New laptop :) battlefield 2 :(

[<DV8>mrbucket]

Re: New laptop :) battlefield 2

OK, I thought when you wrote about benchmarks, you comparing like CPU's. Again I'm not a fanboy, it just seemed a little unfair to compare apple's and oranges. LOL.

[scott123]

Re: New laptop :) battlefield 2

maranello: That was a LOAD of 100% tripe. You really are not posting accurate information when comparing AMD to Intel.

[raceacontari]

Re: New laptop :) battlefield 2

My old computer has a 1.4 processer, and it can play bf2. Now...it takes forever to load the game, but it can play it! So it doesn't have to be a 1.7 like the specs say....but lol...well, trust me, talk about slow on loading...I guess that's why its my old computer and the one I let my friends use when they come over to play

[GLENNYBOY1]

Re: New laptop :) battlefield 2

Is that a xp 1700+ in your old computer raceacontari?

If so what vid card u got in there cos ive got a 1700+ in my old system too,might upgrade it on the cheap to play BF2 on it as a back up if u think it'll play ok ..ish:)

[megamanfre]

Re: New laptop :) battlefield 2

depends...I have 2 PCs, one of them has 3700+ 64bit and the other one has 3.0 P4. I use P4 mostly. Why? Here is why, i can play FEAR, BF2, HL2 at the same time, doing alt+tab. it takes less than 2 seconds to switch between games (I have 2 GB DDR2 ram in P4, 2 GB DDR RAM in AMD). I never agree with the fact that "AMD is good for gaming"

1. The companies that does gaming performance reviews for processors, such as xlabs sell AMD, they have contracts with AMD, they get free AMD processors for their use so it is a known "fact" that they exaggarate AMDs

2. It depends on the person using the PC. If you are not using your PC for multi-tasking and you are a gamer and you use your hardware only for gaming, go ahead and buy AMD, why waste money on Intel. But if you are doing multi tasking and that doesnt include only switching between games too, AND if you are a programmer (like myself) and use your PC for other purposes (such as assembly, C++, math applications), then AMD is worthless and useless as P3.

Just ask yourself this question. Why people keep saying AMD is better than intel? First of all the average gamer is not very rich so they can't afford to have an Intel system. Not only their CPUs (intel) cost more, but their motherboard, DDR2 ram, etc cost more as well. Do you really think there is such thing as "cheap and faster"? Well as a programmer, i can tell you it does not exist in software industry.

Also just ask yourself this question too, why in the world, all the big corporations, such as microsoft, IBM, sun, Dell, HP, GM, GE, Texas Instruments, even NASA, uses Intel instead of AMD. Do you think these people are dumb and love wasting money on a slow processor? No, of course not. It's obvious that they know something more than most of you guys do. AMD makes their processors mostly for graphical applications use, games on the top of the list. AMDs are so slow, so behind, using very old technologies in mathematical calculations. And let me tell you this, by mathematical calculations, i don't just mean math. applications such as mathematica or maple, i mean compiling a DVD video, or compiling a C++ project, or writing a Java web applet, all of these things include math, and Intel has FAR advanced tehcnology than AMD will ever achieve in the next 10 years.

Whatever you say, flame me if you want. I studied both of their architecture, i know how they work. AND i, myself, spent a little over $2000 and built an AMD system. Oh before i finish my post, here is the system specifications for the PCs i have.

1.
P4 3.0 ghz/HT Prescott Core
Intel DXCV925 Mobo
2 GB DDR2 667 Mhz (1024 x 2)
Gefore 7800 GTX OC (575 mhz/1150 mhz)
80 GB SATA

2.
AMD Athlon 64 bit 3700+
Asus Mobo
2 GB DDR 400 mhz (1024 x 2)
Geforce 6800 GT OC (don't remember mhz)
100 GB SATA (newer than P4 harddrive)

1st PC cost around $3000 with the accessories, like 6.1 sound system, 2 x 21" monitors, etc.
2nd PC cost around $2100 with everything

And 1st PC basically owns the second one in every application i run, from compilers, to DVD watching, to playing games. Oh an also

In the first one, i run BF2 at

1600 x 1200
High Settings
Ultra High Sound
32 AA
8 AF

I get around 65-75 fps

In the second one, i run BF2 at

1024 x 768
High Settings
Ultra High Sound
16 AA
4 AF

I get the same fps.

Well this also depends on the fact that first one has a better video card, but that's not the point.

The point is, the entire world is using Intel except gamers and some other graphical designers. Software industries, military industries, car companies, web developers, every major corporation is using intel. This is the same in US, same in Europe, same in Asia. You can look at how much Intel made last year and how much AMD made last year. In fact, what AMD made from CPU sell is less than what Intel made from its motherboard sell. You are comparing oranges and apples. Like comparing Sun and Microsoft.

Don't forget, i am one of the AMD buyers too, so i m not here to flame you or anybody else. Since you said it's a "fact", i wanted to give you some "real facts".

Actually, the government has contracts with Intel, and because of this, they dont pay nearly as much as we do for a processor. AMD wouldnt budge on their discount, while Intel took the beating the Government gave them on prices.

You need to keep something in mind, when you deal with the government, you dont tell them how much its gonna cost, they, more or less, tell you. You sell them something that you are charging, with a discount, for 3k, and they will give you 2500, and thats it. You either take it or leave it. If you dont like it, you take it, then dont accept their business next time around.

The cost for intel to make their processor is small enough where they dont really lose money. They dont lose money, because the government more or less knows exactly how much the product they are buying costs (or should) and will pay you the literal cost for the parts, not the labor, which is where everyone takes it in the bum.

I think it costs something like $50 to make an iPod, and they sell it for like 4 or 500. The labor is where theyre raping you, and then they inflate a bit for profit, so you really are paying out the ass for just about everything.

[zacman13245]

Re: New laptop :) battlefield 2

intel funded the holocaust.