[QUOTE=Axiom :D;24893395]Stop being an intel fanboy, I did it and it got me no were. Accept the fact that it would work better for him.[/QUOTE]
prove it to me then mr. computer expert 15 year old
[QUOTE=Axiom :D;24893395]Stop being an intel fanboy, I did it and it got me no were. Accept the fact that it would work better for him.[/QUOTE]
You don't deserve to criticize other people about being intel fanboys yet.
[QUOTE=dewaf;24810375]how mature of you to do the same..
google it yourself, sherlock. the evidence is clear that i3 has falsified the claim that "amd is better for the money".[/QUOTE]
I recognize this, didn't ph0ne say exactly the same in his troll thread?
[QUOTE=thf;24895294]I recognize this, didn't ph0ne say exactly the same in his troll thread?[/QUOTE]
so me and ph0ne are the only people on this forum that actually encourage intel? what a shame.
Intel is good, but for budgets, AMD is mostly better
Guys guys what about my build?
Dewaf, I love how you say that AMDs CPU sucks because you just look at clock speeds and how high they can overclock. Why don't we grab some benchmarks for you. Be right back.
[QUOTE=dewaf;24900697]So ph0ne and I are the only people on this forum that actually encourage Intel? What a shame.[/QUOTE]
lol, way to go comparing yourself to ph0ne; It'll get you banned permanently before you know it.
An Athlon IIx3 for 70$ has the same performance of Intel's core i3 540 and costs 50$ less.
A Phenom IIx4 for 150$ performs along Intel's quad core and i5 series for alot cheaper.
Also, the post before you got banned calling me an AMD fanboy:
Ha, people are allowed to inform about a cheaper cpu that works just the same. Doesn't make them a fanboy, oh and you started flaming again in this thread :)
EDIT: Falco, I would change the mobo to an 870-g45 with the phenomIIx4 combo deal. 870 is pretty sweet for me, and it allows for crossfiring.
Also, maybe 4gb(2x2)1600MHz G.Skill 7-7-7-21 for 110$
Doesn't AMD tend to have higher clock speeds than Intel?
[url]http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2010/2010052401_Core_i3-550_mini-review.html[/url]
BAM!
[editline]01:27PM[/editline]
wow automerge but you get the point
That's dual cores, I'm talking about the clock speeds of only quads
[QUOTE=thf;24901224]That's dual cores, I'm talking about the clock speeds of only quads[/QUOTE]
The point still stands, AMD does better here. But you can't really compare quads to duals.
[QUOTE=xxncxx;24901105]Dewaf, I love how you say that AMDs CPU sucks because you just look at clock speeds and how high they can overclock. Why don't we grab some benchmarks for you. Be right back.[/QUOTE]
intels are clocked lower than amds you idiot, and overclocking is a big deal. if you don't know how to overclock you shouldn't even be building your own pc, nerd.
[QUOTE=Daltacentauri;24901110]lol, way to go comparing yourself to ph0ne; It'll get you banned permanently before you know it.
An Athlon IIx3 for 70$ has the same performance of Intel's core i3 540 and costs 50$ less.
A Phenom IIx4 for 150$ performs along Intel's quad core and i5 series for alot cheaper.
Also, the post before you got banned calling me an AMD fanboy:
Ha, people are allowed to inform about a cheaper cpu that works just the same. Doesn't make them a fanboy, oh and you started flaming again in this thread :)
EDIT: Falco, I would change the mobo to an 870-g45 with the phenomIIx4 combo deal. 870 is pretty sweet for me, and it allows for crossfiring.
Also, maybe 4gb(2x2)1600MHz G.Skill 7-7-7-21 for 110$[/QUOTE]
oh no, please dont get me permabanned just because you're nerd raging over my genius. also why dont you back up your claims with reliable statistics?
[QUOTE=xxncxx;24901192][url]http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2010/2010052401_Core_i3-550_mini-review.html[/url]
BAM!
[editline]01:27PM[/editline]
wow automerge but you get the point[/QUOTE]
useless statistics from a non-real world test, where clock speed only matters. wow, impressive. its also from a no-name review site that nobody goes on. good job buddy you really proved yourself there.
also nice user history there, youve been banned a lot for being stupid i assume?
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - SteveUK))[/highlight]
[url]http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Athlon+II+X3+445[/url]
[url]http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X4+965[/url]
EDIT: Also, I'm surprised that you never gave any links, or actual statistics of your own. Just the usual, "I'm right, and I need to bitch about it!"
So what xxncxx posted gave more proof then anything you have said so far.
PM a mod Odellus or somebody.
[QUOTE=Daltacentauri;24901899][url]http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Athlon+II+X3+445[/url]
[url]http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=AMD+Phenom+II+X4+965[/url]
EDIT: Also, I'm surprised that you never gave any links, or actual statistics of your own. Just the usual, "I'm right, and I need to bitch about it!"
So what xxncxx posted gave more proof then anything you have said so far.[/QUOTE]
why dont you reread my posts. i have already done the reading and what you're saying to me is contrary to what is true, so im asking you to back up your claims. also nice job at throwing [b]another[/b] useless non-real world test at me
[QUOTE=dewaf;24902078]why dont you reread my posts. i have already done the reading and what you're saying to me is contrary to what is true, so im asking you to back up your claims. also nice job at throwing [b]another[/b] useless non-real world test at me[/QUOTE]
So you admit to be just trolling now?
