Building A New Computer
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)Posted by: ffuuggssddss
I took some advice from some people here to upgrade my comp, i really want to get an amd athlon 64 3200+ with a asus or gigabite motherboard. i never really had an amd before so is it good with gaming/running a server/linux? avoiding intel chip b/c its way to damn pricy. :ghostface:
Posted by: tesco
ya it will do same as an intel chip, some things even faster, but for teh most part you wont notice a difference anyway. both are good, so i prefer amd cause of the price.
Posted by: ffuuggssddss
alright ill go for amd...
Posted by: orcutt989
Amd is cost effective, yet if you are a consumer that likes to listen to music, edit photos, upload websites, design websites, run a virus scan, play multiple games, look at multiple browswer windows, you will find yourself getting caught with an AMD not being able to run multiple programs even though it has a good clockspeed.
Posted by: apunkrockmonk
Originally posted by orcutt989@13 May 2004 - 02:13
Amd is cost effective, yet if you are a consumer that likes to listen to music, edit photos, upload websites, design websites, run a virus scan, play multiple games, look at multiple browswer windows, you will find yourself getting caught with an AMD not being able to run multiple programs even though it has a good clockspeed.
how much crack did you smoke before you wrote that?
Posted by: tesco
Originally posted by apunkrockmonk+12 May 2004 - 21:19--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (apunkrockmonk @ 12 May 2004 - 21:19)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-orcutt989@13 May 2004 - 02:13
Amd is cost effective, yet if you are a consumer that likes to listen to music, edit photos, upload websites, design websites, run a virus scan, play multiple games, look at multiple browswer windows, you will find yourself getting caught with an AMD not being able to run multiple programs even though it has a good clockspeed.
how much crack did you smoke before you wrote that? [/b][/quote]
ya i agree, pentium 4's are not that much better than amd processors. the ones with hyper threading can handle multitasking better, but they require that teh program be written to use hyperthreading anyway...
and amd isnt the one wiith higher clock speeds, intel does. <_<
Posted by: bigdawgfoxx
AMD is the way to go. Asus and AMD are good together.
Posted by: SingaBoiy
64-bit 3200+ is still better then any intel chip.
I just watched that nick berg video. If I was face to face with those mother fuckers... id kill them as slowly as posible. :angry:
Posted by: harrycary
Dollar for dollar, you will get more for your money with an AMD.
Period.
/nothing more to see here, move along.
Posted by: SingaBoiy
Originally posted by harrycary@12 May 2004 - 19:00
Dollar for dollar, you will get more for your money with an AMD.
Period.
/nothing more to see here, move along.
Actually, id like to see more of that chick with the thong-tha-thong-thong-thong in your avatar.
Posted by: atiVidia
ok or-whateverurnameis
u obviously havent been reading the latest benchies.
for intel: HT wont matter at all once 64 bit XP hits the market :)
@ ffuuggssddss: wait a little longer for the newer a64s
Posted by: bigdawgfoxx
Originally posted by SingaBoiy@12 May 2004 - 21:44
64-bit 3200+ is still better then any intel chip.
I just watched that nick berg video. If I was face to face with those mother fuckers... id kill them as slowly as posible. :angry:
Is that when they chop his head off? Thats fucking nasty..i hate terrorist..there so fucking dumb
Posted by: Mad Cat
Originally posted by bigdawgfoxx+13 May 2004 - 12:37--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bigdawgfoxx @ 13 May 2004 - 12:37)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-SingaBoiy@12 May 2004 - 21:44
64-bit 3200+ is still better then any intel chip.
I just watched that nick berg video. If I was face to face with those mother fuckers... id kill them as slowly as posible. :angry:
Is that when they chop his head off? Thats fucking nasty..i hate terrorist..there so fucking dumb [/b][/quote]
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Posted by: Storm
Originally posted by apunkrockmonk+13 May 2004 - 03:19--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (apunkrockmonk @ 13 May 2004 - 03:19)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-orcutt989@13 May 2004 - 02:13
Amd is cost effective, yet if you are a consumer that likes to listen to music, edit photos, upload websites, design websites, run a virus scan, play multiple games, look at multiple browswer windows, you will find yourself getting caught with an AMD not being able to run multiple programs even though it has a good clockspeed.
how much crack did you smoke before you wrote that? [/b][/quote]
i think SB is just proof that commercials work ;)
Posted by: GrubMe
I watched the video ohhh boy it was some nasty shiat.
Well it was revenge for the iraqies since of the embarassment of the prisoners.
Posted by: clocker
Originally posted by orcutt989@12 May 2004 - 19:13
Amd is cost effective, yet if you are a consumer that likes to listen to music, edit photos, upload websites, design websites, run a virus scan, play multiple games, look at multiple browswer windows, you will find yourself getting caught with an AMD not being able to run multiple programs even though it has a good clockspeed.
Clearly you are an alien.
Your race must be very advanced to multitask like that.
I look forward to evolving to your level.
Go with AMD...more bang for the buck.
Take the money you save and invest in good memory and a fast HDD.
Remember, it's not just the chip that makes for a fast, flexible machine.
Posted by: ffuuggssddss
Originally posted by atiVidia@13 May 2004 - 04:40
ok or-whateverurnameis
u obviously havent been reading the latest benchies.
for intel: HT wont matter at all once 64 bit XP hits the market :)
@ ffuuggssddss: wait a little longer for the newer a64s
what do u mean by newer amd's? Will there be a huge difference if i get one now then if i get one in 3 months?
Posted by: tesco
Originally posted by ffuuggssddss+14 May 2004 - 18:02--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (ffuuggssddss @ 14 May 2004 - 18:02)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-atiVidia@13 May 2004 - 04:40
ok or-whateverurnameis
u obviously havent been reading the latest benchies.
for intel: HT wont matter at all once 64 bit XP hits the market :)
@ ffuuggssddss: wait a little longer for the newer a64s
what do u mean by newer amd's? Will there be a huge difference if i get one now then if i get one in 3 months? [/b][/quote]
the new ones will have a higher clock speed, and the old ones will have a lower price tag ;)
Posted by: ffuuggssddss
Originally posted by ROSSCO_2004+14 May 2004 - 23:03--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (ROSSCO_2004 @ 14 May 2004 - 23:03)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by ffuuggssddss@14 May 2004 - 18:02
<!--QuoteBegin-atiVidia@13 May 2004 - 04:40
ok or-whateverurnameis
u obviously havent been reading the latest benchies.
for intel: HT wont matter at all once 64 bit XP hits the market :)
@ ffuuggssddss: wait a little longer for the newer a64s
what do u mean by newer amd's? Will there be a huge difference if i get one now then if i get one in 3 months?
the new ones will have a higher clock speed, and the old ones will have a lower price tag ;) [/b][/quote]
What i ment was, a noticeable difference in speed, im not really talking about the clockspeeds.... 3400+ -> 3800+ doesnt seem like a worthwhile difference. But yeah, prices drop =p