Intel Snags PC Mhz Crown Back From AMD 209
textral writes "The Adrenaline Vault is running an article about Intel announcing the new jewel in its crown, the 800mhz PC, again foisting the 'fastest processor on the market' belt away from AMD's 750mhz Athlon. " Its fun watching the big boys do battle over silly little things like megahertz. Every time they up the ante, my poor P2 feels slower and slower. Jerks.
More power needs more power (Score:1)
Re:You know, I bet... (Score:1)
Re:Intel lost me.... (Score:1)
If you'd bothered to inform yourself about the issue, you'd know that the alleged "off" switch can be cracked. Thus, your statement is as inane as a spammer's "remove" instructions.
/.
Re: What? (Score:1)
Anything in software can be erased (repeatedly wipe-erased, if you really want to be sure) by the user, after which it is inaccessible to crackers because it simply no longer exists. This is not the case with an embedded chip ID.
This implies a certain lack of worth for said feature, but it also implies complete harmlessness for those with even the vaguest clue.
Someone who is unclear on the concept that software is fundamentally different from hardware is in a remarkably poor position to lecture people about their cluefulness level.
/.
Re:Irrelevant due to Architecture (Score:1)
AMD do have a 1GHz Athlon on the market - it's in the Kryotech SuperG machine, retailing at $2200 I think and available now.
Since Kryotech stuck with AMD through the leaner periods until now, it's nice to see their cooling technology get a worthy processor.
Of course, the general media haven't caught up to this, which is odd given that there was a howling crowd of posters in one of the talkbacks to an article on ZDNet looking at the race to 1GHz all wondering why the Kryotech machines aren't being more widely publicized. No wonder I keep bumping into conspiracy theories about Intel 'warning off' OEMs and PC builders... :-)
Cheers,
Toby Haynes
Re:My link for the day... (Score:1)
so should we base everything on one website's benchmarks?
AMD is also going 64-Bit (Score:1)
A 64-bit architecture with NO speed penalty for IA-32 programs, plus a super-fast (like 20x) I/O bus. Booo-yaaah!
Some Athlon Benchmarks (Score:1)
I have an AMD Athlon 700, 192 MB PC100 RAM, and 13 GB Ultra ATA 7200 RPM drive. These results are from my workstation system running RedHat 6.1.
Apache 1.3.9:
less than 30 seconds (25-30 sec. on three different runs) to compile Apache 1.3.9 from source with DSO support the only configuration option.
Tomcat 3.0
42-47 seconds to build Tomcat 3.0 from source (three different runs for comparison). Compiler used was javac shipped with Blackdown 1.2.2rc3 JDK.
2.2.13 kernel
Just under 2min 30 sec. to compile with a pretty standard config for my system (no sound, no SCSI suport) on two runs.
Here are some enlightening links on AMD Athlon performance and benchmarks:
Note: none of the benchmarks I gave above used any custom compiler optimization settings.
Obligatory point-by-point rebuttal (Score:2)
NIS, NIS+, LDAP, NDS...
USB
Has been available for Linux for some time now. Meanwhile, Microsoft has had USB support for NT 4.0, but has been sitting on it to encourage the upgrade to NT 5.0. Right! That's a winner...
High Speed networking
??? AFAIK, Linux supports any networking you have drivers for.
good multi proc support
Linux's SMP works very well on some things, poorer on others. Just like NT. The Mindcraft problem was the single-threaded TCP/IP stack, which has been fixed in 2.3. Next...
standard application base
That old thing? Please. There are thousands of POSIX applications that do everything I want to. (NT cannot run many of them, BTW.) The only thing I lack on native Linux is a lot of games, and Windows 2000 doesn't score too well in the compatability department there...
good web server performance
Which explains why Apache has twice the installed base of IIS, and IIS is dropping...
stability improvements
I'd prefer an OS that was stable to begin with...
You're free to use Windows 2000, but me, I'll stick with Linux any day.
Re:Why does the instruction set matter - Buh? (Score:1)
my p2 does just fine.. (Score:1)
Re:Megahertz Schmegahertz (Score:1)
Sharky's shakey benching... (Score:1)
So what? (Score:1)
The last important thing to happen in the chip market was AMD debuting the Athlon. It was a new chip, not an echo of a past one. New technology, not new numbers, finally allowed AMD to leap over Intel.
