sliderider wrote:

Dominus wrote:

Quoting whole articles should be avoided. Wherever that was posted probably lives on ad income. You should only quote a small part and link to the original article. Full quote only makes this site look bad and vulnerable to copyright infringement claims...
People should be glad I'm not a mod 😉

Some people don't like clicking links that send them to unknown places, which was why I quoted in addition to providing a link. Some people are also too lazy to click the link.

So you rather help them than protect this site? Very cool.

Tetrium wrote:

DonutKing wrote:

The only socket hopping AMD ever did was when they first introduced their A64, but Intel just loves to make changes and leave people with an older Intel platform without an upgrade path (Tualatin, s423 and 1156 come to mind).

Oh, you mean like when they went from Super 7 to Slot A, to Socket A then 754/939/940 and THEN to the AM sockets? Nah, not much socket hopping going on there.

We are still talking about the same thing, perhaps just on different wavelengths.
Fair point on Socket 5 and 7 but I touched on that in my post.

Tualatin is built on a lower process and therefore uses a lower voltage. In the past that would mean an entirely different socket but Intel decided to stick with the same form factor socket for some reason. Many early 370 motherboards didnt have adjustable VRM so making them run at the Tualatin's voltage wasn't possible.

As for Netburst, socket 423-478 is a prime example of 'socket hopping'.

DonutKing wrote:

We are still talking about the same thing, perhaps just on different wavelengths. Fair point on Socket 5 and 7 but I touched on […]
Show full quote

We are still talking about the same thing, perhaps just on different wavelengths.
Fair point on Socket 5 and 7 but I touched on that in my post.

Tualatin is built on a lower process and therefore uses a lower voltage. In the past that would mean an entirely different socket but Intel decided to stick with the same form factor socket for some reason. Many early 370 motherboards didnt have adjustable VRM so making them run at the Tualatin's voltage wasn't possible.

As for Netburst, socket 423-478 is a prime example of 'socket hopping'.

No, you don't understand. At least not completely

I've recently tested a VIA C3 on a CUSL2 motherboard and the board correctly supplies the CPU with 1.45v, the exact same voltage required by Tualatin.
Same with Slot 1, some motherboards support Coppermine just fine as long as the board can supply a low enough voltage because Intel made the CPU's in such a way that voltage was the only relevant change from Katmai.
But with Tualatin Intel purposefully chanced a couple pins around on purpose so it would not work in older boards because Intel wanted people to buy a new motherboard.

And many Socket 7 TX boards would even work with chips made 2 years later (think K6-X and K6-X+).
These days an Intel board made now will not work with a chip made 2 years in the future as Intel will have hopped to a different socket by then.

sliderider wrote:

Tetrium wrote:

The only socket hopping AMD ever did was when they first introduced their A64, but Intel just loves to make changes and leave people with an older Intel platform without an upgrade path (Tualatin, s423 and 1156 come to mind).

Oh, you mean like when they went from Super 7 to Slot A, to Socket A then 754/939/940 and THEN to the AM sockets? Nah, not much socket hopping going on there.

No, that is NOT SOCKETHOPPING

AMD had to chance from Socket 7 to Slot A as Athlon would not work in Socket 7. They had to change. But seriously, isn't that obvious to you??

Intel could have made Tualatin compatible with Coppermine boards, but they choose not to.
And how can AMD be socket hopping with Socket A? That socket existed for years?
But what about people who bought a s1156 board? If they ever want to upgrade or replace a broken part, they will have to buy a s1155 board with an incompatible chip, so the chip must be replaced as well.

Socket hopping is changing sockets deliberately by making little changes with the intended purpose to make older hardware incompatible faster.
Socket 7 existed for a very long time, Socket A existed for a very long time and now the AMX platform has existed for a long time.
That's not hopping as AMD is at least trying to not break compatibility and Intel does the exact opposite.

sliderider, you brought in a good topic. There's nothing wrong in quoting as long as the quote refers to the original and is unaltered.

intel's chips are ahead, but the bias maybe, just maybe, true. Nowadays, people tend to look at how many points a benchmark shows the lead by a particular hardware. Even if the difference is in decimals, they will garner an "Editor's Choice" or "Excellence Award".

In this corporate-minded world, anything is possible.

For us, let's just enjoy with what we can afford and with what we can enjoy ourselves. Chips makers will always keep making faster and faster chips. They survive by selling chips. It's important that we should not fall into that trap. I myself was once upgrading, just because "a new hardware" is available, just for the sake of upgrading. I have been missing out the real reason why I upgraded in the first place.

