I have been seeing this debate for months now and even here recently I have seen it. Well I just got my latest Computer Graphics World magazine and what did I see, some guy ranting about why CGW does not endorse the AMD processor. Truth be told, If you are basing your processor on Quake benches and all of the little silly hooplah that is flashed all over the websites, think again. Gaming is one thing, professional 3D work is another. First of all you have to look at the overall system. AMD and Intel run pretty much neck and neck. So why don't the pro's endorse this processor. 1. Support Intel has large support for its chipset and is able to run with the super high speed memory that we never get to see like DDR and RDRAM. Just learned that from CGW! Also there are a lot of high-end video card manufacturers that don't support the AMD processor either because of chipset issues. 2. SMP! Synchronous Multi-processing can mean the difference in finishing in 3 hours or in 10 hours. Also, much of your high-end 3d apps will not run on anything less than a dual processor system. AMD does not support multi-processing. That much I already knew! It is the entire machine overall that makes a system high-end to low-end so let's end this fight over who is better, they are both fast but Intel wins in the workstation category by a longshot not because of speed, but support from the professional market and that my friends is the truth. I bought a mid-end dual processor workstation and it was the best investment I made, but then I am striving to be a professional! So I am in a different category from many of you who are doing 3D art as a hobby. What it all boils down to is this; if you want to do the deed, you have to spill the bucks! I went for broke and I don't know what I would be doing if it were not for my parents. So AMD! yes great processor if you are a gamer and also good for lower to mid-end 3D apps. Intel, great for professional 3D work and the elite 3D apps as well as play!. P.S. I know someone is going to say this, but yes I know that an AMD will run 3D Studio Max and Lightwave. I am just summerizing all of the information I compiled over the last week.

Just a couple of things that I want to throw in. You are correct in saying that AMD K5, K6, and K6-2 do not work in multi processor systems. You are not correct, according to my research, in saying that the Athlon will not work in multiprocessor systems. The architecture of the chip will supposedly allow unlimited stacking. This may have changed, but that was the case when I did my research on it. As per the case with applications running on it. Sure I know most people wouldn't consider Truespace a high end application, but Caligari gives the Athlon praise right on the front page of their site. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but I have always been a fan of the underdog, and although I do research info in magazines, you have to keep in mind who is advertising in those magazines. That's just my opinion, but what the heck do I know, I'm just a hippie!LOL Chuck

Remember, the Athlon processor has a 200Mhz frontside bus. Pentium does not. And for the difference in cost, I'll keep my Athlon 600, and my Biostar M7MKA motherboard. This is a very fast combo, and it was way cheaper than a pentium setup. I am a professional and had the option of Intel. Pentium is great. Athlon is great too.Either way you'll end up with a great system for a fraction of what this kind of power would have cost ten years ago.

Wow Scott...Im sold!!! j/k I already am using an AMD processor. Another interesting fact. I read that gateway beat out intel for building the navy's new nuclear testing computer. Gateway's (whos computers I hate btw) press release said that the computer will be over 10,000 AMD athlons running in parallel in a building thats bigger than a football field. The truth in terms of performance between the 2 chips is minimual. 10 hours to 3 hours? please. When I build computers for friends I only use amd...why? b/c w/o amd we would be using p2 processors in the 300mhz range right now. Do you honestly believe that intel would still be pushing the envelope in chip development without the amd pressure? Everytime they make a new set of chips they are always trying to class them so that consumers can't have the latest and greatest. They desperatly want a chipset that is only for pros (that cost buko bucks) and a set for consumers (cheap to make...high profits..no development). Besides tell me what is wrong with this computer history.... microsoft + intel -----> corporate lovers microsoft quote "we accidently have been putting id's on all your documents sorry. Unfortunalty we dont plan on fixing this and we are pissed off anyone even found out." intel quote "We dont find it odd that microsoft is tagging your docs. Infact we are helping them by putting a coding system so you cant dupe microsofts tagging. You think you can turn it off but you cant" Consumer quote "intel is the best..they told me that the p3 will make my internet experience faster. If I can get a p3 than I can be L33t..AMD is Souxours" I think anyone who loves intel should thank all us amd supporters for making it possible for you to actually have a faster processor. Ok Im done ranting. (I think) -brent

This should be fun. ;) Im a HARDCORE MicroSoft and Intel supporter. I use MS Operating systems only and Intel processors only. The only reason I stick with Intel and MS is that the products are proven and they work really well. Lynux and AMD just havent been proven in the corporate computing world...yet. The day will come..But its not here yet. Competition is a wonderful thing and I agree thank god for AMD. :) Im not bashing or putting down products other then Intel or MS - Thats just what I use. Ok - Back to work now. Clint

Prozac....Just my opinion.

Oh Scott, I use HP UX, DGUX and a few other flavors of Unix as well as a few propritary OS's from Data General ... AOS/VS II. All of the above are awsome OS's. I've had experience with more advanced OS's. Im stuck in a NT world right now. Im running large on-line banking systems under NT 4.0 sp6 on HP LT6000 rack servers with 6 Pentium III 550Mhz 1mb cache and 2gb memory...These things are flying with NT 4. Anyway - Yes competition is grand. Intel has made some interesting marketing choices through the years as well as MicroSoft. No real point to my message other than - Yes I;ve worked with high level OS's also. :) Clint

haha, Scott - I agree. :) -and- A good debate is cool with me in this forum. Not that I have provided any good points in support of Intel or MS. Its just what Im forced to use. :) If I remember correctly, You've been in the industry a long time as well. Its always great to hear pro's and con's from others about CPU's and OS's. But, People have to remember when debating a point not to get personal...Keep to the facts. Anyway - The thread can continue as I dont have any problems with a good debate. Regards, Clint

Well I was only joking about the prozac crack. I in NO WAY meant to imply the mental state of the post-ies. I was more commenting on your almost obsessive research into this topic. I will comment no more.

hehe, Yea - Im a Systems Engineer. Its my job/life as well. I research the hell out of this stuff also. I read trade mags before I go to bed everynight. Exciting - I know.. ;) Clint