AMD gone crazy

[grant2]

Originally posted by: SexyK

Originally posted by: chizow
They didn't replace 'em all though; I think it was a limited recall depending on what you used the CPU for.

For the record, Intel replaced all of those "flawed" Pentium chips free of charge, no questions asked, even though the flaw would have had no effect whatsoever on 90% of users.

You're both right, intel started with a limited recall & then expanded it after it became a PR mess

 

[StanTheMan]

wow...
when i started this thread, i didnt think that i will get so much opinion
I'm glad of the opinions i received. there are a lot of useful news and experience i got from the replies
more opinion welcome

 

[StanTheMan]

btw, here is the new AMD pricing
http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_609,00.html?redir=CPPR01

 

[MulLa]

Q]uote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: MulLa
Hi all

I didn't read the entire thread but I did read the majority of it. Just like to share a bit about my experience with AMD well its official distributor anway. I am sure it's an isolated incident but it certainly make me think twice before buying an AMD system.

When I was working in a computer retailer a customer returned a faulty Duron 1.3Ghz CPU that won't boot anymore. He returned the chip and the HSF removed. I then proceded to fill out an RMA form to the distributor (won't mention any names here) and sent it off.

A few days later I got a reply saying that the customer had obviously removed the HSF and reinstalled it without reapplying and heatsink grease / thermal tape. The distributor claimed that it caused the CPU to burn out and thus not covered under warranty anymore.

Obviously I was totally shocked as to HOW they can tell it has happened! I and a work mate had inspected the chip and notice no burnt marks or any smell from it and we even tested it and it's definately not working. Maybe there are ways to tell if a HSF had be removed and stuck back on without reapplying thermal compound?

Anyway I printed out the e-mail reply and showed it to the customer and of course he's totally p*ssed about it and started yelling and all. We made various called to the distributor saying how the customer never took the HSF off prior to the failure. In the end he did get an exchange but not after a month of mucking around.

Now I have done RMA with Intel as well and they always exchange no questions asked. Not trying to avoid the problem.

If AMD wanted to seriously compete with Intel they at least should have better customer service. Maybe better distributors

I don't mean to add flames to the thread just wanted to share my experience and opinion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Once again, another example of blaming the wrong people.
You said you RMA'ed it to the distributor. Not the manufacturer. How in the world is it AMD's fault just because the company you purchased from gave you a hard time. There are plenty of shady companies that sell OEM Intel CPU's too. Buying OEM means you have no guarantees from the manufacturer and you take your chances with any warranties the dealer offers. If you had bought retail, it would have been warrantied by AMD and they would have replaced it. It is not AMD's fault that you were screwed by some shady dealer.
[/quote]




Well it would have helped the situation if AMD had a local office in my country rather than relying on a distributor to handle all RMA process. I don't live in some small country either. I wasn't prepared to place an expensive overseas call just to get RMA on the CPU. Besides it's a retail boxed duron 1.3Ghz. The fact that they don't have any local office to handle situations like this made it difficult for us. If they had set down policies to their distributors this situation would never have occured.

AMD had chosen their authorised agents / distributors to represent them and should be responsible for their agent's behaviours.

 

[jtcartboy357]

Ok AgaBooga
The reason amd and IBM wait wait not to mention CRAY supercomputer is teaming up with AMD is simply because of one simple word
OPTERON. From what I have read around cray is on contract for 30,000 opteron CPUs for wait just three of the most renowned laboratories in the world. Sandia labs, livermore labs, and Los Alamos. The CRAY spokesperson said something along the lines of, the intel Itanium is a laughing stock, the OPteron is 1/3 the price and over performs OVER two times better.

Now let me ask one simple question,
Why would a world renowned SUPERCOMPUTER company use an AMD CPU if intel is better.
Think real hard AgaBooga your answers so far have been just shy of mentally incapacitated. SO if you can please please clear this confusion of why they aren't using intel up for me I just don't get it. You said AMDs aren't stable. One of my buddies dads works in the OEM relations of AMD and there has been some talk with dell about the opteron simply because one opteron is superior to something like four zeons.