But if one has money to burn, there's no reason to hold back either. It's the respective's money, anyway. 😉

For me, as you already know, "Down with corporate bastar*s!" 😁

Malik wrote:

But if one has money to burn, there's no reason to hold back either. It's the respective's money, anyway. 😉

Sorry having to bring up my point again. The second fastest Sandy Bridge CPU from Intel sells for ~ AUD 200.

I hear what you are saying, and five years ago that was a valid point. But at the moment PC hardware is cheap as chips.

I don't know what AMD can do, because a lower price isn't cutting it anymore with Intel CPUs selling for so little these days.

And to Tetrium defense, (to me at least) it's common knowledge that when Intel releases a new CPU, you buy a new mainboard. It's been like this since day one...

Asrock often showed that you can indeed use older chipsets with newer CPUs.

Malik wrote:

For me, as you already know, "Down with corporate bastar*s!" 😁

How about "Down with socialist s*um"? 😁

It's good to have choices, the more the merrier. Personally I'm still on the 1-core train and none of the applications I regularly use has any problems with that, plus I get much better compatibility for dual-booting with older systems.

Mau1wurf1977 wrote:

Sorry having to bring up my point again. The second fastest Sandy Bridge CPU from Intel sells for ~ AUD 200. […]
Show full quote

Malik wrote:

But if one has money to burn, there's no reason to hold back either. It's the respective's money, anyway. 😉

Sorry having to bring up my point again. The second fastest Sandy Bridge CPU from Intel sells for ~ AUD 200.

I hear what you are saying, and five years ago that was a valid point. But at the moment PC hardware is cheap as chips.

I don't know what AMD can do, because a lower price isn't cutting it anymore with Intel CPUs selling for so little these days.

Interesting
It's also the boards that used to be more expensive, but having taken a look at s1155 boards, they are similarly priced to AM3+ boards. Surprising!

But still I don't like Intel for it's socket hopping. Theres no telling if Intel will make current boards incompatible again by releasing Socket 1154 or something 🤣 😜

And with AMD, I like the fact that their hardware is very compatible.

Edit:
So in short, what are the advantages and disadvantages of either an Intel or an AMD platform these days?

I'd say the advantages of AMD are:
- Overall better hardware compatibility
- Better availability of CPU's with a free multiplier and often better overclocking options on even the cheaper boards
- Less hassle to repair older systems as compatible hardware is wider available and also cheaper (a friend had to repair his Intel system and it's costs have already exceeded €400 extra).
Disadvantages:
- Generally are harder to overclock then Intel (though both have good overclocking options these days).
- Older architecture that, lets face it, is inferior to what Intel has now (this is excluding Bulldozer however, it's not out yet).

Advantages of Intel:
- Currently has similarly priced parts to AMD
- Iiuc, Intel does run cooler then AMD (better manufacturing process then AMD).
Disadvantages of Intel
- Even if initially it may be as cheap as AMD, if your hardware breaks down the road, you'll still end up having paid more then if you had gone the AMD route
- Intel - loves - sockethopping! 😁

There's nothing wrong in quoting as long as the quote refers to the original and is unaltered.

He didn't mark it as quotation and as such it reads like it's his wording.

As has been stated this should be avoided so try to respect this, and as a bonus hint: there's even an edit button.

Tetrium wrote:

And with AMD, I like the fact that their hardware is very compatible.

I have to disagree on this one.

I mean look at Phenom. How many chipset and CPU revisions did it take for it to be competitive?

Core 2 Duo and Lynnfield did a slam dunk in comparison.

Especially when you consider compatibility, Intel is the way to go.

I thought once that I should go with AMD because then the chipset, CPU and video card will be from one company and this will offer a "smoother" performance. But that was just marketing (Spider platform) or whatever it was called 🤣

wd wrote:

There's nothing wrong in quoting as long as the quote refers to the original and is unaltered.

He didn't mark it as quotation and as such it reads like it's his wording.

As has been stated this should be avoided so try to respect this, and as a bonus hint: there's even an edit button.

Oh I see what you mean. (Duh!) 😁

@sliderider, just use the quote commands [qu***], [/qu***] to prevent misunderstandings.

Mau1wurf1977 wrote:

I have to disagree on this one. […]
Show full quote

Tetrium wrote:

And with AMD, I like the fact that their hardware is very compatible.

I have to disagree on this one.

I mean look at Phenom. How many chipset and CPU revisions did it take for it to be competitive?

Core 2 Duo and Lynnfield did a slam dunk in comparison.

