| Quote: |
|
Originally Posted by midnighter
Hahaha... ok. So because you say one person's right, that obviously means I must be wrong 
I dunno.. maybe the difference is I'm not looking at the highest end CPU's?
Keep on with your brand loyalty if you like, I'll keep riding the waves and buying the best price/performance CPU every few years whether it be AMD, Intel or another company to crop up. |
|
Oh no dude, i think ur mistaking what im saying...
Price/Performance to me has a lot more meaning than most people...
If i CAN OC my computer..i WILL...EVERY computer ive EVER owned has been OC'd...EVERYONE...
And its been a known fact that AMD has had the upper hand in price/performance AKA bang for buck for YEARS now...YEARS...
I take MUCH pride in that fact when i baught my 2 AMD Athln 64 3000+ Venice core CPU's they were retailign for $185 a piece...i go them for $179 each taxes in...
Stock they run @ 1.8Ghz...i have 1 oc'd to 2.7Ghz and the other one at 2.75GHz...both on stock heatsink and fans and relatively low voltage...both 100% rock-solid stable...
im faster than a stock Athlon FX-57 (The leader in single core CPU performance) because ive got a MUCH higher HTT/FSB bandwidth than it does stock...and that chip goes for almost a $1000...
U gonna argue that?
Theres no Intel CPU that u can buy and OC with similar/better results for same or less money invested as a whole in the system...and EVEN if u could it would REQUIRE a more expensive MB and more expensive DDR2 ram...
-Jay
1320drag
