i have a computer i bought back in 2001, already a second hand computer at that time. still it's running today, and is stable enough. it's an AMD K6 266 Mhz. then my laptop runs a 2.66 Ghz Pentium, and another computer of mine has an AMD 64 chip. i've ben most impressed with AMD chips overall. there isn't that much difference between them at high speeds. only i've had problems with the AMD freezing up at high temperatures. i don't know exactly why, but they don't seem to be all that hot, when they get hot. but with a cooler inside, it runs perfectly fine, even with high end 3D intensive games.
if i were to buy another computer, i would go for AMD.

we know AMD is cheaper than pentium and higher speed than pentium.
thereare something of pentium better tahn AMD. most clients like to buy pentium rather than AMD.I don't know. but there are some reasons,perhaps pentium make much ads in mrket.
pentium advantage:
1:pentium can run steadily.
2:pentium mkae less heat than AMD.
3:pentium let clients more reassurence than AMD
I think this is intel'sadvantage!!!

The heat issue is the problem with AMD chips or may be I should say systems.
I did put them to the test.
I left an Athlon and Pentium 3 running continually about a year ago both brand new and the Athlon chip burned out so I stopped the test.
May be I should have let the Pentium go on to see how much longer it would have.
Yes that was the only test I did because I can't afford to keep burning chips.

But all you need to do is read reports by more popular testing firms.
Thats what I do before I start insulting people by telling them.

AMD64, just to be a step ahead

AMD are better and more future proof.
64 bit processoing is the future and AMD have made a large range of processors to take on this future.
I've got an Athlon64 4000+ and it runs like a dream.
and it will run even better when a reliable 64bitOS is released.

Go for AMD i say

Sorry if you thought it was an insult, but all these "reports" of AMD CPUs burning down are rumors and even paid advertising on the part of intel. I mean the only burnt AMD I know of is when Toms took out the heatsink while it was running. Now seriously, who on earth will run a CPU full throttle without active or pasive cooling?

why is it that AMD chips overheat easier? what i heard was that it was made in the Northern states, and it runs fine there, so they didn't take into acocunt hotter climates. it does sound like a load of bull, i know, but that was the only explanation i heard. anyone has a more logical explanation?

The only reason that comes up is because they've either used certain aspects of the Nvidia chipset that allow better performance or in the case of processors, the app has been compiled for the pentium. You'll find the performance as a result of that minimal. Add to the fact



Damn straight.


In the heat department, AMD Athlon XPs run at about 60 C, whereas the AMD64 run at 50C, a hell of a lot cooler if you ask me. It looks like they managed to get the temperature right with their 64 chips. Also, if you're buying a notebook, you'd want to get an AMD64 as its less hungry on the power.

Unless Intel gets their act together and starts making competitive processors, I'll never buy another Intel CPU again.

Look here:
quite good consideration

http://www.devhood.com/messages/message_vi...thread_id=17293

i just don't want to be considered as spammer or plagiarism...

As far as i know i think that AMD is better, it is faster it gets process/threads done way faster than pentium, if you take a look at processors speed, AMD is usually slower, although if you run them in different computers it will still have better performance, and now they have the 64-bit processors that i bet are really fast, although i havent used them but i have heard that from people.

AMD is also better for gaming.