[dragon69]

exactly ! why buy intel when amd can do as much and cost less!



!http://forums.pcworld.com/legacyimages/
1!



296 for the amd

http://www.newegg.ca...N82E16819103674



349.99 for the i7 920



http://www.newegg.ca...N82E16819115202



and 699.99 for the i7 940



http://www.newegg.ca...N82E16819115201



from newegg.ca here in canada in canadian dollars



so why pay a premium price for so little advantage ( the amd should over clock to somewhere between 3.6 to 3.8 with the stock cpu heatsink and fan but i don't know how much the intel will over clock with the stock heatsink and fan . . . you may need to pay for a high performance heatsink and fan to get a decent over clock)



this will also save money in that you will not need to but the expensive 3 channell ddr3 and will be able to get by with a good dual channel kit ( and for those over clockers the dual channel may be easier to over clock ) and a cheaper mother board

also a couple of 4770 will do pretty decent in most games and will run you only 220 (120 each after 2 x 10 rebates= 220 plus taxes and shipping) and will require a lot less power to run and that should equal to less heat in the case





why buy osx when windows is cheaper ( win 7 rc is free till june 2010 )

[dragon69]

or maybe it is not ok too spend extra money when it is macs vs windows but ok too spend it when it is amd vs intel ?

[TechieXP]

I can tell you how much. But before I get to it let me address your case. Yes you are correct. I am aware AMD chips perform better in many cases. It has been proven AMD chips process 3 instructions per clock cycle vs Intel 2 per clock cycle. Giving AMD an advantage..however in order for that advantage to work, you do need to program software to take advantage. THat is why MSFT works so much closer with Intel. Even though AMD makes good chips, Intel has proven to be the better platform. They both have chip problems. But Intel has been around and has way more experience. Intel equates to quality in chips...

But I have used system with AMD...I even owned one in the older K6 series...back in the 486 days. But I haven't tried them lately other then to play with a few laptops when I visit Best Buy. But I learned the hardward way that some name have proven value. And I do consider Apple one of them. But they certainly aren't the bestand neither is MSFT. But the approach is totally different.

As far as over-clocking the Pentium cpu has the best over-clocking features vs other chips from Intel. My present chip is one of the most sought because it is very stable at almost 2x's it clocked speed. I have teh Intel Core Duo 2.4Ghz...This isn't Core 2...this is from the first. It can be over-clocked to a stable 3.8Ghz and you could use the stock cooler if you want. But most over-clockers using ise better heatsinks and fans even on AMD chips. However...unlike Inte, AMD's cheapness comes at a cost. Example...there is a video on Tom's Hardware that shows and Intel Coppermine chip agaist a AMD Duron I think and they removed teh heatsink. The Intel overheated but the system slowed during a game and then it shut down. The AMD simply blew up. If you blow a chip and you blow that socket, that board is ruined. You are less likely to do so with an Intel chip. And in Servers where heat is a huge issue because system run none stop....you can't have failures. Intel chips are top natched. Yes they (AMD) have server chips...but speed at the cost of being reliable...reliable will always win in a corporate business. And if they use it...so should I. I have been using Intel chips since before Pentium...and I have never had a failure.

With video I prefer ATI. I have never used an Nvidia card. However in test after text, ATI costing less then Nvidia cards performed better. ATI cards even with graphics fully maxed and Anti-Aliasing maxxed a 8x...ATI cards in many cases show no noticeable change in play...yet SLI which cost more show sifnicant changes when using high settings. Which to me makes a Mac suffer. If someone is doing huge graphic intensive CAD like stuff...why choose a card that cost more...but perform worse?

Audio.I prefer Creative and even though most board come with sound...I don't use it. I use the Creative Fatality X-FI and it is way better than a builtin card...and I get to have EAX in my games when I play.

I am willing to spend more for better quality. But the fact I have the option to build my own system with what I like...I see no need to chance...even if a Mac si considered better. Grom what I have seen and worked with they are a viable option if I want to go that route. But I like be able to call something MINE. And I'll never have that with any brand name PC. As long as there name is on it...its theirs. You can do what you want with it...but its them you have to go to. I rather cut teh umbilical cord. There is nothing they do I can't do...except integrate. But I think I can live with that.