When will AMD go dual? When will Intel get RAMBUS and the i820 working right? When will AMD get a full 200MHz bus with 200MHz SDRAM? When will Intel try and streamline a new form factor motherboard?
AMD and Intel aren't innovating right now. They're just focused on a race for the first to break the GHz barrier. Until they pass it, computer users will only be getting "bigger," rather than "better."
Re:Just waiting for the last 200 (Score:2)
PII & PIII Different Lines? I say YES (Score:1)
Changes from P2 to PIII:
I don't have any pictures of the P2 vs. PIII dies, but I'm certain they are NOT the same. There are enough changes, minute though they may be, to consider P2 and P3 different lines.
Re:Alpha are still faster... (Score:1)
http://www.ix.de/newsticker/data/ as-16.12.99-000/ [www.ix.de]
The Athlon is now faster than the Alpha.
Megahertz, Shmegahertz (Score:1)
My PC's are fast enough for me to work on right now, it's just getting all the damned data I need takes forever.
When I can get OC-3 to my house without having to sell some limbs/organs on E-Bay, then i'll be happy... Who cares how fast I process the data when I can't get it to my processor fast enough?
Re:I don't want faster, I want cheaper (Score:1)
800 Mhz Athlons are already out (Score:2)
800 Mhz Athlons are already out [tech-report.com]. I'm not familiar with the exact details but suffice to say that the K7 was designed to scale much more easily in clock speed than Intel's parts. Coupled with the good luck AMD is having with yields it looks like Intel is going to be playing catchup for the foreseeable future.
And don't forget that and the same clockspeed Athlon delivers up to 40% more floating point power, making this the world's finest Quake II engine. Then there are the 3D now instructions.
Re:Irrelevant due to Architecture (Score:1)
Re:Is this good? (Score:1)
Are they really crunching numbers with all those cycles or are they making trades? In my limited experience with investment bankers, they only want the cycles so they are "cutting edge" and really don't have apps that require extremely fast processors (e.g. Biff has a 1GHz PC and so does Chad, where is mine?)
Re:Is this good? (Score:1)
God I love that IBM hardware. That PS/2 keyboard is my favorite. I have a whole Microchannel 486 server to set up with Linux one day. IBM sure can build solid stuff! Even though they last longer than they should in the computer industry.
Who is shipping volume? (Score:1)
Re:Is this good? (Score:1)
speed races (Score:1)
worth it? (Score:1)
Fast enough? catching up with bloated software. (Score:1)
If it cant run my bloated software then what is it worth :)
LW
Megahertz Schmegahertz (Score:1)
I seem to remember reading some Tom's Hardware benchmarking results awhile back that had the 700mhz Athlon outperforming the 733 Coppermine.
But then again benchmarks can be slanted too.
Not exactly true... (Score:3)
Re:You actually want an 800 mhz processor? (Score:1)
Bull... If that where the case then no one would buy AMD at all. Go look on those shopping channels. They cater to non-techies and they usually sell both AMD systems and Intel systems. They just don't tell you it's another companies processor, cause they don't care.
Yeah!! (Score:1)
Re:Is this good? (Score:1)
What does the speed limit have to do with how fast you drive a car?
Re:Is this good? (Score:2)
Agreed, but some people do need to crunch serious numbers, and it's good if you're running large servers and suchlike. But if you're just running Office and reading email, 800mhz isn't going to help you much. However, 800mhz CPUs will drive down the price of a 500mhz {insert prefered CPU here} chip, so overall everyone (performance freaks and "normal" people) wins.
But consider that VW does well with their "0-60? Yes." advertisments. How long will it be until a processor company pops up with a similar ad campaign? I give it 12-18 months.
Celerons already have that reputation among geeks, though it's not advertised as such (in fact, I don't remember ever seeing an ad for celerons (or athlons!), just P3s). I know a coupla people running dual overclocked celerons that they got fairly cheap. However, I detest Intel and their bloated architechture, so I would probably get a K6-3 or an Athlon anyway . Yes, same bloated architechure, but at least AMD didn't create it. And from what I've heard the Athlon internals are Alpha-like, which is cool (it would also help explain the performance!).
!!!There are no PIII-800s, its all a scam!!! (Score:2)
Intel(R) Pentium(R) III processor- Advanced Processor Technology for Powerful DesktopPC [intel.com]
The Pentium III processor sets a new baseline for high-performance business desktop computing, and is also available for entry-level workstations and servers. And now, the new mobile Pentium III processor enables greater productivity on the go, at speeds of up to 500 MHz.
