T
tony
Anyone know? I'd like to buy one when it gets down to $100
(which is still quite a lot for a CPU, but whaddaya gonna do?).
Tony
(which is still quite a lot for a CPU, but whaddaya gonna do?).
Tony
S
Stacey
tony said:
I wouldn't hold your breath. I bet they run out before the price drops under
$100 for any of the faster grades. Even the 1.8a's are still hovering above
that price point with the 2.8C's around $175.
T
tony
Stacey said:
Has production of the Northwoods stopped?
Tony
S
Sean Ridge
Intel would be shooting themselves in the foot if they did that right
now.
S
Sean Ridge
Switch to AMD if you want to buy cheap and powerful cpu's. I'm using
Intel on two PC's right now but I'm going to switch one of them to AMD
soon.
R
Rob Stow
The correct answer to that question is another question:
"Why would anyone with half an ounce of brains care?"
Intel has nothing for the desktop market that can compete
with the various AMD64 processors. In the 2 way and 4 way
server market, there are a few cases where Itanic is a good
choice, but Opty beats Xeon in pretty much everything and
also beats Itanic in most things.
"Why would anyone with half an ounce of brains care?"
Intel has nothing for the desktop market that can compete
with the various AMD64 processors. In the 2 way and 4 way
server market, there are a few cases where Itanic is a good
choice, but Opty beats Xeon in pretty much everything and
also beats Itanic in most things.
T
Tony Hill
Not yet, but they will be phasing out production of Northwoods
throughout this year and phasing in Prescott. Despite what some will
say in this newsgroup, to 99.9% of Intel's customers it doesn't make a
lick of difference which version they get, and since the Prescott is
cheaper to produce I would expect Intel to move towards it fairly
quickly.
S
Sean Ridge
Then it's time for me to jump ship and go back to AMD.
T
tony
Sean Ridge said:
That's my opinion too.
Tony
T
tony
Tony Hill said:
I'll bet your "99.9%" is quite a bit off with all the negative posts regarding
Prescotts.
Personally, when Northwoods go away I'll look at AMD before I buying another
Prescott (which means Asus motherboards rather than Intel too).
Tony
T
tony
Sean Ridge said:
When Prescotts are the only Intel option, I may do just that! I wonder if
AMD has any plans on making its own motherboards (though that would
probably wipe out 3rd party motherboards all together). I tend to view
motherboards and processors as inseparable units.
Tony
T
Tony Hill
In the context of all 87% of all stats being made up on the spot, it's
dead-on! :>
Seriously though, who the heck reads newsgroups? Basically nobody in
the grand scheme of things. Same goes for the gamer sites,
overclocker sites, etc. The vast bulk of machines are simply
purchased as a Dell Dimension 8200 or an HP Compaq d530, very little
thought put into the nitty-gritty details.
Despite what some of us may like to think, we're in the definite
minority in this newsgroup in that we actually LIKE looking at the
nitty-gritty of computer internals.
G
George Macdonald
Your "view" is, to say the least, out of date. Some of the better brand
mbrds, like Asus, MSI, Tyan are the equal of, or better than, anything with
the Intel name on them, in the desktop space anyway. Everything is made to
a price point.
Rgds, George Macdonald
"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
D
Diskhead
AMD has made chipsets in the past but I think they got out of that biz
too. MB's from Asus and Abit using Nvidia chipsets are good AMD
platforms.
S
Stacey
Tony said:
It's just like when buying a car. Most people just ask stuff like "Is it a
V6?", "How big is the engine" "How much are the payments" etc. Some people
might ask for HP numbers. Very few would research the power to weight
ratio, disk brake diameters/stopping distances, torque curve etc.
T
tony
George Macdonald said:
Nah. It's just personal preference/opinion. I don't like to bother with the
also-rans.
For me, there's nothing that compelling with other boards unless of course an
AMD
CPU is being used. Here's how I simply divide it (desktops):
A. Intel CPU & MB,
B. AMD CPU & Asus MB.
The rest I don't bother looking at anymore. Servers of course are always all
Intel.
Tony
G
George Macdonald
Nah. It's just personal preference/opinion. I don't like to bother with the
also-rans.
For me, there's nothing that compelling with other boards unless of course an
AMD
CPU is being used. Here's how I simply divide it (desktops):
A. Intel CPU & MB,
B. AMD CPU & Asus MB.
This and your previous ramblings just reveal how clueless you are. Some of
the worst junk in the way of mbrds has been produced by Intel... or with
the Intel brand name on them. No wonder you end up with systems you are
unhappy with.
The rest I don't bother looking at anymore. Servers of course are always all
Intel.
Not for quite a while - Serverworks chipsets were used by Intel for some of
its own mbrds and would have been used for more of them if the tech folks
at Intel had been given a chance. Note also that Intel does not own the
server mbrd market. Now that Intel has cut Serverworks off from new FSB
iterations, Serverworks has thrown its hat in with AMD and Opteron - should
be interesting.
Rgds, George Macdonald
"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??
T
tony
George Macdonald said:
Plonk! This weeding out of useless posters really makes getting through
newsgroup reading quickly!
Tony
K
KR Williams
Plonk! This weeding out of useless posters really makes getting through
newsgroup reading quickly!
Amazing! Sooner or later he'll disappear because he'll have
plonked everyone with any real knowledge! He'll have no one to
talk to! Good idea, actually.
T
Tony Hill
Why is it that every time I think about this I keep getting this funny
picture of a guy in an Intel bunny suit in pain, hoping around on one
foot while holding a smoking gun?
As for the original posters comments about all-Intel for servers, I
think the fact that Intel simply does not have a 4 processor
motherboard in it's entire line-up should tell him something. Intel
is well behind the 8-ball on the server front right now. Their Xeon
chips get pretty badly owned by the Opterons in raw 32-bit
performance, they don't have 64-bit capabilities, they don't have a
chipset capable of running 4P or 8P servers, they don't have any > 2P
motherboards, etc. etc.
I don't know quite what's going on in Intel server camp, maybe they're
holding back to try and push Itanium instead? Regardless of the
reason, Intel had better be careful or they're just going to get
creamed by AMD on this one. AMD is offering better products across
the board for servers and it's only a matter of time before the Dell's
of the world realize it.