Jump to content

Intel or AMD


Mini_Me

whats ur rig currently?  

57 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

i never had a AMD yet  i have always had intel  soo  i am sorta afraid to switch  3.0 ghz ht

 

 

Nothing really to be afraid of. Had AMD's for several years (last 3 comps were AMD) Before that, I know I had one Intel, the others??? IBM 80286, Packard Bell (remember them?) 80386. No idea who made their procs, but at that time it could have been just about anyone; IBM, Intel,AMD, some other player that fell by the wayside.

 

Oh the Intel I had was a 100 Mhz pent. Still runs, cpu fan doesn't, so the computer spends months on end turned off. :lol2:

 

Current: mine is A64 3200+ Wifes', Athlon 2800+

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GC Alumni
i never had a AMD yet  i have always had intel  soo  i am sorta afraid to switch  3.0 ghz ht

 

 

Nothing really to be afraid of. Had AMD's for several years (last 3 comps were AMD) Before that, I know I had one Intel, the others??? IBM 80286, Packard Bell (remember them?) 80386. No idea who made their procs, but at that time it could have been just about anyone; IBM, Intel,AMD, some other player that fell by the wayside.

 

Oh the Intel I had was a 100 Mhz pent. Still runs, cpu fan doesn't, so the computer spends months on end turned off. :lol2:

 

Current: mine is A64 3200+ Wifes', Athlon 2800+

I think the 80286 and 80386 are both Intel chips, IIRC. Intel chips are numbered ending in 86 generally for a while, hence Intel assembly being called x86. I think Pentium 4 processors are sometimes even referred to as i586.

 

EDIT: When I say "assembly" what I really should mean is "instruction set."

Edited by mookie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the 80286 and 80386 are both Intel chips, IIRC. Intel chips are numbered ending in 86 generally for a while, hence Intel assembly being called x86. I think Pentium 4 processors are sometimes even referred to as i586.

 

EDIT: When I say "assembly" what I really should mean is "instruction set."

 

True about the architecture, but I seem to remember reading that other companies, AMD namely but there were others too (Cyrix?), were also licensed to make the x86 processors.

 

At some point Intel stopped that program, and AMD went on to create the Krypton series of chips to compete against Intel directly. Took several generations to make any real headway though. I'm just glad there are 2 chip makers that continue to push the other to make better, faster chips. The competetion also "helps" keep the prices a bit lower than they might otherwise be. :luxhello:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
True about the architecture, but I seem to remember reading that other companies, AMD namely but there were others too (Cyrix?), were also licensed to make the x86 processors. 

 

At some point Intel stopped that program, and AMD went on to create the Krypton series of chips to compete against Intel directly.  Took several generations to make any real headway though.  I'm just glad there are 2 chip makers that continue to push the other to make better, faster chips.  The competetion also "helps" keep the prices a bit lower than they might otherwise be.  :luxhello:

 

Intel was the only x286, Cyrix came in and had a license to make 386 & 486's. I personally owned a Cyrix 486 cpu. It was my second upgrade. My first upgrade was from a 386 -> Intel 486 33Mhz. I think the Cyrix I bought was a 66Mhz. I did have a 286, but that was pretty much unupgradable.

anywho, AMD bought out Cyrix around the 486 era, giving them the ability to create the x86 architecture. They took the Cyrix engineers, gave them some money, and hence came the K5 & K6 CPU's.

 

correct me if I'm wrong, but the 586's were out for a short period of time right before the pentiums. We are currently oin 686's right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i had amd for years, then for some unknown reason made the plunge to intel. my one and only intel experience landed me with a chipset/sata incompatibility, and now i'm back in the safe waters of amd.

 

i suppose *someday* this whole 64bit rage will be cool, but not yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i had amd for years, then for some unknown reason made the plunge to intel. my one and only intel experience landed me with a chipset/sata incompatibility, and now i'm back in the safe waters of amd.

 

i suppose *someday* this whole 64bit rage will be cool, but not yet.

John, I'm FULLY 64-bit right now. The OS, the chip... even some applications. The stability and multitasking capabilities are freaking awesome. More and more people are taking the 64-bit AMD plunge and not looking back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...