Intel gamers!

[gaara]

Intel has the potential to stomp AMD especially right now with their revised P3 architechture shown in the Pentium M, but they're put in a bit of a tight spot. They've marketed high clock speeds for so long that going backwards is going to make people raise eyebrows, and will also open the market even more for AMD.

I honestly don't care who makes the better chip, I like AMD better but that won't stop me from buying an Intel if it's a cheaper and better alternative, which IMO, currently is not.

 

[GameGURU]

ASUS are NOT the king of overclockers for AMD Gameguru.....as these other guys have said it's DFI hands down....it's not all opinion either, just do a search and DFI will always be recommended.....go to Xtremesystems.org well world record holder overclockers are and it will always be DFI for the AMD64 setups......ASUS is utter crap, I believe they are actually good for intel but not for AMD, their quality has definitely gone downhill in recent years not to mention the absolutely horrifying tech support.

How many Asus boards do you own?

And why is everyone buying them if they suck?

Just curious.

edit:

http://www.insanetek.com/index.php?page=dfilanpartynf3

It seems...754 would go Asus.

But 939 would go DFi

 

[Nubius]

I've gone through 2 or 3 ASUS boards.....people buy them because they are safe with a particular brand just like Intel people laugh at AMD's speeds without knowing that in reality that 2Ghz would kill a 3GHz+ Intel depending on chips of course.

Just because people buy something doesn't make it great....you could attribute ignorance to that.

For AMD's DFI is the way to go in terms of OC'ing.....for Intels I hear ASUS is still pretty good.

One of the boards I had in the past wouldn't work with my newer graphics card....upon contacting tech support I get a half assed barely understandable almost english response how I need to get another graphics card....upon getting a decent MSI board everything was fine...that's just one problem I've had with them.

I know a couple people at the LAN I go to monthly that have ASUS because they know nothing of computers....they want their systems to be overclocked and as soon as you go into mess with it, the system is nothing but trouble to work with.

Stick to what you want, but the fact remains if you want overclocking potential you go DFI

 

[Harper]

Personally I like AMD for it's BANG for BUCK.
I find that both the CPU and the good performance / feature driven MoBos for AMD helps users save money and still get a proformance system.

 

[Esse]

This whole topic has gone a little off topic. Anyways, here is my intel machine listed below. And I play with max settings for HL2, D3, and BF2 and it runs perfectly - absolutely no skips. Right now AMD doesn't impress me...I remember when a person said, " after a few years a computer just becomes a regular computer". I'd rather have the intel "multi-tasking" power than "gaming" power once this machine gets old.

-Esse

 

[Helixxxer]

I don't know why there's this split between multi-tasking and gaming. AMD's hyperthreading technology, granted not as lightning quick nor inventive and is a blatent rip-off of hyperthreading, still contributes somewhat of a solution to multi-tasking. I can burn a CD, play Doom3, run DVD editing software, and run Prime95 just fine with my system (granted doom drops down to about 30-35 fps, but it's still playable). The real truth of the matter is processors are so powerful these days, we don't ever really use their full potential exept for gaming, and even then it's usually the motherboard or some other factor on your computer that's slowing it down. It's really too close of a race to care whether or not amd or intel is more powerful. They're always going to go through cycles, and this whole argument is just stupid. I am happy with my AMD, and I was happy my PentiumIII I had a long time ago.

 

[DJ-CHRIS]

Helixxxer you have no idea what the hell your talking about

Intel's have HT, which is hyperthreading. AMD use HyperThreading which is completly different. One is virtual dual processors, and another is a high speed point to point memory interface.

 

[dhw200]

AMD use HyperThreading which is completly different.

Chris, u got it wrong too

AMDs have HT, which is Hyper Transport

 

[Helixxxer]

Funny how even when you agree with something you still get ripped to shreads. Anyway, I think any reasonable person can see when I said "AMD's hyperthreading technology", I meant hypertransport. I phrased it like that to show that they are similar processes of the same methodology/idea. It's in my sig correctly related to the motherboard (granted it's not the same thing, but you get the idea and I think you know what I meant), so I don't see why you're so quick to jump. I know I probably don't know anything at all about computers and you are all-knowing, but please... both technologies are different means to the (relatively) same end, are they not? Sorry if I caused confusion.

 

[dhw200]

No, hyperthreading and hypertransport are completely different. Hyperthreading, which is Intel, is basiclly simulating dual core processors. This benefits multitasking. Hypertransport, for lack of a better way to describe it, is moving things faster along the same thread, making single applications, such as games, faster.