I'm a big AMD fan and I will continue to support AMD. The last Intel CPU I bought was a Pentium4 2.4 GHz. After that I have been AMD all the way. Intel is leasing in performance now but remember it was the opposite for a few years. Intel is a HUGE company and can throw an enormous amount of resources and money to develop new CPUs. Much more the AMD can ever dram of. Intel is also dominating the market for CPUs totally. So I support AMD. Just thinking of Intel and how they are trying to crush AMD makes me sick.
You're loyalty is sweet, but also stupid. As a consumer you shouldn't subscribe to brand loyalty, but should be evaluating each product on a price vs performance basis. I've had a AMD K6-2, T-Bird 1.2ghz, XP 2400+, XP 2600+, Athlon x64 3400+, which were all great processors at purchase, and were at a reasonable price. AMD have fallen off the bandwagon however, so I moved to Intel. If AMD get their shit together, I'll move back, but not before.
Brand loyalty is straight out silly. Do yourself a favour and get what's best at the time of purchase. Don't be a sucker.
Mark's right, your loyalty is 'sweet' but utterly misguided.
If people continue to buy AMD just because they're not Intel as opposed to choosing their processors based on merit alone, then it just means that AMD will be slower in getting their arses into gear and actually competing with Intel. If people stop buying AMD, then they'll have to sort themselves out. Well, that or die a slow and deserved death.
Brand loyalism could actualy bee a good thing, to some extent. We consumers have the power to say what is OK for a company to do and not to do. For example if you have a company A and a company B, company A have the better product but uses foul play and "ugly" methods. Wich company's product would you buy ?
I know neither Intel or AMD use fair play, but Intel is probably the least fair.
I generally buy AMD for their better Linux support. And also because AMD, as second in market, generally has better offers.
Intel has better quality. But now with upgrade cycle of two years - when you need to replace mobo - make the whole point of Intel advantage moot.
Formula didn't changed in years: Intel is more expensive, have better quality; AMD is cheaper, but still provides sufficient performance for the buck.
Loyalty is quite silly - if it is about a product. To product there are only two metrics: whether you can afford it and whether it does the job for you. Rest is rubbish.
@theblokesupposedlyknownasMartin: how are Intel any less fair than AMD? They're both companies whose sole aim is to make money.
@Philips: of course, Intel will not be ideal for everyone but for most people, at this point in time, you have to wonder why they would want to buy AMD. Ok, yeah, they're a bit cheaper but this Phenom isn't that much cheaper than the low-end Intel quads and it's only just about hanging in there. If you go down the AMD range to try and save money, the performance drops off dramatically - there is such a thing as false economy, saving a bit of money now but costing yourself more in the future (when you have to upgrade your under-powered AMD CPU earlier than you would a slightly more expensive Intel one).
Loyalty is misguided? Silly? Why can't someone cast his economic vote AGAINST a cpu monopoly? Do you Intel switchers really want to pay much higher CPU prices once AMD is gone? As with any economic segment, competition always makes things better for the consumer...quality, cost, inovation, etc. Some people might want to maintain those in the CPU market rather than wear a "My rig is faster than your rig" T-shirt.
Why is Karl Viklund low ranked for considering something other than performance/cost? It's a perfectly reasonable position: not everybody is a capitalist whore.
It's almost like you people have forgotten the situation a few years ago when there was NO choice. Intel did what they wanted, holding back releases, since there was no commercial need to release their best efforts, and charging what the hell they liked.
Supporting the little guy is often good, it aids competition and keeps them in business so they are there when you need them. People are very quick to criticise monopolies, but they didn't get there on their own. It's that same attitude that pushes jobs abroad and funds unethical governments.
If you follow your capitalist performance/cost metric you would always shop online and never at your local store, which would go out of business. Then what happens when you need inkjet supplies for your report that's due in 1 hour?
So my point is: support who you like, there's more to life than counting pennies.
Disclaimer: I know nothing about the operations of either company. I just like the fact that there's a choice. (And for the record: I'm a Core 2 man)
Loyalty is misguided? Did you see what happened to Blu-ray player prices when HDDVD bowed out? Loyalty to AMD may save us all some big bucks in the long run.
i dont know, toms hardware lists price to performance and that top is pretty green, and to me when you consider that my 90$ amd 4800+ is only outscored by 190 in pc mark by my friends 190$ c2d, and the fact that my motherboard was 90$ and his was 140$ i think i won. i also consider the mobo in this factor and intel motherboards have no innovation, produce more heat, use tons more electricity, and cost a ton more
“An engineer explained to us that hundreds of ear impressions were gathered in the name of research, and while each one obviously boasted its own unique shape and size, one single characteristic remained uniform across the board: the entrance into the ear canal is not a perfect circle, it's an oval.”
