INTEL INTEL INTEL! GO INTEL!

G

Guest

Guest
Well, now this will be my second post here at Tom's, and well, its going to take and shoot down AMD! Below I am going to paste in the post I made in the GRAPHICS comment page...now I am going to follow up, please read it carfuly and my coments at the end..

Hello, I am a regular visit to Tom's hardware, but this is going to be my first post...
Well, as for the world of graphics cards I would have to say good job NVIDIA, but ATI STILL KICKS YOUR ASSS! Sure reviews say that the GForce2 and 3 series are suppose to be better than the ATI series, but I hate to break it to a lot of you NVIDIA users, ATI IS BETER, dont mean to be crule or anything...
I have the ATI All In Wonder Radion 32DDR AGP 4x system, for those of you who dont know, SVID IN/OUT, COMPONENT IN/OUT, SPDIF OUT, COAX IN, DIGITAL FLAT,CRT, or Touch screen out...
Out of personal tests, I have found that my ATI card still beats the competetion. At the place I work, we have a number of computer systems, so myself and a few others always take it upon ourselves to test new machines and grade them accordingly. Well, not to long ago we received nice new ATHALON (YUCKIES) systems at 1.1 and 1.2 ghz with 128 of either SD PC133 or DDR at 200, 40gb western digital or Maxtor HDD's and the NVIDIA GForce 2, GForce 3 and GForce 2+ all with either 16 or 32 mb of DDR. For benchmarking we us 3DMark 2000/2001. Nothing tests a systems performance beter than 3D rendering! Of the new systems their top score was only 1500. Prity pathetic for 1.1 and 1.2 Athalon systems. I personaly grade the machines according to my home machine whitch youll probably laugh, but I bet it still does better than most of peoples machines at 800mhz +. My system scores a score of 2550 with 3DMark 2000, and 1957 with 3DMark 2001...heres what i have...
Intel Celeron yes, the "C" word, at--400mhz,(I can get it up to 500mhz just by changing my bus, and core multiplyer, unfort there is no BiOS update for my motherboard, it only supports up to 500mhz, with some simple math i could probably get the chip up to 600+ mhz)
a Matsonic 7090S motherboard....i know, but its pritty good if you ask me!
192 pc 133 sd ram
30gb maxtor 5200rpm
10gb maxtor 7200rpm
creative 12x dvd
lg 4x4x32 cdrw
ATI All In Wonder Radeon 32DDR
and a simple DLink 10/100 NIC

So as it stands In my opinion, if a 1.1 or a 1.2 ghz ATHALON-meaning has all bells and whistles, with a quote on quote "Better" CARD cannot beat my "CELERON" at 400mhz, I would have to say that NVIDIA should try harder to gain my respect, but dont get me wrong they do have a great card, but the ATI does pritty damn good!

As you can see a graphics card does play an important role in the home pc and all other pcs, but as it stands, tests like 3DMark 2000 and 2001 also do relly on procesor speeds and abilities, so all I have to say is, look at the facts, and INTEL CELERON 400 beat an AMD ATHALON at 1.1 and 1.2 ghz. Also, in personal tests on the same machines, I found that the boot time between my personal machine and the 1.1 and 1.2 was actulaly better, my machine booted twice as fast and ran almost all aplications just as fast, the only part of my personal testing that the 1.1 and 1.2 procesors beat my machine was when burning a cd or processing large databases or graphic/data files over 100mb....in my opinion, INTEL ALL THE WAY!
 
G

Guest

Guest
true, amd does make a good system, i should try the tests again with updated drivers, but as an out of the box product, it did perform poorly. thanks for the input though
 

FatBurger

Illustrious
Jun 1, 2001
13,625
0
40,780
0
So AMD is crap because an OEM's system doesn't work well out of the box? Look at all of the MadOnion scores of AMD systems, you'll see that Tbirds are no slouch.

<font color=green>I post so you don't have to!
9/11 - RIP</font color=green>
 

njeske

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2001
400
0
18,780
0
GET THIS MORON OFF OF OUR FORUMS!!!!!

(AMD_Meltdown X FUGGER)^2 = funkyboi = the biggest troll at THG.

Get a grip dude. The only reason you score so low is because some OEM (that you have yet to name) built you a crap system. It is just coincidence that it is an AMD based system. You have yet to post any evidence of your claims, yet you continue to insist that you know what you're talking about.

Your 3dMark scores are either complete lies, or your system need BIOS updates and driver updates. Even an Intel system without the proper drivers and BIOS will run slower than it should.


<font color=red>"I'm not gonna launch a $2 million missile at a $10 tent and hit a camel's butt." -Bush</font color=red>
 

kurokaze

Distinguished
Mar 12, 2001
421
0
18,780
0
I believe he's referring to your 3dMark scores.

Please post the links to MadOnion.com for them.
If you did now submit your scores, I'm sure you
could rerun them?

Intel Components, AMD Components... all made in Taiwan!
 