Right here, straight from the source. 500MHz is the max that a PIII will do. The rest must be overclocked. I hope that those of you who bought >500MHz chips don't melt 'em.
Re:PII & PIII Different Lines? I say YES (Score:1)
We're Bein' Scammed! (Score:1)
Re:!!!There are no PIII-800s, its all a scam!!! (Score:1)
Uhm.. that's the current max for the Mobile p3...
Hmm, let's try to buy a PIII 750... (Score:2)
Re:worth it? (Score:1)
For instance, it sometimes happens that my office box (a PII/400) has a load average > 3 for weeks continuously, running compute-intensive jobs. Replacing its SE440BX with something SMP-capable, and using two processors could actually help as a lot of the work is actually quite parallelizable. If the kernel weren't an archaic kernel altered by others in ways about which I have minimal information, it might actually be worth it to save time and sanity...
Re:Alpha are still faster... (Score:1)
Re:Just waiting for the last 200 (Score:2)
been out for a month. Super G from Kryotech [kryotech.com].
TomsHardwareGuide has reported on the easy of overclocking Althons and the problems getting a PIII to just go 50Mhz faster.
-Z
Chips get faster and faster, forget that data buss (Score:1)
Re:I feel the need for speed... (Score:1)
Connah
Re:My link for the day... (Score:1)
It might be that you can't buy RDRAM K7 mobos, in which case AMD needs to get some made.
#define X(x,y) x##y
Re:Is this good? (Score:2)
You know, you're absolutely right, they really are filling that niche. I hadn't thought about Celeron a) because it's Intel, an existing company and b) they don't advertise it as such.
I wonder if, upon advertising it appropriately, Intel could have Celeron capture that market?
x86 is way outdated (Score:1)
Re:Irrelevant due to Architecture (Score:1)
Like the chipset, right?
Tom's Hardware recently ran benchmarks of Intel's chipsets [tomshardware.com]. What I got from this (which may be wildly inaccurate :) is that the i820 (which is probably what you'll get if you buy a P3) is in many cases no better than the 440BX. In order to get a real performance boost, you'll need the i840, which Intel isn't yet releasing in mass quantities, and they're marketing it as a workstation (not desktop) chipset. hmm.
anyway, I've got a P2-350 and don't plan on upgrading anytime soon (and it'll probably be an AMD when I do. :)
Re:News for rich nerds... (Score:1)
In the end, this has nothing to do with what you or I buy, but it has everything to do with the industry and what seems like the flagging domminance of Intel. People like to buy from the manufacturer that makes the fastest chips. Even if they can't afford top of the line.
Re:Transmetta? (Score:1)
Re:Is this good? (Score:2)
>milliseconds and can go up to 250mph.
No, it's not like that at all. Cars that can go 250MPh (show me one) are irrelevant because there is no speed limit that high. Unless I've missed something, there is no speed limit on processors.
>It just doesn't matter to most people, at least
>practically-speaking
To the unwashed masses, it doesn't matter; but that's not who the chipmakers are targetting in their first releases. I work for an investment bank whose traders won't be happy with 1GHz; faster math processing = faster trading = more profit.
Also, as someone else pointed out: how important was the PII to the "average person" when it first came out? Just as important as this speed bump, I'd say. Newer, faster technology at the top pushes prices down at the bottom and all the way up. When an even newer, faster technology comes out your "average joe" won't buy anything less than n-1 tier technology.
Re:Who is shipping volume? (Score:3)
Re:Yeah, But.... (Score:1)
Now I have to say that for some odd reason I feel biased towards Intel even though they are the giant. Maybe it's because AMD has underperformed in the past.
However, I will say that I'm happy AMD came out with their Athlon. Competition can only be good, and if they can take the crown, it will mean that I can buy an even faster processor. I don't have any problem with that.
Re:Yeah, But.... (Score:1)
From everything I've heard (two places IIRC) Tom's Hardware [tomshardware.com] and Gamespot [gamespot.com] a PIII with the 820 mobo and RDRAM actually runs faster than an equivalently clocked Athlon. Now, yes it is running a different memory, but as far as I know, Athlon doesn't support that memory (at least right now.) And the memory is VERY expensive (~$700-$1000 for 128MB), but if you are going for the FASTEST possible at this moment, I think it goes to INTEL. Another slight hit towards Athlon is that it isn't stable in all configurations. (according to gamespot [gamespot.com])
Now I have to say that for some odd reason I feel biased towards Intel even though they are the giant. Maybe it's because AMD has underperformed in the past.
