Is AMD Really a Sinking Ship?

[Sparky]

Amd ftl.

If you believe that, then please go back to the intel section. A post like that in the AMD section is pointless at best.

[Epicenter]

Or at least learn to type in coherent sentences that aren't 100% acronym. AMD survived much worse times like back in the days of K6/K6-II/K6-III. I've always built PCs on a tight budget and worked to get the best for my money-- low-end AMD CPU, feature-rich midrange motherboard with a lot of overclocking features, sufficient RAM with modest timings (since timings really mean nothing in the real world), midrange video card, get one good PSU and let it last for years.

That was my strategy when I built my 450 MHz K6-II box and OC'd it to 550 MHz, put as much RAM as possible in it, with a Voodoo 3 and overclocked the crap out of the V3 as well. I built a solid machine for next to nothing and while it would lose to Pentium II/III machines in benchmarks, for the few hundred dollars it cost me it did a marvelous job of it.

Now I run a machine with a Brisbane 4000+ X2, 2GB of Patriot DDR2-667, an eVGA 8600GT/256MB, on an mATX board in a small case, with the CPU OC'd from 2.1 to 2.9 GHz-- my machine won't win benchmarks with a more expensive C2D system, but it gets the job done faster than any machine I've ever owned, and keeping the system well tuned and the OS bloat-free it still runs circles around the PC of most people I know. It cost me very little ($600 + $200 for my liquid cooling system which should last me a very long time); when I want to go to an X4 it will cost me nothing but the cost of the CPU and a BIOS update (free) to do so. Had I opted for an Intel platform I'd be looking at a new board for chipset revision/VRM standards change reasons.

Whoever has the best numbers in SuperPI or what have you isn't the only choice out there. If Intel had a better platform available for less money when I built this box I'd have done so; I'm no fanboy and I'll go with the rational deal. But in this case, even given AMD's rumored 'sinking ship' status, they were the 'smarter choice'.

[nemrod]

I don't know exactly the meaning of flt. But according to your post it could be related to bankrupt.
And I'm not agree with your statment:

AMD survived much worse times like back in the days of K6/K6-II/K6-III.

You can't compare K6 period and actual period because new Fab, new technology costs explode. I don't hope amd go bankrupt but I'm not sure you could refer to the past to say they will not go. If they have not enought money they can't invest enought for the future

[hardrail]

Or at least learn to type in coherent sentences that aren't 100% acronym. AMD survived much worse times like back in the days of K6/K6-II/K6-III. I've always built PCs on a tight budget and worked to get the best for my money-- low-end AMD CPU, feature-rich midrange motherboard with a lot of overclocking features, sufficient RAM with modest timings (since timings really mean nothing in the real world), midrange video card, get one good PSU and let it last for years.

That was my strategy when I built my 450 MHz K6-II box and OC'd it to 550 MHz, put as much RAM as possible in it, with a Voodoo 3 and overclocked the crap out of the V3 as well. I built a solid machine for next to nothing and while it would lose to Pentium II/III machines in benchmarks, for the few hundred dollars it cost me it did a marvelous job of it.

Now I run a machine with a Brisbane 4000+ X2, 2GB of Patriot DDR2-667, an eVGA 8600GT/256MB, on an mATX board in a small case, with the CPU OC'd from 2.1 to 2.9 GHz-- my machine won't win benchmarks with a more expensive C2D system, but it gets the job done faster than any machine I've ever owned, and keeping the system well tuned and the OS bloat-free it still runs circles around the PC of most people I know. It cost me very little ($600 + $200 for my liquid cooling system which should last me a very long time); when I want to go to an X4 it will cost me nothing but the cost of the CPU and a BIOS update (free) to do so. Had I opted for an Intel platform I'd be looking at a new board for chipset revision/VRM standards change reasons.

Whoever has the best numbers in SuperPI or what have you isn't the only choice out there. If Intel had a better platform available for less money when I built this box I'd have done so; I'm no fanboy and I'll go with the rational deal. But in this case, even given AMD's rumored 'sinking ship' status, they were the 'smarter choice'.

Best post I've read here in a while.

Furthermore, Intel doesn't do themselves any favors releasing a new "bleeding edge" chipset every 3 months (seems like it) with no performance benefits. All I read for weeks was about this X38 chipset that turned out to be pretty useless. I don't buy Intel because there MB's are more expensive, their chips are more expensive.