Proof that Intel sucks...

[Geeky1]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=22504

Intel got pwn3d.


Ok, ok so it doesn't prove that Intel sucks (regardless of the fact that they have for the past several years). But it's still damn funny.

 

[Burnout]

hehehehe.

 

[Ev0]

I think this sums it up perfectly.

 

[Geeky1]

I think this sums it up perfectly.

or, if you prefer one of these....

Any of those would work too...

 

[VT]

Only smilie that suffices.

 

[under18carbon]

👍

 

[Jmac279]

Intel has been proving that they suck for like the last decade ...

 

[Geeky1]

Oh not quite... The P2, P3, and a handful of Celerons were/are excellent CPUs, as is the Pentium M (the Pentium M is, in fact, the best mobile CPU out there period). The bad ones are the P4s and most of its derivatives, and the Itanium.

 

[Super Jamie]

Bahahah That Connect Four Pic Is The Bomb :d

 

[Geeky1]

Personally my favorite part of the whole deal is that the Intel woman wouldn't present the award herself. Talk about poor losers...

 

[RX-7_FC_DrIfteR]

HAHA I love my AMD, suxs i have a intel laptops but it does the job.

 

[cardude2004]

Even if they lost this year, they still don't stink. I would take an Intel over an AMD.

 

[Geeky1]

Even if they lost this year, they still don't stink. I would take an Intel over an AMD.

Having owned, built, and used countless systems based on chips from both manufacturers, I'd LOVE to hear why...

 

[toyomatt84]

I'm not going to dispute or cause a ruccus. I and a few friends have just had better luck with Intel. That's all.

 

[The Ernster]

Oh not quite... The P2, P3, and a handful of Celerons were/are excellent CPUs, as is the Pentium M (the Pentium M is, in fact, the best mobile CPU out there period). The bad ones are the P4s and most of its derivatives, and the Itanium.

What he said. Centrino Mobile Technology is pretty much the industry standard for the consumer and business levels.

 

[cardude2004]

I have also had better luck using Intel processors.

 

[Geeky1]

"Better luck" in what way though?

 

[Burnout]

"Better luck" in what way though?

I've always wondered the same thing.

 

[TVRKing]

I have had the same P4 2.4 chip now ever since it came out.

It has never, repeat NEVER gave me any problems.


My dad bought a brand new AMD machine, and, quite literally, ripped it's guts out because it was complete and utter rubbish (slow, crashing at LEAST 3 times a day due to overheating). Guess what he replaced them with?

An Intel P4.

He's had no problems since.

He now has an AMD laptop, and that is also giving problems. For example, the chips temperature is roughly about 60 degrees celcius (twice as hot as my P4). Granted, it dosen't break down as often as his PC did, but it still resets itself on average 4 times a week (He's often said that the only reason he bought it was because it was the only one that had the right spec. Had an Intel version been avaliable, he would have bought that instead).

The only reliable AMD we had was a K6 version, which was, and still is, unbreakable.

 

[oosacker]

omglololol.... etc etc...

 

[Jmac279]

I've never had any crashing problems in any of the several dozen AMD computers I've set up ...

I'd say either your dad has bad luck or he's buying ****ty motherboards ...

 

[TVRKing]

I've never had any crashing problems in any of the several dozen AMD computers I've set up ...

I'd say either your dad has bad luck or he's buying ****ty motherboards ...

Maybe so, but it was TIME Computers that he bought the system off.

I built my own.

 

[toyomatt84]

"Better luck" in what way though?

I have 2 desktops at the moment running similar setups. One is a AMD64 3200+ and the other is a P4 640. The P4 is in far more stabile conditions, even though it is running more often and is slightly overclocked. I don't run anything special for cooling on either, but I do run more hdd's on the P4. I've actually had to reformat the AMD more often, due to acceptancy failures in the OS. So, that is why I will lean on Intel more often then AMD.

 

[BAZZ]

Proof that Intel sucks...

Hmm. Is that proof of Intel beeing "sucky" or AMD beeing the better bang for the buck? Ive had one problem with a AMD 2500+ that got a tad to much voltage and decided to burn up but it got replaced by a Mobile 2500+ that is still running at 2600Mhz on water. I am now running a Necastle 3500+ and im more then happy with it and unless Intel get their prices down a tad my next one will be a AMD aswell.

 

[Burnout]

AMDs being stable.. Let's see...

I ran a 1600+, on $8 cooling, at 2100Mhz (Stock was 1388Mhz) for two years, running 2.016V into it. It crashed while I was initially overclocking and getting the settings right. After that, the only time it crashed was in the Summer, while Folding. Technically it didn't crash, though. Rather, it hit my mobo shutoff temp of 65C. Yes, it was running stable at 65C.

That processor is now in my backup PC running happily at 1733Mhz.

Now I have a 2400+ running at 2300Mhz, stable as a rock. As a side note, I'm running crappy ram in both machines.

My sisters 2600+ has never crashed.

My parents 2400+ XP-M @ 2100Mhz (for low cooling needs) has never crashed.

Someone built a 2.4Ghz P4 system for my youth group (next to three AMD systems that I built, which have never crashed), and it has overheated more times than I can count, always below 55C. The AMDs are in the same room, with cheaper cooling.

I want everyone to keep in mind that system stability is not nearly soley dependant on the CPU but rather the system chipset, RAM, PSU, amoungst other things.