Well, for almost 15 years, I've been an AMD guy. My first personal computer was in 1993. Intel was starting to market their Pentium I's. So I bought the AMD 486. That computer lasted me for 6 years. And it was still ticking well. The only reason I had to upgrade was because the softwares and the internet demanded faster processors and more memories. But 6 long years is unbelievable! After that first one, it's been downhill since.

My second computer was the AMD K5 in 1999. That computer lasted me for 4 years, and it croaked.

So in 2003, it was the AMD Athlon 1800. 2 years later, it wigged out and fried.

So in 2005, I bought the AMD Athlon XP 2800. 2 years later, it started behaving funny. No matter how many times I did a fresh install and reformat of the hard drives, the bugs kept coming back.

By 2007, I desperately needed a new computer, but finances prevented me from doing so. So I tried to hang on as long as I could. By March 2008, it completely died.

So after a month of researching for my next computer, and weighing all the options, and assessing my long relationship with AMD processors that has spiralled worse and worse with each new computer, I finally went Intel. All I can say about Intel is, it sure is expensive. I got a computer with a Core 2 Quad Q9450. Huge 4gb DDR3 RAM. I checked my resources, and was shocked to see that already 2.7gb of the RAM was being used. Simply unbelievable.

But I'm running the new Windows Vista, and I guess that's the new demanding hardware requirements. With my Athlon XP, I couldn't even watch HD trailers on the internet. But with this new computer, WOW!!! Those HD trailer movies run very nice... very very nice...

__________________
Will Shin
Rockville, MD

Vista hogs a LOT of space, even though I am a Mac-dude, most of my friend use PC, and I have heard MANY complaints about Vista in this regard.

__________________
~etexas~

Will,

Your story pretty kinda parallels mine.

I'm an I.T. Administrator (have been for 20 years). I've loved AMD since the early '90s. I couldn't stand Intel's arrogance and monopolistic pricing so I embraced AMD. I really wish I would have bought some stock in the company back then, when it was only $3.00 a share, but I digress.

I never had the reliability problems that you had with the 100 or so systems I installed, but different folks have different experiences. AMD for years pushed the envelope on processor performance until the Intel Core 2 hit the market.

Nowadays all that I purchase and install in my job are Intel boxes. I hope AMD will get back on track and keep Intel's pricing in check. Otherwise we will be paying high prices like the Mac folks (sorry Max ) .

I think AMD may have a long road in front of them and I fear they may have bitten off more than they can chew with the purchase of ATI Graphics.

Just my

__________________
Steve Butts - Former SBC-er
Three Forms of Unity - Bradenton CRC - Bradenton, Florida
(A conservative member in a conservative congregation)

"Of two evils, choose neither." — C.H. Spurgeon

Ohh,

And congrats on the new box Will. The Core 2 Quads are really nice huh?

Very, very nice... You mention AMD's biting the bullet by purchasing ATI. I'm curious. I have an Intel mb that does ATI crossfire. If AMD bought ATI, why would Intel go with Crossfire instead of SLI?

My understanding is that the companies (Nvidia and Intel) don't play nice together.

Originally Intel had difficulty licensing SLI from Nvidia, and that 'forced' Intel into a relationship with AMD / ATI / Crossfire.

I understand that now Intel has motherboards based on both video specs.

Interesting...