Quote:
Originally Posted by CRussel
Yes, that's EXACTLY what they were pushing. And yes, it would have been more than RANT-worthy. They were way late to the party, and it was only AMD actually delivering the hardware, while MS delivered the OS, that forced Intel to grudgingly deliver a (very late) x64 processor.
|
I can remember that... wasn't it the first Opteron, that made 64-bit hardware affordable in 2003? (edit:
Yes.)
Quote:
|
Which is why all the Windows distributions had an \amd64 folder, even when installing on an Intel x64. And boy, didn't Intel hate THAT.
|
Suck it up Intel... there is enough stuff that AMD has had to license/use from Intel.
While I can't say I 'hate' AMD (or ATI), I don't really like them either. Every time I encounter something known as "weird shit", it almost always is on a computer running an AMD part, be it a CPU or graphics card. Maybe it's just me :X But, as you say, we need another force in the market to prevent an Intel monopoly.
=====
Regarding CPU and mainboard, I've been looking into that. The i7-5820 costs €400 over here, and the cheapest mainboard is the Gigabyte GA-X99-UD4 at €200, which can handle up to 64GB RAM.
When comparing the 5820 to the 4790,
there is not a big difference.... The difference is 15%. However, the setup is *much* more expensive because the CPU is +/- €100 extra, the mainboard is twice as expensive as I would pay for a good socket 1150, and DDR4 memory is almost twice as expensive as DDR3. (Dutch prices.)
A mainboard, 6-core i7-5820, 16GB setup would cost me €800 at least.
A mainboard, 4-core i7-4790K, 16GB setup would cost me €500 on average; less if I wanted to.
While I would normally take the i7-5820 over the i7-4790K, even at a somewhat higher price, >= €300 extra for 15% performance gain (and a LOT of performance loss when not using all cores) is a bit much I think. In addition, I won't ever fill up those 8 memory slots to hold 64GB before the entire computer gets obsolete.
The difference in price is a quite powerful graphics card such as the GTX 970 or it's successor, and I think that, if the i7-4790K becomes too old to handle stuff, the i7-5820 will be as well, because of the marginal difference.
(By comparison, the upgrade from the E8500 to the Q8400 boosted the performance of this computer by about 40%, not to mention the HDD->SSD and 9600GT -> GTX 560 upgrades, and because I could sell the older hardware at OK prices, it wasn't an expensive upgrade either.)
Maybe I'm yet sticking to a 4 core i7 and DDR3... except if something drastically changes in the next 6 months.