I don't understand this whole Intel vs. AMD shenanigans. A CPU is a CPU. You buy what you can afford. If you can afford a slightly faster CPU then you buy a slightly faster CPU. Squeezing every possible ounce of power out of it gets you what exactly? a browser opening seconds faster? a couple extra FPS in your video game? a couple of seconds off of your encoding home-movies?
Real world comparisons are rubbish. RUBBISH I tell you. With how much processing is done by other components on board, there just isin't any apples-to-apples comparison you can do these days.
Sure, back when there was one socket to go around and you plugged whatever you bought into it and it worked--that was differnt. Nothing other than the CPU changed, so that was a true comparison.
But now you got northbridge and southbridge doing stuff that the CPU used to have to do--not to mention dedicated chips for networking, sound, USB hosts, wireless, etc. which all do their own parts. So there isn't a way to test if one CPU is faster than the other. The boards are so radically different, that it's not worth it.
I buy what I know will work. I read online forums, and I read opnions on the websites that I buy my product from. I also ask local stores and what they see coming back in.
But at the end of the day, I buy AMD. They have a good track record as far as making chips that are reasonable priced that have a fairly good lifespan before they are considered 'phased out'. They also keep a pretty even keel when it comes to sockets.
Yes, I got burned by the AM2+ socket, but that is okay. I need a new motherboard anyway.
And I have seen more Intel CPU's fail than AMD CPU's. But that's just my opinion. It is based on the PIV systems I built that came back to me within a month and the CPU just... I don't know. They just failed. They didn't overheat, they just failed. Stopped. Ceased. No POST error, just nothing. Like the CPU wasn't even in the socket. Poof. gone. The motherboards were fine, the CPU just kicked the bucket for unknown reasons.
None of the AMD systems I have ever configured have ever come back with that kind of vauge problem. The motherboards have fried, or the CPU has gone up in smoke--but never just this "Meh, we won't work anymore. Not going to tell you why either." stuff.
So you buy what you buy. At the end of the day, it lets you do stuff on it and that is that. If you absolutely need to have the fastest thing in the world--chances are you have the cash to buy a new computer every month when something new comes out.
Well, for your information, the speed and efficiency of the CPU is very important. I used both a T7200 notebook and a Q6600 desktop and my desktop cannot even achieve speeds that I need. We are in 2008 now. If I click on an Excel document, it should immediately show up in front of me on a high-resolution large display.
Time is money... your time just seems be to lacking in value.
Alex you sir are full of crap. I guess you never heard of the luggable PC. There are different classes of laptop. UMPC 6" display (1lbs), Ultra light laptops (8-13" display (2-4ish lbs, standard laptops 14"-15" displays (6-7ish lbs), desktop replacements 17" displays (7-8ish lbs) and luggables 20+" displays usually topping out around 9lbs.
So please do us all a favor and stop inventing BS on the fly. A laptop is intended to allow you to do your damn job on the go. That is the PRIMARY purpose of a laptop. This whole it wasn't designed to do that...can you even type something like that without thinking its crap? Next you will tell me that Dell, HP, et al should scrap their workstation class hardware because CAD\CAM\ graphic artists should settle for more moderate hardware because its the standard. Gah...Sometimes I wonder why I even come to this site. I see this insane rational way too often. Makes me want to kick a kitten or something.
I'm with this one entirely, a processor is a processor, my interest in the brand is non-existant, it just so happens I have an intel chip as they are the best currently :D
the day I show any interest in AMD is they day they bring out another decent processor like the AMD64
@John Doe: If they were designed to be desktop replacements, woulden't they be the equivalent of desktops then? 7200RPM drives, full-speed CPU, standard keyboard-sized keys, nice big and bright LCD with no ghosting, etc.
Oh, no. They don't. Why? Because they have to use the tiniest of parts, and the cream-of-the-crop CPU, and then they under volt them so they run cooler so the laptop doesn't melt off your 'special purpose' when you are trying to use it on the airplane from NYC to ATL, on route to YYZ through COL. Not only taking up a bunch of room, but also making it hard for me to sleep with your constant tapping of those plastic keys. Why should I have to listen to you tap away on some TPS report just because you didn't have enough time in the office where you should be...
Sorry. I got a bit off topic there. Back on again.
