| Quote: |
|
Originally Posted by midnighter
Dude, you constantly argue that AMD has always been some sort of underdog and always had cheaper and faster CPU's. Which just isn't true.
The prices of the Athlon systems similar in performance to the 2.4 I bought were more expensive and performed about the same. I know of course you would say the AMD CPU is better, but I look at every benchmark I can find for the systems I'm ready to purchase. I made my decision based on research and no, the Athlon CPU was not faster, nor was it cheaper.
|
|
I dont know where u bought ur parts from than man...Now do i know where or what benchmarks ur looking at.
Wanna see my 2.7Ghz Athlon smoke 3.8Ghz Pentium 4's? or how about my single core 2.7Ghz smoking dual xeons ?
go to
www.infonec.com or
www.liata.com and tell me where u see a Intel CPU being cheaper than the equivelant/comparable AMD cpu.
I baught a 2500+ Barton 2 years ago. I almost went with a 2.4B Pentium 4, but i could seem to justify the extra $35 THAN for the CPU and the extra $40 for the MB compared to the AMD's.
I bought from Infonec the 2500+ for $125, Abit NF7-S 2.0 motherboard for $120...try and find a good quality comparable enthusiasts motherboard like that for the same/less money...
I benchmarked higher than my buddies P4 2.4b system i built for him a week after i built my system and he spent close to $90 MORE just on the CPU/MB combo than i did...
Even right now a Socket 478 2.4 P4 is selling for $139...whereas an AMD athlon xp 2500+ Mobile (which is even better than the desktop version) is selling for $118
Grab say a good AGP video card and 1GB of ram of unknown brand and a comparable Intel Socket 478 MB and ull see the AMD system not only costs less but benchmarks higher aswell.
1320drag