I am not against intel and am not an amd fan boy. I just don't like companies that deserve some recongnition to be disrespected by some genius who buys an old mobo, and can't figure out how to line up the CPU fan.

Also buddy I have an XP 1700 with an asus motherboard with a
60 GB Western Digital hard drive same as you no? and off of that I have a 120 GB WD hard drive

I am also running OCd to a 400 MHZ FSB which makes me a 2400+ and I am running at 89 def F idle and 96 at full load.

I burnt out my first 1700 too and I din't blame it on AMD that was all my fault.

Remember we all make mistakes it is the ones who take the responsibility of their mistakes who become bettered by it.

 

[esc]

If AMD was not stable, then I possibly cannot find anyway to explain why my XP1700+ can STABLY run at 50 deg C for a straight 6 months without non-Windows related crashes or reboots. With this, I've convinced other people that AMD cpus are not that fast to overheat, which a year ago, was a statement most people abide too. So this stability issue really is pure crap.

Just sharing my experiences

 

[PrinceXizor]

*sniff* this thread makes me so proud to be an AT'er *sniff*

 

[rwalterk]

These threads are great.

Pricing in the CPU arena is all based on perception. The perception that Intel is superior is what allows them to charge a higher price. This is especially true in the business arena, where very few IT Directors (at big companies where the purchasing power lies) are willing to stick their necks out for AMD and the myriad of accompanying chipsets.

Keep in mind that both AMD and Intel actually lose money when they get into price wars. Intel chops prices to put the pressure on AMD (they can afford it), and AMD has no choice but to lower its prices. What other appeal would there have been in the past to use AMD CPUs otherwise? When the K6-2 was their best CPU, price was the only reason to choose it - FPU performance sucked and it showed in gaming benchmarks. It wasn't until the Athlon that AMD had a true contender.

At this point since performance is arguably equal between Athlon XP and P4, straight economics would dictate similar pricing. However, Intel's marketing department puts AMD's to shame. The best AMD can do right now is their print campaign with the embarassingly weak slogan "AMD Me." Until the perceptions shift, AMD will always be required to sell its CPUs at a discount (and continue to lose money). Occasionally AMD will test the waters by introducing new CPUs at comparable-to-Intel prices, then lower them if necessary.

 

[jade1313]

wot a great thread! it is a shame that amd went to intel-like pricing for their newer procs, and i personally am not expecting hammer to end that trend, but i don't honestly think there's anything to fuss about...

if you look down at the 1.5-2ghz range, the price to performance ratio is still there, prolly as good as it has ever been... i just built my mother in law a box (3-4 months ago) and when i checked pricing, it was an extra 70 bucks for an equiv pentium proc, and a tad more than that b/c pentium mobo's were pricier as well (we did require onboard lan, video, and sound)... sure 70-100 bucks isn't that big a deal, but when you're building an approx $300-350 dollar machine, it makes a difference...

on the high end stuff, as someone pointed out, amd is making some serious (not to mention realistic, *cough* itantium2 *cough*) changes in both their roadmap as well as their fabbing... of course that r&d and equipment and testing will add cost to procs, but once the changes are made and ironed out on the manufaturing side, the costs trail-off/cease and the benefits remain, and prices drop...

most people aren't running out and buying top of the line procs anyway, so this is really sorta frivolous... i luv hardware, but i see no reason to upgrade until i can get a hammer chip... my old faithful celeron 300a clocked @ 450 just recently got replaced by a free celeron 500.... and yea, that's really lame, but at this point i am almost keeping it up just out of spite... i've been able to game (cs, qIII, unreal, 1942), run win2k, as well as do music stuff... my system was a monster back in the day, but hell, it's scsi and it still does everything i want it to, and i just had a kid almost 2 years ago so i've been broke... but even if i had a ton of $$$, i wouldn't waste my money on a top of the line proc until hammer came along, b/c there's no reason to... nothing is demanding the power, and i could care less if my game runs at 500+ fps; 60-100 is good enough for me....