However, I will say that I'm happy AMD came out with their Athlon. Competition can only be good, and if they can take the crown, it will mean that I can buy an even faster processor. I don't have any problem with that.
Re:Yeah, But.... (Score:1)
Gamespot [gamespot.com]
If you look about midway down for
The Coppermine/RDRAM/820 combination clearly outpaces other solutions, including the Athlon 700. But the performance crown lies much more uneasily on this system's head. AMD has just announced the 750MHz Athlon, which is built using a 0.18 micron semiconductor process, similar to that used for Coppermine.
This states that Intel is faster, although not by much. I doubt, however, that it can be considered faster because of a mere 33MHz, so my feeling is that the overall package of a PIII system is better than the Athlon. (The CPU may not be any better, but once you plug it into something, it starts getting better.) Note also, the cost of increasing to RDRAM and the 820 chipset isn't very cheap, but it does seem faster.
It's all in the L2 cache (Score:1)
for more information look here:
www.anandtech.com [anandtech.com]
Re:PII & PIII Different Lines? I say YES (Score:1)
Compare this to the 5th generation of processors:
pentium + more L1 cache + tweaking = pentium mmx
Then the P2 came and it was truly a new core. Entirely different chip that runs the same instruction set, but with a new architecture.
Re:Sharky's shakey benching... (Score:1)
Re:Is this good? (Score:1)
Real Speed (Score:1)
Re:Megahertz Schmegahertz (Score:1)
Man, this is weird (Score:1)
I would never do something as stupid as buing the latest and most expensive CPU. I can't afford an Athlon 800, but when faster models come out, the price of slower models comes down - JUST HOW IS THAT A BAD THING?
Re:Is this good? (Score:1)
Furthermore, whether or not you run Linux is immaterial. There will always be new software that pushes the limits of current hardware, and as hardware advances, so will the software. Just because you don't agree with Micro$oft's philosophy that it suddenly takes a P-III 800 with 256 MB RAM for your son to write a book report doesn't mean that there won't be something you want to do that requires faster hardware. Whether it is voice recognition, 3D animation, home automation, or AI, something will come out that will make you need faster hardware. And if you don't believe me, look at your current software and OS and tell me you would just as soon run it on a 4MB 486SX/25Mhz.
Re:Is this good? (Score:1)
I wonder if, upon advertising it appropriately, Intel could have Celeron capture that market?
They probably could, but I doubt they want to. All the geeks I know who drool over celerons do so because, overclocked, they run about as reliably as gravity...so they get some incredible benchmarks on them. The celeron 300 can be easily and safely OC'd to somethng like 550Mhz. But I really don't see Intel advertising chips along these lines, since it would probably detract from higher-end chip sales.
Besides, all the people who are even vaguely qualified to OC their system are pretty much guaranteed to know about celerons...
Gigabit Ethernet (Score:1)
The latest technology leap in HDD's has been ATA-66, which realistically only pushes 20MB/s which is only marginally faster than a $30 100MB ethernet card.
Now with gigabit ethernet cards, although they are expensive, are fast enough to easily saturate your system bus. Once we finally get away from slow hard drives and buses, we can really see improvements in overall end-user-apparent speed.
Anyone who has attempted to play Wheel of Time knows what I mean
Re:Just waiting for the last 200 (Score:1)
GO AMD!
Re:Transmetta? (Score:1)
Re:We're Bein' Scammed! (Score:1)
-> Nobody will ever use a fast computer.
-> Intel and Microsoft are in a conspiracy, because they keep creating new hardware and software. (Win2k's requirements are realistic, it will run on less, just not well)
-> We _cannot_ run older OS's, or software on old hardware for people to write letters.
-> Your machine which has slower hardware will go faster than newer better hardware. (Win2k isn't that slow. == RH isn't that fast)
-> You still want that new fast hardware to play Q3, a hardware hog.
-> AMD should be praised for playing the same Mhz game Intel does.
I think we see the contradictions here...
Don't bash new hardware, it's an engineering marvel that intel can get their ppro core (essentialy the same as p3) which came out years ago, to run at 800 Mhz. The Athlon is a great chip and it's amazing that it can run x86 crap instructions at 1Ghz. These feats aren't easy.