Boondock_Saint

Distinguished
Jul 4, 2001
548
0
18,980
0
This guy is a moron:

#1 3D Mark 2001 Overall is a PATHETIC AND POINTLESS benchmark! The difference between a GeForce 3 and GeForce 2 Ultra, with a 1.4GHz Athlon and 512 DDR RAM, same mainboard an all, IS OVER 1500 POINTS! Way too graphics intensive if you ask me.
#2 The system you built/bought is garbage. Try installing all the needed drivers and so on, and watch that score rise to at least 3500. Your system had to have been built improperly.
#4 Nvidia = Pure Speed. ATI = Quality. Do not try to tell me that at this moment ATI cards are faster, because they just plain aren't. Look at your wonderful 3D Mark 2001 benchmark; their site has all the highest scores with Nvidia based cards.
#3 What a troll post. He makes the announcement that this is his 2nd post, his first being a troll post, this one linked to it. Pretty sad if you ask me.

Here's MY 3D Mark score, no tweaks, so on:

http://gamershq.madonion.com/products/orb/?3d2k1_details.shtml
 

flamethrower205

Illustrious
Jun 26, 2001
13,105
0
40,780
0
Can I just ask what will I notice in image qaulity if I were to switch to a Radeon? I have tried both, and havne't really seen any difference. I don't want to flame or anythinglike that, just wondering- is it my 4 year old 15" monitor maybe? I think that there may be a point where the human eye can't distinguish anyway.

U got a problem?! Then dial 1800-328-7448!
 

njeske

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2001
400
0
18,780
0
The Radeon has slightly better Anti-Aliasing and texturing capabilities than the GeForce2/3 series does. So on a really fast computer, with a really high quality monitor you will notice some difference. Also, ATI makes it a point to support higher resolutions at decent frame rates. That is why (typically) ATI can score higher than or on par with the GeForce2/3 in resolutions of 1280x1024 and higher.

The two companies just focus on different aspects of their products. Nvidia concentrates on raw speed so that they have awesome numbers to advertise with. ATI tries to woo their audience with high quality, high resolution screen shots.


<font color=red>"I'm not gonna launch a $2 million missile at a $10 tent and hit a camel's butt." -Bush</font color=red>
 

Matisaro

Splendid
Mar 23, 2001
6,737
0
25,780
0
#1 3D Mark 2001 Overall is a PATHETIC AND POINTLESS benchmark! The difference between a GeForce 3 and GeForce 2 Ultra, with a 1.4GHz Athlon and 512 DDR RAM, same mainboard an all, IS OVER 1500 POINTS! Way too graphics intensive if you ask me.
LOL it *IS* a videocard benchmark after all boondock LOL.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
 

Matisaro

Splendid
Mar 23, 2001
6,737
0
25,780
0
NO currently released ATI card can even come close to the gf3 with aa on at high resolutions.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~
 

kurokaze

Distinguished
Mar 12, 2001
421
0
18,780
0
Well I can tell you that when I upgrade from my
Matrox G400 to a Hercules GF2 MX I was very
disappointed in the image quality. The G400 was
really nice. The GF2MX was noticably grainy in
16-bit colour. Only at 32-bit colour was it
halfway decent.. and even then my old G400 produced
a better image.

Just my $0.02

Intel Components, AMD Components... all made in Taiwan!
 

charliec2uk

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2001
249
0
18,680
0
Why is 3D Mark 2001 a pathetic and useless benck mark?
It runs some demanding scenes and stress the 3D rendering capability of your system.

If you say that it's wholey synthetic and all that, it is useful as a relative indicator your system against every one else.
So it's not fair to call it useless, so nyaaahh.

Charlie

Democracy Bernad, it must be stopped!
 

charliec2uk

Distinguished
Jul 26, 2001
249
0
18,680
0
Anyway examples of this whole AMD/Intel debate can be found everywhere.

For example:
Conservative/New Labour
BMW/Mercedes
Windows/Linux
Boeing/Airbus Consortium

Hell, even in the Theatre world,
Vari-lites or Martin
Wholehog 2 or Avolites desks

They all start as intelligent debates and are taken over by those eccentricites of the human personality which, I think, just like to be able to annoy someone

Charlie

Democracy Bernad, it must be stopped!
 
G

Guest

Guest
You got 2 very badly put together Athlon systems. This does not meat that all Athlons are bad.
My computer:
1.2Ghz Athlon @ 1.32
256Mb 266Mhz DDR SDRAM
Nvidia GeForce 2 GTS 32 Mb DDR

3DMark 2000
8779
3DMark 2001
4071

-Mike
 

Raystonn

Distinguished
Apr 12, 2001
2,273
0
19,780
0
"Conservative/New Labour"
Conservative!

"BMW/Mercedes"
Neither!

"Windows/Linux"
Windows!

"Boeing/Airbus Consortium"
Um.. no opinion? ;)


(By the way, this is just a for-fun post, not to be taken seriously for debate in a CPU forum. Yelling out what you support is not really good practice in a debate anyway.)

-Raystonn


= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
 

Similar threads