the extra $$$ now should pay off later, as i said... and why all this worrying? intel made all this noise about destroying them w/ the p4 and the pipeline, high clock, etc etc etc... sure, amd has been on the defensive, but they have been keeping up, and have even seemed to have won the "frequency wars" (which is versus consumers who think clock is king) w/ their naming convention and the performance to back it up... now intel has a slow year ahead, and it seems like amd may be getting ready to shake up the market a tad... who knows, could it be a repeat of nVidia vs. ati? a year ago i don't think anyone would've imagined how that situation has seemed to turn out....

anywho, point being, take amd's prices w/ a grain of salt... they will drop over time, and really, if you buy anything that is bleeding edge, you are paying a significant premium over just waiting 3-6 months, so....

-- jade1313

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: ketchup79

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: ketchup79

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: ketchup79

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER
Die thread Die!!!

BUMP

LMFAO,
Wouldn't bumping help keep the thread alive?

Hey, did you figure that out on your own?

No, I had to read your posts first and absorb some of your exceptional knowledge and intelligence. It is only because of you that I was able to come to this profound and revolutionary conclusion.
Thank you for helping me see the light, I will be forever honored to have been in your virtual presence.

Ha Ha, fellas, I think I have a contender in the BS department. Anybody else wanna join in?

By saying no, I am unfortunately sucked in.

 

[Ilmater]

Originally posted by: jtcartboy357
Now let me ask one simple question,
Why would a world renowned SUPERCOMPUTER company use an AMD CPU if intel is better.
Think real hard AgaBooga your answers so far have been just shy of mentally incapacitated.

ROFLMFAO This is my favorite comment about AgaBooga yet.

AgaBooga, why do you bother. Just admit you were wrong. Me and paralazarguer get into arguments every once in awhile that are usually pretty heated. However, when he proves me wrong (along with usually a few other AT'ers), I admit it. Here are the facts:

1) YOU installed the HSF incorrectly, causing your CPU to fry.
2) ASUS built a mobo that I assume was based on a VIA chipset.
3) AMD, or one of its distributors (you just said "they" like in X-Files) replace the CPU for you for free.

However, after all of this, you blame AMD. Yeah, AMD's socket design isn't perfect, but what does that have to do with stability, which is what you're claiming is bad? And for the record, you must be "just shy of mentally incapacitated" (thanks cartboy ) if you can't figure out that the side with the big dent goes over the raised part of the socket.

You have said absolutely nothing to prove your original post (which is what everyone has a problem with) that AMD is less stable that Intel, so admit you were wrong. You said that your first impression was bad because of what happened. That's fine. But that doesn't make AMD CPUs any more or less stable now does it? So next time you want to come in here and talk trash about something you obviously know nothing about, just keep your fingers off your keyboard. Everybody stays happier that way.

For the record, if I had more money than God, I'd buy two systems: a 3.06 P4 and a 2100+ AMD. The first one is just to sit there and be ridiculously fast in its Hyperthreaded badassedness. The second would just be to overclock the holy heck out of it. Intel gives me Hyperthreading, AMD gives me adjustable multipliers. Both give me stability.

 

[b4u]

So, by this so-long thread (I read about 60%, then quit ), I can conclude the following:

If I'm buying a new PC, if the CPU's are the "same" (preformance related), then I should choose the Mobo with the best features, RAM for it, and then the CPU ... eheh

Anyway, I don't have an AMD since before my 486DX2-66, so that heatsink stuff makes me ask: can you post a picture with that "n00b problem" when putting the heatsink? I really don't see it ... as I said, long time no AMD ...


Thanks