Would you rather slow progress down so you and I can catch up? (my p200-mmx isn't the blazing machine it was when I got it)
Maybe we should petition Intel to slow down a bit. They have plenty of money, we don't need faster computers.
Re:Yeah, But.... (Score:1)
PS to moderators: This is not a troll!
Re:Intel lost me.... (Score:1)
Yes, and when they made the announcement that you could turn it off, they said the only way to turn it back on was through rebooting. The next week someone had figured out how to turn it on in software without rebooting. Real secure.
Too many ignorant people (conspiracy theorists, perhaps?) make dumb statements like the above.
And what exactly are YOUR credentials? No offense here, but it doesn't take an idiot to make the connection between UIDs that a browser can identify and send to a company and cookies. Honestly cookies are bad enough, but adding a unique identifier to them such that you personally are easily identifiable without going through your ISP is worse.
Re:You actually want an 800 mhz processor? (Score:1)
Re:Three letters... (Score:1)
Re:Gigabit Ethernet (Score:1)
The only IDE device I have is an internal zip drive, which i hardly use since i got a cd-r...
Believe me, my bottleneck is bandwidth. (I'm in the multimedia content prod. area) I use a Dual PII-400 256Mb PC100 RAM... With ~23GB Ultra-Wide SCSI Drives (minus the CD-R/ROM's, but they're on a seperate SCSI controller)
One client wanted me to ftp a ~700mb movie to their site. All fine and dandy for them, on their nice t3. but me, i still had a 28.8k at the time (And it was on my personal Line, lol). SO i bought a CD-R and mailed it to them. Got there MUCH faster. (USPS is good for something)
I do agree on the bus speed points you make. intel's i820 or AMD's 200Mhz is a start, if they could ever start... and SCSI is still too expensive for most people. We need to take the NASA route, "faster and cheaper."
Speaking of load times... anyone remember installing Wing Commander 2 from diskette? what was all THAT wait-time about?
Re:I don't want faster, I want cheaper (Score:1)
Also, Intel has created socket 370, if you got one of the motherboards supporting socket 370 it looks like you are going to be out of luck when the new P3s come out in socket form, because Intel decided to change a few pins around.
Kudos to Intel.
Compatibility and voltage... (Score:1)
Geez (Score:2)
Win95 Off Floppy (Score:1)
How... (Score:1)
Fastest == most expensive (Score:1)
Re:Irrelevant due to Architecture (Score:1)
The public is, in general, getting more techno-savvy. However, as this proves, a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. And by the time your PHB's actually know what a superscalar pipeline is, we'll be getting into some seriously weird new stuff...
Re:Is this good? (Score:1)
But it is the cars like Saturn that are surviving 'crashes' and intersection collisions.
Is there a push for chipmakers to meet the side impact compliance standard?
The thunder is stolen already... (Score:1)
What makes these news even more irrelevant is that the big hardware guys (Dell, Gateway) are not able to get PIII 750 MHz from Intel, let alone this new 800 MHz model! I think Intel is playing the good-ol' FUD card.
Re:Is this good? (Score:2)
I draw a line between my various computers. Each one serves a purpose. I do most of my writing on an an IBM PS/2 Model 30. That's an 8086 with 640K of RAM and a 20MB hard drive.
Why? Because it works.
But I'm writing this now on a 350mHz G3 with 190MB of RAM and 8MB of VRAM. Why? Because I like to play Quake on this machine.
I use most of my systems as appliances. They do a few things, and that's all that I want them to do. And I strongly believe that this is a trend that more and more people will follow. But they don't want multiple computers as they think of them now, but devices. (With, as discussed today [slashdot.org], Be as the OS.)
So, yes, in that sense, I fully believe that there will continue to be a use for less-than-stellar processors, for the VW bug of processors. (Though I maintain that some people will knowingly purchase traditional desktops with less souped-up processors.) Whether Celeron or something else, there will be room for them in a mass-market sense.
Re:Gigabit Ethernet (Score:1)
However, if you are still using a 28.8 modem, don't complain about how bandwidth is lacking
If cable or ADSL is available in your area, jump all over it. There are startup discounts galore and its well worth it. I've been on cable for almost a year now and I can never go back. I've seen 370K/s (yes
Floppy installs are the worst. At my old work, one of my co-workers actually installed win95 off floppies, something like 80 disks? Why? I don't know...
