AMD or Intel as well as the memory brand - page 32
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Once again: PRICE QUESTION?
The system on E is more expensive than its counterpart on A.
OK, fuck it, the religious wars - it's no use anyway. Let's collect the dry statistics next. As a reminder, the table with the test data can be found on this page of this thread in my post. BLACK_BOX test data is given in accordance with generally available information and reasonable assumptions on the real operating frequency of the stone under load.
P.S. Begun for good health: "AMD beats Intel" and ended for sorrow: "the system at AND is more expensive than one at A". All right, let it be more expensive. The common result: Intel after several years of lagging (when even Duron was beating Pentium) has temporarily overtaken AMD. But AMD will get out anyway, and it is good because of competition.
Once again: PRICE QUESTION?
The system on E is more expensive than its counterpart on A.
It's not all that obvious. That's what we are here to clarify. It strongly depends on the category. In one (very low budget) category Intel wins, in the middle may be equal or AMD, in the premier league and in the perspective of the technology - definitely Intel. Apart from the last category, the others have what they call options.
Not everything is so obvious. That is what we are here to clarify. It strongly depends on the category. In one (quite budgetary) category Intel wins, in the middle may be equal or AMD, in the premier league and in the perspective of the technology - definitely Intel. Apart from the last category, in others there are what they call options.
Unfortunately for many people it is a matter of faith.
unfortunately for many people it is a matter of faith.
Or maybe it's just a life experience, or a choice... it doesn't matter...
When the stone was really a stone, the 486DX-100, Intel and AMD were available.
Didn't bother with it much....
Then MMX Stump, a big one, I would even say a big brick.
)))
Later I succeeded to replace it by Celeron 533, but the following replacement by Athlon 800 and its subsequent death in sweating heat
didn't make me feel any better, and the Celerons somehow got on better than the AMD ones. Once burned. (с)
So it's different for everyone... e.g. the same OS debates, even the trading platforms...
;)
As there are so many question marks near the processor circuit of my old PC I'll give the details:
Build by Dell (committed) I don't build it myself (not friendly with latch), I trust them for now (third in a row taken from them). OS Vista SP2.
At that time (January 2007) I chose a stone with the lowest price/performance ratio possible.
The frequency of ONE core was about 1.1 GHz. Although the datasheet at the time said (I'm no expert, I'll repeat)
1.1GHz * 2 cores = 2.2GHz.(CPU-Z screenshots)
Took part in the stats here and turned out to be a "black horse", intrigued.
But I did not refuse from analysis.
My opinion concerning monsters AMD and Intel:
The concept of budget stone is a relative thing, for sure there is a $ limit for it after which it ceases to be such.
So, historically, Intel spends a lot on advertising (impressive) its products, from marketing lessons we know that in the end the consumer pays for the advertising, hence the difference in price.
Plus we have to remember that AMD and Intel are the only players in the market, so it makes sense from the perspective of maximising reliable (certain) profits to pursue a coordinated marketing policy, minimising the profitability of industrial espionage (and this from game theory).
Therefore, the products of these manufacturers should not differ in the average, they differ only in their position on the price shelf in proportion to the amount of money spent on advertising.
Just for fun, there is also VIA. Those who are sorry to waste electricity and care about size, buy their CPUs.
Just for fun, there is also VIA. Those, who don't want to waste electricity and are very interested in size, buy their CPUs.
>> >> Not a joke, but in the future the question of an SBC (single board) is very relevant...
Haha not homa but the question of future SBC's is urgent...
I have the 2nd one (for expert work) on Zotac ITX, Winsis case, AMD 5050e 2GB CPU.
>> But the MB selection is a bit of a problem, our range is rather limited, so I have to make do with what we can get.
I have a 2nd (for expert work) on Zotac ITX, Winsis case, AMD 5050e 2GB CPU.
But there's a problem with selection of MB, we don't have much of them, so I have to make do with what they bring.
I don't know Zotac yet, but I've heard of it, I'll have a look at what it's compatible with and how...
I'm interested in this kind of thing..:
http://www.ixbt.com/news/all/index.shtml?07/41/90
and that's 2007 for sure! I'm sure the range has expanded.
One problem, delivery is difficult, and the shops only stock Atom...