Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → What brand of CPU does your computer use?
12
What brand of CPU does your computer use?
2006-07-08, 8:47 AM #1
Intel, AMD, or some stupid little company that no one has heard of?

If oyu have more than one computer, list them all. (your vote should correspond to the chip that you have the most of)


I have 2 AMD machines and my laptop is an intel.
2006-07-08, 8:47 AM #2
2 AMD, but i only use one.
2006-07-08, 8:48 AM #3
AMD
Holy soap opera Batman. - FGR
DARWIN WILL PREVENT THE DOWNFALL OF OUR RACE. - Rob
Free Jin!
2006-07-08, 8:49 AM #4
Not Outtel but Intel lolololo

/me expects an AMD nerd-raid
Star Wars: TODOA | DXN - Deus Ex: Nihilum
2006-07-08, 8:49 AM #5
Old computer's an AMD. New computer's an AMD.
I had a blog. It sucked.
2006-07-08, 9:06 AM #6
In my previous 2 computers, I only used AMD, but now I'm an Intel butt-boy! Woo!
"Harriet, sweet Harriet - hard-hearted harbinger of haggis."
2006-07-08, 9:10 AM #7
Transmeta Crusoe

...wait. No, I mean AMD.
2006-07-08, 9:13 AM #8
You left out a few...

  • Via
  • Transmeta
  • Motorola
  • IBM
  • Sun
  • HP
  • AT&T
  • DEC


Ive used workstations built on chips from all of those companies, none of which I would consider to be "stupid" or "little".

Most of my systems are built on AMD chips, but my laptop runs an Intel chip. Ive also got a multitude of Via chips running in specialized single-purpose boxes lying around.
And when the moment is right, I'm gonna fly a kite.
2006-07-08, 9:13 AM #9
AMD :D
A computer's worst nightmare:
0010111010011110210011010001

HazTeam Website-=HT=
2006-07-08, 9:16 AM #10
Currently Intel, but when I do my massive upgrade next summer, I'm switching to AMD.
2006-07-08, 9:16 AM #11
AMD 4 Life
"His Will Was Set, And Only Death Would Break It"

"None knows what the new day shall bring him"
2006-07-08, 9:18 AM #12
Intel in home desktop, AMD in laptop
2006-07-08, 9:20 AM #13
Originally posted by gbk:
Ive used workstations built on chips from all of those companies, none of which I would consider to be "stupid" or "little".
Yet, for some reason, most of those chips are stupid in a home desktop PC. Fancy that.

VIA and Crusoe are the only ones in your list that are really (strictly) x86. Newer HP processors are IA-64 only (as in, they no longer emulate x86) and I'm pretty sure Intel is the company that actually manufactures them. Even out of those two, VIA processors are budget-line to the point of being sad, and Transmeta processors are so unreasonably slow that they are only practical in embedded applications.

And now that Apple has switched, Motorola and IBM have both effectively left the commodity processor market. DEC Alpha no longer exists, SPARC is not a desktop processor and I'm honestly not sure what microprocessor Lucent has made.
2006-07-08, 9:20 AM #14
All four machines I currently own are AMD, but I have used Intel, Via, Sun, etc.
[This message has been edited. Deal with it.]
2006-07-08, 9:31 AM #15
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Yet, for some reason, most of those chips are stupid in a home desktop PC. Fancy that.

VIA and Crusoe are the only ones in your list that are really (strictly) x86. Newer HP processors are IA-64 only (as in, they no longer emulate x86) and I'm pretty sure Intel is the company that actually manufactures them. Even out of those two, VIA processors are budget-line to the point of being sad, and Transmeta processors are so unreasonably slow that they are only practical in embedded applications.

And now that Apple has switched, Motorola and IBM have both effectively left the commodity processor market. DEC Alpha no longer exists, SPARC is not a desktop processor and I'm honestly not sure what microprocessor Lucent has made.



Actually, very few of the systems I mentioned were modern.

The HP chips Ive used have all been PA-RISC chips in workstations from the mid-90's. (Servers too, but the workstations were more interesting)

Transmeta's chips are indeed slow. I had a series of tablet PCs running them. They were worthless.

VIA chips are great for cheap embedded systems, but only if you dont try to run Windows on them.

And yes, SPARC isnt a desktop processor, but it does make a decent workstation chip. And Lucent doesnt really make chips, but AT&T used to -- the Hobbit.
And when the moment is right, I'm gonna fly a kite.
2006-07-08, 9:31 AM #16
Windows desktop is P4, Linux desktop is AMD Sempron, and my laptop is Celeron.
the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot - LC Tusken
2006-07-08, 10:55 AM #17
Intel. AMD next upgrade.
Got a permanent feather in my cap;
Got a stretch to my stride;
a stroll to my step;
2006-07-08, 11:39 AM #18
AMD Athlon 64 3000+
Intel P4 1.6 Ghz (old one that is very messed up and slowing down very quickly)
"You're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!" Anyone who recognizes this quote is awsome.
2006-07-08, 11:57 AM #19
Intel. It does me just fine.
nope.
2006-07-08, 12:47 PM #20
I have Intel, and AMD in 2 computers
"Nulla tenaci invia est via"
2006-07-08, 1:40 PM #21
AMD right now. I'll probably go with Intel for the next computer.
2006-07-08, 3:47 PM #22
well instead of voting what i have the most of... i voted what i use currently...