The Pentiums are using $1000/128M RDRAM (Score:1)
Besides, for $1000 you could get a 1GHz kryo cooled system and put a big gap between the Athalon and Pentium systems.
Yeah, But.... (Score:2)
Alpha are still faster... (Score:2)
For the price, Athlons and PIII's are great, but for serious number crunching, Alphas are the way to go.
Why does the instruction set matter? (Score:2)
If you still want to say otherwise, i'd venture to say that both the K7 and P6 (especially the K6 though) are not really executing x86 instructions anyhow... They've got microcode that converts x86 instructions to their native instructions, because x86 was just too cumbersome...
Regardless, though... It's not at all hard to compare an Alpha to a Pentium...
Re:Is this good? (Score:2)
I've got the distributed.net software & povray crunching away on it, day and night...
Megahertz At All Costs (Score:2)
People who read Slashdot know that clock rates are only directly comparable between identical processors. We know that different architectures have different performance at the same clock rate. The vast majority of people that purchase processors these days don't know that. Most people don't understand why (if they are even aware) a PowerPC, SPARC, or Athlon has better real-world performance than a Pentium at the same clock rate.
Most people look at the "megahertz" and use that as the sole comparison of the processors performance even when they don't understand what that number actually means.
For this reason, the mantra at processor companies is "Megahertz At All Costs"
AMD strikes back wih 900 MHz (Score:3)
Re:Just waiting for the last 200 (Score:2)
Re:Three letters... (Score:2)
While this may be true of the K6-2 3DNow! instruction set, the Athlon introduced some more 3DNow! instructions. The long and the short of is that Athlon 3DNow! and SSE are basically equivalent in terms of performance.
I believe that neither of these instruction sets are being rendered irrelevant due to lack of vendor support, the only other real issue.
Irrelevant due to Architecture (Score:3)
When the Athlon was first released, Toms Hardware [tomshardware.com] did a very detailed write up on the architecture of the Athlon, and how it relates to the PIII.
You can find that article here [tomshardware.com]. To summarize, this advancement from Intel is basically irrelevant, as AMD could (probably) have 1GHz Athlons on the market already, the Athlon is designed to run at those kinds of speeds, and has a (in their opinion) dramatically superior architecture to the PIII.
Tom mentioned somewhere in the article that AMD would probably do to Intel what Intel had been doing to them for years, which was to one-up whatever speed they come out with. Watch for AMD to beat this by 50MHz or so pretty soon...
Anthony
Is this good? (Score:3)
It just doesn't matter to most people, at least practically-speaking. As people pointed out in a recent discussion [slashdot.org], even though it doesn't matter, people will still buy the hottest chip around. Very much like how people buy the greatest SUVs, the fastest Porches, etc.
But consider that VW [vw.com] does well with their "0-60? Yes." advertisments [vw.com]. How long will it be until a processor company pops up with a similar ad campaign? I give it 12-18 months.
And I'll get one, too, because I don't need the latest, greatest hardware. 'Cuz I run Linux.
Just waiting for the last 200 (Score:2)
Hangtime
News for rich nerds... (Score:2)
----------------------------------------
MHZ BS! (Score:2)
I want to hear about number crunching ability. I want Quake2/3/Unreal Tournament framerates. I want to see distributed.net and seti@home rates. I want to know how fast it can compile a 2.2.9 linux kernel.
MHZ is as meaningful a measure of a processor's ability as bogomips.
LK
You actually want an 800 mhz processor? (Score:3)
The flip side is that AMD has probably been holding back a little bit to maximize revenue from each step up in MHz.
Re:Yeah!! (Score:3)
And if windows 2000 isn't technologically advanced as you would expect, then i can't imagine how linux could appear to be superior or even competitive..
Directory Services, USB, High Speed networking, good multi proc support, standard application base, good web server performance, stability improvements (my nt servers now run longer then my linux boxen on todays hardware.. but if i throw linux on my trusty old p2 systems, its vice versa).
So yeah, in this case the AMD and Intel is working for the customer.. as true for Microsoft and all its competitors.. the best man will win and has been winning. And as for choice, i choose Sun Solaris for my databases, NT for my file servers and linux for my development boxes. And now i get to choose which CPU i want to use. Too bad AMD hasn't released its Multiproc systems yet, or announced any developer chips for 64bit systems..