[TechieXP]

Depends on what you want.
I prefer Intel...but I would buy an AMD model in a pinch. Speed isn't important to me as much as being reliable.

[dragon69]

my point was if you want a decent over clock with intel you will need to buy a better cpu heatsink and fan but with the amd you can get a decent ( 3.6 or so) overclock with amd's heat pipe cpu collers so that woule decrease the said value even more of intel cpu's ( power per dollar ratio ) my heat pipe cpu cooler is very cool and also whisper quiet !



then also the extra cost of ddr3 tri channel vs ddr2 or ddr3 dual channel and also the intel platform mother boards seems to cost about a 30% premium over a amd motherboard ( might bcause of supply and demand as the intel mother boards are in a bigger demand right now but with this economy thing might slowly change and i think the economy is why netbooks are doing so well right now so it seems most people would give up some performance to get a better price ( or power per dollar ratio)



wish i never got this ati 4670 a few months ago as the 4770 seems like a sweet deal right now ( and i hope that in a month the 4770 will come out with a 1 gb ddr5 ( or maybe ddr3 ?) model at a decent price ( in the benchmarks that i have seen the 4770 in crossfire gives up some performance against a single but more expensive 280 gtx because of the limited amount of ram )

[dragon69]

also only 60 or 70 % of intels line up of cpus have the VT which will be needed if you want to run the " win xp mode " on win 7 rc

here on pc world they have two ( 1 for desktop and 1 for mobile cpus ) list for intel cpu as to weather or not they support Virulization Technology

[smax013]

TechieXP said:

Its price gauging. It may be legal...but it is orrally wrong. Just like I wouldn't support a company that uses sweat shops to make clothes and shoes...i won't support a company that purposely over-charge it customers mererl for profit and provide no benefit over lesser cost products.

But it is ok to treat yourself to something special..and there are lots of options that still get you more.

Personally, I find many of these claims of Macs being expensive to be highly misleading. Many such analysises fail to actually fully compare models that have specs that are as close as possible and even if they do, they tend to make wild claims about how some of the differences in specs amount to advantages one way or another.

Sure, you can get $500 Windows laptop, but does that $500 Windows laptop REALLY compare spec wise with the MacBook Pro that someone might try to compare them with? Not typiically even close.

And that does not even get into the intangibles (i.e. stuff other than hardware specs).

Personally, I buy Mac laptops because either support I have gotten on the Windows side has been crappy or the products have been crappy. Both of my Mac laptops have worked flawlessly for years (my MacBook Pro is now 3 years old and my Powerbook G3, which still works just fine, is about 10 years old)...my most recent Windows laptop has had constant problems. But, I am not the type of users that wants a "bottom line" computer. I want a higher end laptop. And when you truly compare specs of a MacBook Pro to a truly comparable Windows laptop, it usually compares rather well...certainly not nearly as bad as some would want you to believe.

On the desktop side, I build my own systems, which means Windows. The Mac Mini is too little for me and it is very much NOT upgradeable. The iMac is not an option for me as I don't want an All-in-One (if I did, I would just use my laptop). And while I would LOVE a Mac Pro, it is overkill for my purposes. Thus, due to Apple's product line, they force me over to Windows (that and I still like to and need to use Windows).

And as to performance, performance "kings" will change all the time. There was a stretch where PCWorld (if I recall correctly) found that MacBook Pros running Windows (in BootCamp) were faster than any available "actual" Windows computer. That has changed as the likes of Dell, HP, etc have come out with new hardware and Apple has lagged. And it is entirely possible that it will change back at some point, even if it brief in duration.

[TechieXP]

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz 2 x 4MB L2 Cache LGA 775 Quad-Core Processor - Retail
Model
Brand Intel
Processors Type Desktop
Series Core 2 Quad
Model BX80562Q6600
CPU Socket Type
CPU Socket Type LGA 775
Tech Spec
Core Kentsfield
Multi-Core Quad-Core
Name Core 2 Quad Q6600
Operating Frequency 2.4GHz
FSB 1066MHz
L1 Cache 128KB+128KB
L2 Cache 2 x 4MB
Manufacturing Tech 65 nm
64 bit Support Yes
Hyper-Threading Support No
Virtualization Technology Support Yes
Multimedia Instruction MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3,SSSE3, EM64T
Voltage 0.85V ? 1.5V
Cooling Device Heatsink and Fan included
Manufacturer Warranty
Parts 3 years limited
Labor 3 years limited

Looks like I pass. I support VT.
Highlights
Intel Core 2 Quad-core Processor
With four processing cores, the multitasking monster Quad-Core Intel Core 2 processor delivers twice the performance on highly-threaded applications, taking your desktop PC experience into a completely new realm of mega power. The powerful processor delivers serious performance on the ultra-demanding games of today and tomorrow.