current computer is AMD last 2 have Intel
eat right, exercise, die anyway
2006-07-08, 4:00 PM #23
AMD. I haven't found a reason to switch to anything else yet.
The cake is a lie... THE CAKE IS A LIE!!!!!
2006-07-08, 4:42 PM #24
IBM PowerPC in one, Intel Pentium 4 in the other.
"If you watch television news, you will know less about the world than if you just drink gin straight out of the bottle."
--Garrison Keillor
2006-07-08, 4:44 PM #25
Intel.
Pissed Off?
2006-07-08, 5:20 PM #26
Intel, P4 + H for desktop from ~year ago, Core Duo for laptop

I've always been an intel fanboy haha
Remained that way to spite the annoying amd fanboys
一个大西瓜
2006-07-08, 5:23 PM #27
Originally posted by Pommy:
Remained that way to spite the annoying amd fanboys
Except not all AMD users are "fanboys". In most situations the AMD processors were the better-performing and more economical choices. The situation has only changed in the past month. Sticking with overpriced/under-performing Intel chips just to stick it to AMD users == biting off your nose to spite your face.
2006-07-08, 5:31 PM #28
Intel in the Lappy and the "liberated" Physics Dept. computers, AMD in my desktop system. My next upgrade will most likely see AMD as well, though I'll be sure to check on the situation between the two to see which is the more prudent choice.
Marsz, marsz, Dąbrowski,
Z ziemi włoskiej do Polski,
Za twoim przewodem
Złączym się z narodem.
2006-07-08, 6:00 PM #29
AMD (Athlon, Barton core) and IBM (G5).
2006-07-08, 6:23 PM #30
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Except not all AMD users are "fanboys". In most situations the AMD processors were the better-performing and more economical choices. The situation has only changed in the past month. Sticking with overpriced/under-performing Intel chips just to stick it to AMD users == biting off your nose to spite your face.


Yeah, he sure showed the AMD users.
Pissed Off?
2006-07-08, 6:34 PM #31
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Except not all AMD users are "fanboys". In most situations the AMD processors were the better-performing and more economical choices. The situation has only changed in the past month. Sticking with overpriced/under-performing Intel chips just to stick it to AMD users == biting off your nose to spite your face.


I never said all AMD users are fanboys.

I also don't have anything against AMD, and do not think AMD's products are inferior. My computers are cheaper computers anyways, and it just so happened that they had intel chips in them. This, however, seems to spite the AMD fanboys, and rather than spending money ( :confused: ) to change the chips and appease them, it serves me better to be happy at their spite and remain with my computers, which work perfectly fine for me.

一个大西瓜
2006-07-08, 6:48 PM #32
The logo is perhaps the worst metric for determining the quality of a chip that I have ever heard.

My current machine has an AMD, because it happened to come with one. My dead laptop has an intel, because that is what it came with. My old machine had a VIA, because it was really old, but I replaced it at some point with a celeron of some sort, because it was cheap and I was dumb.

My next computer, whenever that is, will have whatever chip it happens to come with.

I wish my lappy wasn't broke, though. :(
Wikissassi sucks.
2006-07-08, 7:24 PM #33
Originally posted by Isuwen:
The logo is perhaps the worst metric for determining the quality of a chip that I have ever heard.


My point was that my "fanboyism" of intel has nothing to do with the quality of their chips
一个大西瓜
2006-07-08, 9:01 PM #34
Originally posted by Jon`C:
Except not all AMD users are "fanboys". In most situations the AMD processors were the better-performing and more economical choices. The situation has only changed in the past month. Sticking with overpriced/under-performing Intel chips just to stick it to AMD users == biting off your nose to spite your face.



Err... the Conroe hasn't come out quite yet.


Also, I'm rooting for AMD just becuas ethey have less market share. I like equal market share. That makes me happy, because it lessens the possibly of one player being knoed out and creating make a monopoly.

Intel hasn't impressed me as a company. Before they woke up to the fact that AMD was a competitor they just coasted on their crappy net burst architecture, and milked the market. Even when AMD bested them it just milked the OEMs. If AMD wasn't there we'd still have the same old 3.2 GHz Northwood. If AMD ever gets out of the CPU business we're in for a heap of trouble. I'd like the see AMD have a better hold in the OEM market.
2006-07-09, 7:02 AM #35
Originally posted by Obi_Kwiet:
Err... the Conroe hasn't come out quite yet.
Intel has corrected its retail pricing. AMD is still the better performer at the high end, but Intel is much more competitive now for price vs. performance.
2006-07-09, 7:33 AM #36
If I post from my PSP, does that mean I can vote MIPS? :D
2006-07-09, 8:42 AM #37
[QUOTE=Cool Matty]does that mean I can vote MIPS? :D[/QUOTE]
MIPS IS NOT A BRAND
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2006-07-09, 11:15 AM #38
Originally posted by Emon:
MIPS IS NOT A BRAND

Actually, it is. MIPS developed the MIPS architecture and licenses their designs off to other companies now.

I love the flak Intel gets, yet they've effectively dominated the laptop market, which is growing much faster than the desktop market, for the past 3 years with very well designed processors. They know exactly what they're doing from a business standpoint. Especially since they're throwing that technology that's been evolving for the past 3 years in the laptop market right into the desktop market soon.
2006-07-09, 3:22 PM #39
[QUOTE=Cool Matty]If I post from my PSP, does that mean I can vote MIPS? :D[/QUOTE]
Oh God I feel sorry for you. I tried doing that on my friend's PSP once. What a ***** that was.
I had a blog. It sucked.
2006-07-09, 5:31 PM #40
Originally posted by Darth:
Actually, it is. MIPS developed the MIPS architecture and licenses their designs off to other companies now.
What Darth said. In this case, however, CM would have to say "Sony" because the R4000 used in the PSP is extremely heavily modified and it is manufactured by Sony in-house. It's like calling the XScale a StrongARM.
12

↑ Up to the top!