>I dont do AMD for the same reason I don't do Hyundai. Yea it's a way
>cheaper car, still runs 65 as good as any car, but it's a fn Hyundai....
>If you want a Hyundai fine, just don't tell me that I should buy one too :-)
Jason
You deserved that one Mitch :)
-Larry
> >I dont do AMD for the same reason I don't do Hyundai. Yea it's a way
> >cheaper car, still runs 65 as good as any car, but it's a fn Hyundai....
> What a ludicrous comparison. Maybe there should be a new Intel case
> badge "F***wit Outside*.
> --
> Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
> please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevent text.
> Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
Eldred
--
http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Screamers League
IICC League
GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
N2k3 rank:in progress
Slayer Spektera lvl 68 assassin
Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
US East
Sorry Joachim, but IBM's 970 ("G5") is every micron a fierce competitor
to both Intel and AMD, and is basically a better design, megahertz for
megahertz.
Otherwise, the Big Mac super would never ever have come out on top of
both all Intel AND AMD-based supercomputers in all the world - using
fewer cpu's and at lower cost. Even PC magazines like, um, PC Magazine
had to admit the G5 is at least as powerful a computer as every
Repentium clone (in most of their tests, the G5 came out on top).
Regards, Rudy
(GPLRank -21)
Could you point me to where one can buy a G5 based PC along with
benchmark comparisons running x86 code?
--
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevent text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
...
Better think twice before calling someone wrong so bluntly... just about
all who've ever called me wrong in this way have been mistaken <g>
The G5 may be every bit as fast as a P4 or Athlon XP, but how many
people use it for playing the current state of the art sims like Lomac,
IL2-FB, N2k3, GPL, or F1C?
Potential makes a potential competitor. But only actual usage makes it
an actual competitor in the market sector you're discussing...
Achim
Achim
-Larry
> >That was my point, most anti AMD posts are by people who used a K6
> >years ago, or an Athlon on a crappy mobo,
> Really? I had a K6 (two, actually) because it was cheaper than Intel.
Got an
> Athlon for the same reason. Seemed like performance was equal to
Intel(present
> haunted system notwithstanding). As long as the performance is seen to be
the
> same, I'll purchase the less expensive product. Simple economics, no
> particulat brand loyalty.
> Eldred
> --
> http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
> Screamers League
> IICC League
> GPLRank -6.0 MoGPL rank +267.80
> Ch.Rank +52.58 MoC +741.71
> Hist. +82.34 MoH:na
> N2k3 rank:in progress
> Slayer Spektera lvl 68 assassin
> Slayer Spectral_K lvl 38 Necro
> US East
http://www.top500.org/list/2003/11/
My main point is though, there's more to choose from than just Repentium
and Repentium AMD clones, these days.
Regards, Rudy
(GPLRank -21)
No, not every piece of x86 code is also available for the Mac;
but on the other hand, being a Unix (OS X is a BSD Unix-based system) it
runs plenty of *nix apps that Windows in turn doesn't have direct access
to, unless you're willing to install Linux of course - which would be
the best thing to do on a Repentium anyway ;)
Regards, Rudy
(GPLRank -21)
*nix apps - I want Lomac, IL2-FB, GPL, N2k3, F1C... ;)
Achim
So therefore it is totally pointless bringing up G5's in a discussion
about PC x86 64bit chips.
--
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevent text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
Thought so.
Regards, Rudy
(GPLRank -21)
It is directly about the subject of a thread clearly marked OT.
--
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim messages to quote only relevent text.
Check groups.google.com before asking a question.
> >Ah yes - you mean discussing x86 chips in a simulators forum *is*
> >actually on-topic?
> It is directly about the subject of a thread clearly marked OT.
> --