Supports Intel Virtualization Technology (Intel VT)
With Intel VT, one hardware platform functions as multiple "virtual" platforms. For business, Intel VT offers improved manageability, limiting downtime and maintaining worker productivity by isolating computing activities into separate partitions. In the home, Intel VT allows creating unique user environments for multiple family members using the same platform simultaneously.

Enhanced Intel SpeedStep Technology (EIST)
EIST allows the system to dynamically adjust processor voltage and core frequency to decrease average power consumption and average heat production. Combined with existing power saving features, EIST may provide an excellent balance between providing power when you need it and conserving power when you don?t.

Scalability and Performance with Intel EM64T
Intel Extended Memory 64 Technology (Intel EM64T) can improve performance by allowing the system to address more than 4 GB of both virtual and physical memory. Intel EM64T also provides support for 64 bit computing to help handle the applications of tomorrow.

Execute Disable Bit (EDB)
Intel's Execute Disable Bit function can prevent certain classes of malicious "buffer overflow" attacks when combined with a supporting operating system. Execute Disable Bit allows the processor to classify areas in memory where application code can execute and where it cannot. When a malicious worm attempts to insert code in the buffer, the processor disables code execution, preventing damage or worm propagation.


Quick Specs
Brand Intel
Name Core 2 Quad Q6600
Operating Frequency 2.4GHz
Core Kentsfield
Multi-Core Quad-Core
CPU Socket Type LGA 775
FSB 1066MHz
Manufacturing Tech 65 nm
L2 Cache 2 x 4MB
Virtualization Technology Support Yes

[dragon69]

THE Q6600 HAS MOST OF THE POWER OF THE I7 920 WITH OUT THE HIGH COST ( well about 87 % of the power and yes it does have the virtualization technology) and i think it only supports dual channel ram which is usually enough but that is only necessary if you are interested in trying out the "win xp mode" in windows 7 rc or run a virtual machine ( both microsoft and sun have free versions and paid for versions and other companies too have their own versions )





virtual machines need extra ram so i hope you have at least 4 gb ( and i expect you do i think i remember reading some of your specs before in a past post ( not sure but my memory is not the greatest and i could be wrong)

[WinTard]

My Supra Turbo with normal compression and full boost is at 18psi.
My Corolla XRS normally aspirated at 11.5psi compression.
My Civic Si normally aspirated at 11.0 compression.

All require premium 92 octane or above. I've been using Sunoco 94 since it exists... No problems, detonation, pinging, or engine damage. Yet redline everyday whichever car I'm driving at the time.

Synthetic oil also helps. I use:

http://www.mobiloil....roil/oils/mobil10w-40.aspx

~~~~~~~~~~
Quality is never expensive.
~ Anonymous

[artzy65]

what the ... you posted to the wrong guy.... and why are you talking about cars in this thread anyway?

[artzy65]

You noticed how much trouble President Obama's crack about the Special Olympics got him into... right?
About your 'sensibilites'...."WinTard", huh...

[infoDave]

Same thing in OS X. The difference is that it gets in the way of the system wide spell check of OS X. Until the 3.0 version of Firefox, I had one spell check, one dictionary, for all of my applications. That's the way it should be. Now Firefox inhibits what I used to use in Firefox and still use in all of my other applications. Anybody have a fix?

OS X also has a system wide print preview and print to PDF. I've wasted much less paper since. Very cool. Very green.

[dragon69]

sorry dave i don't have any experience with macs but did you try disabling the firefox spell check and see if the system wide returns back to normal



wish i could of been of more helpful to you infodave



gl and tc



btw it is under Tools>

options>

advanced>

general >

then make sure " check my spelling as i type " is deselected

[Bandit4556]

I do have to say everything just got better...

I stumbled across CrossOver Games for Mac OS X that allows me to play PC Games on my Mac without even needing to purchase windows or boot into windows. There are also options to make the keyboard layout more of a Mac style or Windows style. Great program and now I can play Windows games on my Mac... So for anyone out there that wants to run the millions of games that are Windows only CrossOver Games makes it easy to do so. Also if you want to run any of the millions of apps on your Mac that were made for Windows only there is CrossOver or WINE which are both great Windows emulators on the Mac. Now that is not to say that Windows is better than Mac or vice versa I am just saying this nulls the excuse that people give when saying that Windows has more software... That may be but I can run them all on my Mac too...

[TechieXP]

And emulator no matter how well it is written is not as good as the real thing. I have console emulators...but it isn't as good as using the actual console with its own joypad. And to get a similar experience on my pc...i have to buy adapters to make it work the same...which means more money.

Also not all Windows applications run well in WINE. If it did you wouldn't need to install Windows on a Mac. They are simply alternatives to doing a direct install so that you don't have to dual boot. However dualbooting is better then any virtualized software. However unlike Macs...the CPU in most Windows based PC's have VT technology, which allow for software that is wriiten to take advantage to run almost identical to the real thing. For IT Pro this is a Godsned where you can run multiple OS's from a single server and have them all work as one machine. by why would a home user need all of that? I do use VM applications...and I don't like the overall...but they do make things a bit quicker when I need to do a quick check. High Def games don't run well in virtualized software. Try playing John Clancey's Hawk in a virtual pc and then play it on a native Windows PC....

Would you rather date a real woman...or one of those $10,000 fakes that only look/feel like the real thing? Here is one thing those dolls and virtualization have in common...they are only as good as your mind pretends them to be (sarcasm).

[GetReal]

Where would a person go to determine if a specific x86 processor actually had VT technology?

Why the need for +4 Gb memory when using this?

Thanks,

[dragon69]

The easy way is to go to Gibson Research Corperations website and down load a small program called SecurAble and run it ( download and installing and running this program took about two minutes )


www.grc.com/securable.htm



or you could go to ZDnet and read there lists ( one for mobile and one for desktop cpus )



[http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=946&page=3&tag=mncol;txt]



the second option would be better if you are shopping for a new computer but the first one is fast and easy
Message was edited by: dragon69

[Bandit4556]

[~179412] wrote "Would you rather date a real woman...or one of those $10,000 fakes that only look/feel like the real thing? Here is one thing those dolls and virtualization have in common...they are only as good as your mind pretends them to be (sarcasm)."

There is one problem about your statement...

You forgot to say what relationships and Windows have in common... The upfront cost is low but in the long run you will pay more than that $10,000 option! (sarcasm)

Since I have found CrossOver I have been able to run all of my Windows games on it without a problem... so I guess you will need to check it out again since last time you have (that is if you have ever used CrossOver for OS X or Linux) because I have not had any problems and not to mention CrossOver is $40 not $10,000. Compare that to the cost of Windows and the fact that I can copy files from my CrossOver drive (fake Windows drive) to my OS X drive as well as not having to shut down OS X to boot into Windows I would say it is a great option.

[TechieXP]

see of these help:

http://www.intel.com...ns.htm?iid=prodcore2duo+tabspec

http://www.intel.com...cifications.htm - T believe all the quads have VT.

http://www.intel.com...cifications.htm and i7 surely does


As far as why 4GB of ram? Depends. In my opinion and from usage...it depends on what OS you're using. 64 bit application appear to run faster because they load double the ram versus 32bit appz. However VT applications...if I am not mistaken...the software is using the VT that is on the chip to actually work directly with the CPU. In most virtual machines the ram and the CPU is directly accessed, while the other hardware is just software that mimic actual hardware. Which is why gaming can't happen in virtual pc's beyond simple ones. The graphics in virtual systems isn't a real card...its a software emulating one. You need more ram because when you load a virtual pc, it too will use your system ram. if you don't have enough, both virtual and you real pc will be slow.

Here are some other things you can do for speed. If you don't have more ra....Vista amd 7 offer the usage of flash drive to use Readyboost which is like adding more ram. When you install virtual pc's it is best to run them from another drive vs using your main drive. You could also install a vpc onto a flash drive if you like.

I also feel a quad core cpu is better for virtualization...that way you can have 2 for your own system and 2 you can use just for your vpc.