[dba-Tech] Laptop Recommendation

LOL.  People get emotional about their computers.  You will find others just
as emotional about how good their Intel box is.

I for one agree with Francisco, I love my AMD.  I have not had an Intel box
in this century.

John W. Colby 
www.ColbyConsulting.com

-----Original Message-----
From: dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:dba-tech-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Jon Tydda
Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 12:05 PM
To: 'Discussion of Hardware and Software issues'
Subject: RE: [dba-Tech] Laptop Recommendation


Argh, I only asked a simple question, what have I started??? :-)


Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Francisco H Tapia [mailto:my.lists at verizon.net]
Sent: 09 June 2004 17:02
To: Discussion of Hardware and Software issues
Subject: Re: [dba-Tech] Laptop Recommendation


jwcolby wrote On 6/8/2004 1:59 PM:

>>My opinion is that Intel makes a fine microprocessor as does AMD.
>>    
>>
>
>Yes, Intel is a fine company and makes fine processors.  AMD is the 
>little guy making slightly better processors for slightly less.  Add 
>the two slightly and you get a fair "bang for the buck" advantage going 
>with AMD.
>
>  
>
I disagree, although Intel was at one point a "fine" company, they have 
long pushed their weight around as the dominant processor.  Even w/ the 
leaps and bounds that AMD has done, Most people still think of AMD as a 
2nd rate chip.  While having experianced both P4 and Athlons, I can w/o 
a doubt say that ALL AMD ATHLON systems I've worked on are faster than 
that of their Intel P4 counterparts.

I've seen it with machines w/ RAMBUS which are supposed to boast and 
brag about high performance and I've seen it w/ the later P4's that went 
DDR (and even dualchannel)

>>It's just my humble opinion that day in and day out I get more bang 
>>for my
>>    
>>
>buck with AMD.
>
>Mine too.  Unlike MS where there is no competition, the processor 
>market
has
>some.  I buy AMD for two reasons.
>
>1.) Their product is good, slightly better (for the price) than Intel's 
>and..
>2.) If Intel ever does "own" the market as MS does, their prices will 
>go
up.
>So I support the competition.
>
>  
>
My boss recently picked up a 3.x ghz P4 for the office (I say x because 
I'm unsure if it's a 3.2 or the later 3.4... :|, in any case it's a 
Dell), and the system IS fast, it IS zippy, it does get off it's duff 
and run Windows XP like a champ, and it should w/ what 1gig of dual 
channel 400mhz (800mhz) DDR.  However it isn't MUCH faster than my 
Athlon 2000+ XP NOR is it much faster than some of the other boxes I've 
put together running 2600+ Athlons. 

The true test will be when I finally get my hands on an AMD Athlon 3400+ 
and run it up against the P4 w/ real benchmarks... because all the 
systems I mentioned above can process DivX (among other software) 
withing frames of each other...

I support AMD not to keep Intel from winning more marketshare, (no I 
brag about how fast AMD processors are for that ;o)).  I do however BUY 
AMD because it does "OFFER" more BANG for the BUCK.  I can get "better" 
performance on an AMD processor for the same money (or less) than it 
cost to go w/ Intel.  Example...If I want to spend under $200 bucks for 
a an Processor+Mobo combo, I will end up with more processing power when 
I choose the AMD route.  For me it's not about keeping Chipzilla tamed, 
it's about earning more processing power w/ my $$. With the Extra cash I 
save I can apply to get a better video card. :o)

>Microprocessor design / production is not something you can do in your 
>garage and create a competitor for the giant company.  It takes bucks, 
>BIG bucks.  Intel has BIG bucks to throw at research / design as well 
>as fab plants.
>  
>
because Intel has "SUCH" big bucks, it is very disappointing to see them 
struggle to come up with a truely superior chip.  I'm not Anti-Intel, 
I'm just not gonna buy something that sucks and pay more for it.,  I 
remember in the days of 386/486 chips, you HAD to go w/ Intel.. in fact 
PII and PIII's were all in Intel's domain, however it wasn't until the 
screwed around w/ trying to provide a crippled version of the PIII that 
they went to hell, w/ their Celeron processors running cooler and faster 
than the later PIII's, :O.  My first AMD processor was an AMD 300mhz 
3D.  I bought this puppy w/ the promise that it could deliver graphics 
at a better price factor.

there's also all the propaganda that surround AMD chips, is that they 
are not as stable.  While there are chipset manufactures that suck, 
namely PCCHIPS, and then SIS in it's former years (pre-Dragon).  That's 
not to say that Intel hasn't had it's share of problems with it's OWN 
chipsets, (Intel Brand).

k, better get off this soapbox before I fall off :D

-- 
-Francisco