Especially when you consider compatibility, Intel is the way to go.

I thought once that I should go with AMD because then the chipset, CPU and video card will be from one company and this will offer a "smoother" performance. But that was just marketing (Spider platform) or whatever it was called 🤣

I agree with what you say here. I remember the very first Phenom to be rather unimpressive.
It was slow and hot.
But Intel was much more expensive at the time.
What I meant with compatibility is that with the AMX platform, it's much easier to switch CPU's and boards around as AM3 CPU's were made to work in AM2 boards.

Ever since Intel left s775, they have been changing sockets a lot, leaving people with very little to upgrade to.

And another reason for me to be suspicious of Intel's intentions is that they have a monopoly on their platform and thus don't really have any reason to speed up "evolution" on their platform. USB3 comes to mind which Intel isn't in a hurry to implement

Edit:merged 2 of my posts into 1

Malik wrote:

@sliderider, just use the quote commands [qu***], [/qu***] to prevent misunderstandings.

I just use the little quote thingy in the top right corner and edit out unrelated parts, trying to not break anything as I go along 😜

I made a new topic so we can discuss our Intel vs AMD there 😜
Link: Intel vs AMD? Or should I say Intel and AMD?

Tetrium wrote:

No, you don't understand. At least not completely […]
Show full quote

DonutKing wrote:

We are still talking about the same thing, perhaps just on different wavelengths. Fair point on Socket 5 and 7 but I touched on […]
Show full quote

We are still talking about the same thing, perhaps just on different wavelengths.
Fair point on Socket 5 and 7 but I touched on that in my post.

Tualatin is built on a lower process and therefore uses a lower voltage. In the past that would mean an entirely different socket but Intel decided to stick with the same form factor socket for some reason. Many early 370 motherboards didnt have adjustable VRM so making them run at the Tualatin's voltage wasn't possible.

As for Netburst, socket 423-478 is a prime example of 'socket hopping'.

No, you don't understand. At least not completely

I've recently tested a VIA C3 on a CUSL2 motherboard and the board correctly supplies the CPU with 1.45v, the exact same voltage required by Tualatin.
Same with Slot 1, some motherboards support Coppermine just fine as long as the board can supply a low enough voltage because Intel made the CPU's in such a way that voltage was the only relevant change from Katmai.
But with Tualatin Intel purposefully chanced a couple pins around on purpose so it would not work in older boards because Intel wanted people to buy a new motherboard.

And many Socket 7 TX boards would even work with chips made 2 years later (think K6-X and K6-X+).
These days an Intel board made now will not work with a chip made 2 years in the future as Intel will have hopped to a different socket by then.

sliderider wrote:

Tetrium wrote:

The only socket hopping AMD ever did was when they first introduced their A64, but Intel just loves to make changes and leave people with an older Intel platform without an upgrade path (Tualatin, s423 and 1156 come to mind).

Oh, you mean like when they went from Super 7 to Slot A, to Socket A then 754/939/940 and THEN to the AM sockets? Nah, not much socket hopping going on there.

No, that is NOT SOCKETHOPPING

AMD had to chance from Socket 7 to Slot A as Athlon would not work in Socket 7. They had to change. But seriously, isn't that obvious to you??

Intel could have made Tualatin compatible with Coppermine boards, but they choose not to.
And how can AMD be socket hopping with Socket A? That socket existed for years?
But what about people who bought a s1156 board? If they ever want to upgrade or replace a broken part, they will have to buy a s1155 board with an incompatible chip, so the chip must be replaced as well.

Socket hopping is changing sockets deliberately by making little changes with the intended purpose to make older hardware incompatible faster.
Socket 7 existed for a very long time, Socket A existed for a very long time and now the AMX platform has existed for a long time.
That's not hopping as AMD is at least trying to not break compatibility and Intel does the exact opposite.

How was Socket A not sockethopping? Couldn't they have put those processors on Slot A cards and continued using Slot A?

sliderider wrote:

How was Socket A not sockethopping? Couldn't they have put those processors on Slot A cards and continued using Slot A?

It wasn't as Socket A was kept alive for a very long time.
If AMD wanted to, they could've changed 2 pins so newer CPU's wouldn't boot in older Socket A boards (like Intel did with the Tualatin, or how Intel castrated the Tillamook to not work correctly in Super 7 boards) but my point is that they didn't.

