Revelation:
At 1906hrs several weeks ago, I decided that just because a company "briefs well," doesn't mean I have to spend another year saving up to have a monster gaming rig (no more Micro Velocity or Falcon Northwest). Similarly, I realize that Intel "briefs well" on paper. However...
I'm still glad I bought that new Intel-based desktop for university-work, but if you can own two old consoles (PS2 and Xbox), you can own two new computers (Intel and AMD). Although, I haven't bought a console game in years. I can say I never will again.
Pivotal:
I'm tired of seeing marginal gains with high premiums (Intel). And yes, I read the thread about Intel considering cutting prices in 2008. But it's 2008 and I'm waiting to see a substantial drop.
Come On People:
Overclockability is okay, but 3.0GHz with multiple cores should be plenty of speed. Companies are more focused on cores than increasing processor speeds. So overclocking is unncessary. It's more likely that game developers will find better performance gains through implementing multi-threaded games and incorporating better use of SLI and Crossfire setups.
Conclusion:
For all those looking forward to the next Intel bangfest of quads that can be overclocked to 4GHz+ and have a larger FSB than San Diego, hold your horses kids. Take a step back just say no, "I ain't havin' it toDAY!"
Besides, large numbers won't necessarily translate into noticeable performance gains, at least to the human eye.
So save your money children of the damned (Intel whores), buy AMD...because AMD WANTS YOU!
At 1906hrs several weeks ago, I decided that just because a company "briefs well," doesn't mean I have to spend another year saving up to have a monster gaming rig (no more Micro Velocity or Falcon Northwest). Similarly, I realize that Intel "briefs well" on paper. However...
I'm still glad I bought that new Intel-based desktop for university-work, but if you can own two old consoles (PS2 and Xbox), you can own two new computers (Intel and AMD). Although, I haven't bought a console game in years. I can say I never will again.
Pivotal:
I'm tired of seeing marginal gains with high premiums (Intel). And yes, I read the thread about Intel considering cutting prices in 2008. But it's 2008 and I'm waiting to see a substantial drop.
Come On People:
Overclockability is okay, but 3.0GHz with multiple cores should be plenty of speed. Companies are more focused on cores than increasing processor speeds. So overclocking is unncessary. It's more likely that game developers will find better performance gains through implementing multi-threaded games and incorporating better use of SLI and Crossfire setups.
Conclusion:
For all those looking forward to the next Intel bangfest of quads that can be overclocked to 4GHz+ and have a larger FSB than San Diego, hold your horses kids. Take a step back just say no, "I ain't havin' it toDAY!"
Besides, large numbers won't necessarily translate into noticeable performance gains, at least to the human eye.
So save your money children of the damned (Intel whores), buy AMD...because AMD WANTS YOU!
... if the ability to do it is there.. i don't see why not 