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'm a big AMD fan and I will continue to support AMD. The last Intel CPU I bought was a Pentium4 2.4 GHz. After that I have been AMD all the way. Intel is leasing in performance now but remember it was the opposite for a few years. Intel is a HUGE company and can throw an enormous amount of resources and money to develop new CPUs. Much more the AMD can ever dram of. Intel is also dominating the market for CPUs totally. So I support AMD. Just thinking of Intel and how they are trying to crush AMD makes me sick.
You're loyalty is sweet, but also stupid. As a consumer you shouldn't subscribe to brand loyalty, but should be evaluating each product on a price vs performance basis. I've had a AMD K6-2, T-Bird 1.2ghz, XP 2400+, XP 2600+, Athlon x64 3400+, which were all great processors at purchase, and were at a reasonable price. AMD have fallen off the bandwagon however, so I moved to Intel. If AMD get their shit together, I'll move back, but not before.
Brand loyalty is straight out silly. Do yourself a favour and get what's best at the time of purchase. Don't be a sucker.
Mark's right, your loyalty is 'sweet' but utterly misguided.
If people continue to buy AMD just because they're not Intel as opposed to choosing their processors based on merit alone, then it just means that AMD will be slower in getting their arses into gear and actually competing with Intel.
If people stop buying AMD, then they'll have to sort themselves out. Well, that or die a slow and deserved death.
Brand loyalism could actualy bee a good thing, to some extent. We consumers have the power to say what is OK for a company to do and not to do. For example if you have a company A and a company B, company A have the better product but uses foul play and "ugly" methods. Wich company's product would you buy ?
I know neither Intel or AMD use fair play, but Intel is probably the least fair.
@Iain
I generally buy AMD for their better Linux support. And also because AMD, as second in market, generally has better offers.
Intel has better quality. But now with upgrade cycle of two years - when you need to replace mobo - make the whole point of Intel advantage moot.
Formula didn't changed in years: Intel is more expensive, have better quality; AMD is cheaper, but still provides sufficient performance for the buck.
Loyalty is quite silly - if it is about a product. To product there are only two metrics: whether you can afford it and whether it does the job for you. Rest is rubbish.
@ihar
From what I see performance/$$ Intel is the cheaper option and the best choice currently.
As everyone has said brand loyalty is silly with brands this huge. If you're supporting your local breadmaker then it's not so bad :)
@theblokesupposedlyknownasMartin: how are Intel any less fair than AMD?
They're both companies whose sole aim is to make money.
@Philips: of course, Intel will not be ideal for everyone but for most people, at this point in time, you have to wonder why they would want to buy AMD.
Ok, yeah, they're a bit cheaper but this Phenom isn't that much cheaper than the low-end Intel quads and it's only just about hanging in there. If you go down the AMD range to try and save money, the performance drops off dramatically - there is such a thing as false economy, saving a bit of money now but costing yourself more in the future (when you have to upgrade your under-powered AMD CPU earlier than you would a slightly more expensive Intel one).
I just get whatever faster and cheaper. When it comes to pc therms, it all aboout the spec (^_^)
Loyalty is misguided? Silly?
Why can't someone cast his economic vote AGAINST a cpu monopoly? Do you Intel switchers really want to pay much higher CPU prices once AMD is gone?
As with any economic segment, competition always makes things better for the consumer...quality, cost, inovation, etc. Some people might want to maintain those in the CPU market rather than wear a "My rig is faster than your rig" T-shirt.
Why is Karl Viklund low ranked for considering something other than performance/cost? It's a perfectly reasonable position: not everybody is a capitalist whore.
It's almost like you people have forgotten the situation a few years ago when there was NO choice. Intel did what they wanted, holding back releases, since there was no commercial need to release their best efforts, and charging what the hell they liked.
Supporting the little guy is often good, it aids competition and keeps them in business so they are there when you need them. People are very quick to criticise monopolies, but they didn't get there on their own. It's that same attitude that pushes jobs abroad and funds unethical governments.
If you follow your capitalist performance/cost metric you would always shop online and never at your local store, which would go out of business. Then what happens when you need inkjet supplies for your report that's due in 1 hour?
So my point is: support who you like, there's more to life than counting pennies.
Disclaimer: I know nothing about the operations of either company. I just like the fact that there's a choice. (And for the record: I'm a Core 2 man)
Loyalty is misguided? Did you see what happened to Blu-ray player prices when HDDVD bowed out? Loyalty to AMD may save us all some big bucks in the long run.
Because AMD are doing such a great job forcing down Intel's prices just now...
@jake
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=1106&model2=874&chart=444
i dont know, toms hardware lists price to performance and that top is pretty green, and to me when you consider that my 90$ amd 4800+ is only outscored by 190 in pc mark by my friends 190$ c2d, and the fact that my motherboard was 90$ and his was 140$ i think i won. i also consider the mobo in this factor and intel motherboards have no innovation, produce more heat, use tons more electricity, and cost a ton more
what a boneheaded thing to say.
competition isn't good for the consumer? what should intel be trying to do, if not beat amd, have a picnic with 'em?
please keep buying AMD, as it means my intel chips are cheaper :)
@Bufsabre
well said, AMD does own the bargain bin.