Socket A superseded Slot A as CPU manufacturing was advanced enough to allow very large L2 caches on-die and thus the Slot CPU's had lost their right of existence. Also Slot A was more expensive to manufacture then Socket A so moving to Socket A was a logical move on AMD's part.
And in the same time Intel did it's sockethopping thing with s370, starting with Tualatin. When Intel found out people figured out a way to use Tualatins in their own non-Tualatin boards by using a linlin, Intel even went through the effort to update it's BIOS so their Coppermine boards wouldn't work with a Tualatin anymore!
And no such crap came from AMD

Okay whatever. You can split hairs all you like but my point was that Intel has been swapping CPU sockets unnecessarily since long before LGA775 came along.

How was Socket A not sockethopping?

Socket A had a pretty good run, it was around while Intel went from 370 to 423 to 478 to LGA775.

DonutKing wrote:

Okay whatever. You can split hairs all you like but my point was that Intel has been swapping CPU sockets unnecessarily since long before LGA775 came along.

How was Socket A not sockethopping?

Woops DonutKing, I was typing a long reply before I noticed I was replying to you instead of sliderider! (Since you changed your avatar, I keep mixing you 2 guys up, my bad! 😜 )

I agree with you here, Intel likes to change sockets unnecessarily while AMD has only done so when they first released their A64 line and Intel was still messing around with netburst.
I trust AMD will try to give it's users now a way to upgrade in the future while Intel is actually trying to force people to keep buying new motherboards, and for me this trust is actually a reason for me to prefer AMD over Intel.

When I buy new hardware, the last thing I need is having to spend hours of time and lots of extra cash to keep older hardware going simply because some manufacturer decided to go proprietary on me 😵

Tetrium wrote:

I agree with you here, Intel likes to change sockets unnecessarily while AMD has only done so when they first released their A64 line and Intel was still messing around with netburst.
I trust AMD will try to give it's users now a way to upgrade in the future while Intel is actually trying to force people to keep buying new motherboards, and for me this trust is actually a reason for me to prefer AMD over Intel.

Worst offenses for Intel in that regard is making Tualatins incompatible with FC-PGA and the current ridiculous number of platforms- all of which are destined to be dead ends. s775 was pretty great though, my P965 Asus P5A (5 years old) runs Wolfdales with a bios upgrade and you can fit in anything from a lowly P4 to a quad.

For AMD, deliberately and suddenly just killing off s939. If you avoided that turkey, the later AM2+ woulda given you many years of super service. I can even run a Phenom II on my AM2+ 690G board (4 years old)! and a Thuban on my 780G board (2 1/2 years)... talk about upgradeability.

Maybe the current Intel trend of near zero upgradeability has to do with economics more than anything- currently hardware is cheap and the additional costs of a motherboard is not what it used to be.

These days when people say they're going to upgrade their computer, what they really mean is they're going to build or buy a whole new one... Upgrading or adding to existing hardware doesn't seem to be as popular these days (i blame Intel).

I have no issues buying a new mainboard. Even if the socket is the same and you could upgrade the CPU, this view is flawed because everything else in the system is old and will hold you back.

While you can stick an AM3 CPU into an AM2+ board, most of them are "stuck" on DDR2 which is heaps more expensive compared to DDR3.

Some boards are still PCIe 1.0 and stuck on HT 2.0 or don't support some features of the CPU (cool and quiet) and things like that.

Just like some boards can run Bulldozer, but not every feature will work. There is always a catch or some restriction.

Simply put, never ever consider things such as "upgradeability". It's a marketing term to lure you to buy a certain product but the IT world moves so fast, not worth it.

With so much overclocking headroom these days, who really upgrades the CPU these days? Most AMD CPUs are fully unlocked and you can even unlock cores. Even Intel is doing unlocked CPUs now...

I remember when the AMD 6 core CPU came out. Most boards received a BIOS update, but this didn't stop many of the AMD fans to buy a 6 core CPU AND a new 8 series chipset board! Why? I have no idea 😁

Anyone remember eSATA? For a while this was a reason to buy a new mainboard. But then you also wanted to buy a new case, one that has eSATA at the front or top.

But now we have USB 3.0 and we have the same issue. You case needs to also come with USB 3 plugs...

And what's around the corner? Intels highspeed interface lightpeak / thunderbolt.

Oh and then there is UEFI BIOS and support for 3TB drives. Again something that only a mainboard swap can do.

Still wondering what the go is with UEFI. I mean my Asrock board has this, but what's the big deal? It has exactly the same options as the normal BIOS, just looks nice and has mouse support. AMI Win BIOS did this 10+ years ago 🤣

So yea, don't worry about upgradeability. Buy the cheapest gear that does what you need now and upgrade more frequently...