Laptops were designed to be portable--otherwise they would be a desktop. I mean, why cram all the technology in the world down to a
The Chromebooks are here, starting with Samsung's Series 5, a cute little number that promises instant-on access, 3G connectivity, and long enough battery life to web surf with the best of 'em.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
I don't understand this whole Intel vs. AMD shenanigans. A CPU is a CPU. You buy what you can afford. If you can afford a slightly faster CPU then you buy a slightly faster CPU. Squeezing every possible ounce of power out of it gets you what exactly? a browser opening seconds faster? a couple extra FPS in your video game? a couple of seconds off of your encoding home-movies?
Real world comparisons are rubbish. RUBBISH I tell you. With how much processing is done by other components on board, there just isin't any apples-to-apples comparison you can do these days.
Sure, back when there was one socket to go around and you plugged whatever you bought into it and it worked--that was differnt. Nothing other than the CPU changed, so that was a true comparison.
But now you got northbridge and southbridge doing stuff that the CPU used to have to do--not to mention dedicated chips for networking, sound, USB hosts, wireless, etc. which all do their own parts. So there isn't a way to test if one CPU is faster than the other. The boards are so radically different, that it's not worth it.
I buy what I know will work. I read online forums, and I read opnions on the websites that I buy my product from. I also ask local stores and what they see coming back in.
But at the end of the day, I buy AMD. They have a good track record as far as making chips that are reasonable priced that have a fairly good lifespan before they are considered 'phased out'. They also keep a pretty even keel when it comes to sockets.
Yes, I got burned by the AM2+ socket, but that is okay. I need a new motherboard anyway.
And I have seen more Intel CPU's fail than AMD CPU's. But that's just my opinion. It is based on the PIV systems I built that came back to me within a month and the CPU just... I don't know. They just failed. They didn't overheat, they just failed. Stopped. Ceased. No POST error, just nothing. Like the CPU wasn't even in the socket. Poof. gone. The motherboards were fine, the CPU just kicked the bucket for unknown reasons.
None of the AMD systems I have ever configured have ever come back with that kind of vauge problem. The motherboards have fried, or the CPU has gone up in smoke--but never just this "Meh, we won't work anymore. Not going to tell you why either." stuff.
So you buy what you buy. At the end of the day, it lets you do stuff on it and that is that. If you absolutely need to have the fastest thing in the world--chances are you have the cash to buy a new computer every month when something new comes out.
Good for you.
Well, for your information, the speed and efficiency of the CPU is very important. I used both a T7200 notebook and a Q6600 desktop and my desktop cannot even achieve speeds that I need. We are in 2008 now. If I click on an Excel document, it should immediately show up in front of me on a high-resolution large display.
Time is money... your time just seems be to lacking in value.
A laptop is designed to be portable, not fast.
Stop using things that they weren't designed for, and maybe you won't be wasting your oh so valuable time.
Alex you sir are full of crap. I guess you never heard of the luggable PC. There are different classes of laptop. UMPC 6" display (1lbs), Ultra light laptops (8-13" display (2-4ish lbs, standard laptops 14"-15" displays (6-7ish lbs), desktop replacements 17" displays (7-8ish lbs) and luggables 20+" displays usually topping out around 9lbs.
So please do us all a favor and stop inventing BS on the fly. A laptop is intended to allow you to do your damn job on the go. That is the PRIMARY purpose of a laptop. This whole it wasn't designed to do that...can you even type something like that without thinking its crap? Next you will tell me that Dell, HP, et al should scrap their workstation class hardware because CAD\CAM\ graphic artists should settle for more moderate hardware because its the standard. Gah...Sometimes I wonder why I even come to this site. I see this insane rational way too often. Makes me want to kick a kitten or something.
I'm with this one entirely, a processor is a processor, my interest in the brand is non-existant, it just so happens I have an intel chip as they are the best currently :D
the day I show any interest in AMD is they day they bring out another decent processor like the AMD64
@John Doe: If they were designed to be desktop replacements, woulden't they be the equivalent of desktops then? 7200RPM drives, full-speed CPU, standard keyboard-sized keys, nice big and bright LCD with no ghosting, etc.
Oh, no. They don't. Why? Because they have to use the tiniest of parts, and the cream-of-the-crop CPU, and then they under volt them so they run cooler so the laptop doesn't melt off your 'special purpose' when you are trying to use it on the airplane from NYC to ATL, on route to YYZ through COL. Not only taking up a bunch of room, but also making it hard for me to sleep with your constant tapping of those plastic keys. Why should I have to listen to you tap away on some TPS report just because you didn't have enough time in the office where you should be...
Sorry. I got a bit off topic there. Back on again.
Laptops were designed to be portable--otherwise they would be a desktop. I mean, why cram all the technology in the world down to a