I've been using both Intel and AMD processors on MSI, Asus, Intel motherboards for 15 years or more. So far, I've had one Intel, one Asus, and two MSI boards fail. No processors. I typically use MSI, so the increased failure is really not a higher percentage. Nearly every motherboard manufacturer got hit with a bad batch of capacitors a few years ago.
I prefer AMD processors because you get more for your money. If you need maximum processing power, then Intel makes the fastest (and most expensive) chips.
I prefer AMD processors because you get more for your money. If you need maximum processing power, then Intel makes the fastest (and most expensive) chips.
Holey crapola, I hate to be rude but 'one' digital vs ' another' being better is complete crap.
Digital is digital is digital. It doesn't matter if its amd, powerpc, intel, arm, windows, linux, mac, steamOS, android, ios, java, NOTHING.
Your 'feelings' are subjective placebo effect. A 5 dollar HDMI cord is exactly the same as a 5000 dollar HDMI cord. Why? Their both digital.
There is absolutely ZERO difference between the digital output of an AMD system than a Intel system. ZERO. Otherwise USB, toslink ect wouldn't be compatable between the two. Obviously you can use the same flashdrive on an AMD system than am Intel.
One of the best DACs ever made, the ODAC, is USB.
Are you going to try to tell me that there is a difference between USB cables aswell?
Digital is digital is digital. It doesn't matter if its amd, powerpc, intel, arm, windows, linux, mac, steamOS, android, ios, java, NOTHING.
Your 'feelings' are subjective placebo effect. A 5 dollar HDMI cord is exactly the same as a 5000 dollar HDMI cord. Why? Their both digital.
There is absolutely ZERO difference between the digital output of an AMD system than a Intel system. ZERO. Otherwise USB, toslink ect wouldn't be compatable between the two. Obviously you can use the same flashdrive on an AMD system than am Intel.
One of the best DACs ever made, the ODAC, is USB.
Are you going to try to tell me that there is a difference between USB cables aswell?
As I said before, Intel is absolutely in no way 'better' than AMD. I've been building computers sense I was 13 years old, self taught. All my systems I've built for myself and for clients have been AMD. No problems.
AMD simply.has higher value than intel. Intel has a slightly more powerful cpu lineup, but at a significantly higher cost. Either way, neither effect audio quality in any way.
The single thing I can recommend for potentially better audio, is a very very good, platinum rated power supply.
You'll literally get better value spending 30 dollars on a good surge protector ti protect your system than 200 just to have an intel cpu.
Download foobar 2000, get an ODAC, and stop worrying. Digital audio is nothing but 0's and 1's.
AMD simply.has higher value than intel. Intel has a slightly more powerful cpu lineup, but at a significantly higher cost. Either way, neither effect audio quality in any way.
The single thing I can recommend for potentially better audio, is a very very good, platinum rated power supply.
You'll literally get better value spending 30 dollars on a good surge protector ti protect your system than 200 just to have an intel cpu.
Download foobar 2000, get an ODAC, and stop worrying. Digital audio is nothing but 0's and 1's.
Yeah yeah yeah we get it already. You're not saying anything new. Just slip a pamphlet under the door next time.
ARM processor (A9 and up) powerful enough to manipulate audio files then send them to DAC real time.
If you are using i3 to render HD video in the same time (multitasking) manipulate audio files then send them to DAC real time, maybe you have trouble
It is depend on what OS you use, and you do multitasking or not (light or heavy).
If you are using i3 to render HD video in the same time (multitasking) manipulate audio files then send them to DAC real time, maybe you have trouble
It is depend on what OS you use, and you do multitasking or not (light or heavy).
But many people call himself as "audiophile" confuse about using their brains or their feelings....
But many people call himself as "audiophile" confuse about using their brains or their feelings....
Unless you can point to any definitive proof that articulates the difference in the world of audio then all you have is one opinion vs another opinion. Opinions are fine but it silly to post things like they are indisputable facts.
Not to mention all it does derail the thread. There is already a thread specifically for this kind of nonsense debate in another forum, take those comments there.
FWIW both the Fox and CBS television networks run their on-air 'video' through AMD based servers.
I'm typing this on one of my 4 AMD based systems. I had one AMD Athlon chip fail but it was the ECS motherboard that ate it, not heat.
G²
One of the most accurate statements made.But many people call himself as "audiophile" confuse about using their brains or their feelings....
Another has confused 'digital' with what makes or undermines 'digital'. A transition always exists from analog to digital or digital to analog. The transition is not always same. For example, how much noise is created by that transition is quantified by numbers. Most who just know always ignore numbers. So they just know because they feel.
A perfect example of this mistake is light bulbs. So many see a light bulb burn out when powered on. Then just 'know' powering on a light bulb causes failure. Even invent mythical reasons for that failure (ie temperature change). Reality is defined by numbers even in the light bulb industry bible (IES Handbook). One event that does not cause light bulb failure is power cycling. But that also means learning facts and numbers before making a conclusion.
An A/D or D/A conversion always has an analog component. Some maybe be better than others. Only hard numbers (ie manufacturer specifications) can define quality. Be very suspicious of any manufacturer who does not provide those numbers. Suspect he is hiding something to appeal only to those who used their feelings to 'know'.
I salvage 12-24 PC's weekly , just about ALL earlier AMD Athlons
(duron,thunderbirds - socket A) are "fried" , as well as their power supplies.
In the same era , most of the older Pentium 4 Willamette's are fully functional
...maybe a failing memory stick.
The socket A's did outperform the ALL the P4's except for the last ones
(socket 775 HT) but could not nearly match the reliability of Intel.
Many of my salvaged P4 systems end up serving industrial needs. They still
have 10 years left after already serving for 5-7 years!
2004 , AMD copied INTEL with the integrated heat spreader and better thermal
management starting with the Athlon64.
Still, AMD did not make good motherboard chipsets causing board failures.
The processors DID survive , but the motherboards failed.
Nvidia got into the game , AMD bought ATI , and the chipsets drastically improved. In 2006,
AMD started dual and quad cores teamed up with the AMD 9XX chipset.
These are just as reliable as the Intel Core lineup.
Of course , Intel advanced the Core tech way ahead of AMD. The new Intel's
TOTALLY blow away anything AMD can produce ..... but at least the
two companies products are on par in the durability aspect.
And , of course .... you can buy an AMD at 1/2 the price.
(quad core AMD = dual core INTEL $$$)
OS
(duron,thunderbirds - socket A) are "fried" , as well as their power supplies.
In the same era , most of the older Pentium 4 Willamette's are fully functional
...maybe a failing memory stick.
The socket A's did outperform the ALL the P4's except for the last ones
(socket 775 HT) but could not nearly match the reliability of Intel.
Many of my salvaged P4 systems end up serving industrial needs. They still
have 10 years left after already serving for 5-7 years!
2004 , AMD copied INTEL with the integrated heat spreader and better thermal
management starting with the Athlon64.
Still, AMD did not make good motherboard chipsets causing board failures.
The processors DID survive , but the motherboards failed.
Nvidia got into the game , AMD bought ATI , and the chipsets drastically improved. In 2006,
AMD started dual and quad cores teamed up with the AMD 9XX chipset.
These are just as reliable as the Intel Core lineup.
Of course , Intel advanced the Core tech way ahead of AMD. The new Intel's
TOTALLY blow away anything AMD can produce ..... but at least the
two companies products are on par in the durability aspect.
And , of course .... you can buy an AMD at 1/2 the price.
(quad core AMD = dual core INTEL $$$)
OS
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.