the world a grand choice between two glorious competitors; but I have to be honest with my readers and right now, I just cannot advise them to hang with you. I am, however, always willing to change that, as long as you are.
When you're ready to get serious, I'll be there. Until then, we'll just be friends."
The drivers allowing 4 GPUs in crossfireX should be out this month.
--------------------------------
Desktop - AMD 8450 Tri Core, 3 gigs of DDR2 800 RAM, ATI HD 3200 Graphics, Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit
Laptop (Dell Latitude E6400) - Intel P8400, 2 GIGs of RAM, Intel X4500, Windows XP Professional
Take a look at this thread...
http://mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/post/1876624/thread/169236#1876624
AMD Processors are going to be good again pretty soon. Intel is boldly going where AMD was starting to put R&D 2 years ago. Ever notice how AMD lost its crown when AMD and ATI merged. They have been working on a better integration between PC components, as well as creating lower cost higher power platforms. Intel is just now looking at this when it forced a large set-back for AMD.
Also I wouldn't really call the 3870x2, 2 3870 stuck together. There is an architectural difference. The 3870 doesn't perform as well at higher resolutions, yet the benefit of the X2 comes at the higher resolutions. Incase you are wondering about nVidia sticking 2 8800 together. Its called the 9800x2 done on the g92 chipset. And it performs... the same as the 3870x2.