Never posted a link, just made conclusions that the i3 is better when an Athlon II gives the same performance and costs 40$ less.
Also, you called someone a 15 year old pc wiz, lol. Something tells me you're just a 14 year old getting his laugh on.
Don't forget, you tried to report two people for what they said about you before you were banned, I would guess that calls you a little nerdy kid as well?
Really this thread should be closed, op hasn't posted anything within 5 days and this thread is becoming nothing but arguments and Falco posting his build.
[QUOTE=Daltacentauri;24902263]So you admit to be just trolling now?[/quote]
how does that even imply trolling in the least bit?
[quote]Never posted a link, just made conclusions that the i3 is better when an Athlon II gives the same performance and costs 40$ less.[/quote]
im going off of [b]predetermined knowledge[/b], buddy. this implies that i read articles [i]before[/i] entering this thread and i am basing my arguments off of those.
[quote]Also, you called someone a 15 year old pc wiz, lol. Something tells me you're just a 14 year old getting his laugh on.[/quote]
just because i have a job, i graduated high school, and i dont spend all my time on the computer means im a 14 year old getting my laugh on? i think it implies more that im trying to shed light on the charlatans here.
[quote]Don't forget, you tried to report two people for what they said about you before you were banned, I would guess that calls you a little nerdy kid as well?[/quote]
no, it makes me someone who abides by the forum rules. they were flaming/trolling and i reported them for such accordingly. there's nothing nerdy about following the rules, buckaroo
[quote]Really this thread should be closed, op hasn't posted anything within 5 days and this thread is becoming nothing but arguments and Falco posting his build.[/QUOTE]
giving up? i win then, thanks ;)
[quote=dewaf]how does that even imply trolling in the least bit?
im going off of [b]predetermined knowledge[/b], buddy. this implies that i read articles [i]before[/i] entering this thread and i am basing my arguments off of those.[/quote]
You tell us you read articles, probably forums as well, and through websites that have never been mentioned by you. But actual benchmarks or other articles are considered, "Falsified" and "incorrect."
[quote=dewaf]just because i have a job, i graduated high school, and i dont spend all my time on the computer means im a 14 year old getting my laugh on? i think it implies more that im trying to shed light on the charlatans here.[/quote]
Great job, we can really tell you're 50 years old through the internet when you have a picture of your "daughter" as your user picture. Also calling people 15, virgins, or raging nerds seems to help back that statement up.
[quote=dewaf]no, it makes me someone who abides by the forum rules. they were flaming/trolling and i reported them for such accordingly. there's nothing nerdy about following the rules, buckaroo[/quote]
The same as the users on here did to you, although you try and say you haven't been flaming/trolling at all. We made a joke about you having a daughter posed in such a way as your user image, so that would count as "raging" and I can call you nerdy because you have the same average posts per day as me, but you have far less posts than me.
[quote=dewaf]giving up? i win then, thanks ;)[/quote]
Yup, can't forget the troll statement, "I win!"
It's simply because this thread has just gotten completely off topic since the last two quotes.
[QUOTE=thf;24900941]Intel is good, but for budgets, AMD is mostly better[/QUOTE]
Rate this man agree.
[QUOTE=dewaf;24901563]intels are clocked lower than amds you idiot, and overclocking is a big deal. if you don't know how to overclock you shouldn't even be building your own pc, nerd.
oh no, please dont get me permabanned just because you're nerd raging over my genius. also why dont you back up your claims with reliable statistics?
useless statistics from a non-real world test, where clock speed only matters. wow, impressive. its also from a no-name review site that nobody goes on. good job buddy you really proved yourself there.
also nice user history there, youve been banned a lot for being stupid i assume?[/QUOTE]
So if I build my own computer (which I am) and don't choose to overclock, then I shouldn't be building at all? What? You build PC's for customization, upgradability, not just overclocking.
Also, how am I a nerd, you post here too, you are no different. good job buddy you really made an ass of yourself there.
[QUOTE=xxncxx;24901192][url]http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2010/2010052401_Core_i3-550_mini-review.html[/url]
BAM!
[editline]01:27PM[/editline]
wow automerge but you get the point[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html[/url]
Here's another site, It's not very accurate because it thinks the 980X is slower than the 970.
[editline]10:44PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=dewaf;24901563] *retarded rambling*
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - SteveUK))[/highlight][/QUOTE]
Wow just get out already you have no idea what your talking about.
[QUOTE=poopsicle;24915361][url]http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html[/url]
Here's another site, It's not very accurate because it thinks the 980X is slower than the 970.
[editline]10:44PM[/editline]
Wow just get out already you have no idea what your talking about.[/QUOTE]
That's the site I was using to compare the Athlon II against i3's.
It matches an i3 for 130$ when the Athlon IIx3 costs 70$.
[QUOTE=thf;24901125]Doesn't AMD tend to have higher clock speeds than Intel?[/QUOTE]
Not really.
Either way, a AMD Athlon II 635 @ 2.9GHz is still gonna be beat by a Xeon X3440 @ 2.56GHz.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
