Originally Posted by melgross
I don't want this to happen—EVER!!!
Despite what some people here think, there is no advantage going to crippled AMD, and some big dangers. AMD is nowhere near as reliable as Intel, and as usual, they are behind in every area that matters.
I have no respect for anyone running AMD. None at all.
I wonder if disagreeing with a moderator on AppleInsider gets one into trouble? (Yes, I just have to ask. Hoping it doesn't.)
I'd politely suggest that your viewpoint here is incorrect. I don't know where you got your reliability information for AMD versus Intel, but the source should be double-checked--it sounds highly dubious. I've been in the business of assembling systems for a long time for all kinds of roles--everything from end user desktops to servers to appliance "things" that center around a computer (such as surveillance or TV DVRs and FreeNAS boxes).
Some have Intel processors while others have AMD CPUs. The split is roughly 50% of each. There have been some odd failures along the way, but never has a microprocessor failed. Nor has the rate of failure been skewed to suggest that one platform is any more reliable than the other. I use good quality components, build things to have a reasonable lifetime, and don't try to cut corners somewhere.
If anything has given AMD's products a black eye here, I'd say that it had to be the number of unscrupulous dealers who took advantage of the fact that an AMD processor could cost less and paired it with junk (motherboard, case, PSU, etc) to get a system out the door for an unbelievable price. I've seen this done many times--and it's not AMD's fault. Is it easy to blame them? Yes, it is. Is it correct? Absolutely not.
Furthermore, look around sometime and see how many AMD products you find. They're very big in the embedded microprocessor market, both x86 (Geode or 80186 based products) and non-x86 (Elan family and others, though it seems these have been discontinued). Apple has used AMD products before, usually at the heart of their LaserWriter printers. (And you don't have to look hard to find a LaserWriter still soldering along--I'd wager that many of the long time participants in this forum still have at least one. I have two.)
Do I hope to change your mind? Get you to use an AMD product? No, I don't. To think that I am is to miss my point. Intel's products are (for the most part*) excellent. I do hope that you might reconsider the "no respect" bits and maybe look further into the source that suggested AMD products were unreliable.
It must also be considered that AMD's lead in graphics technology (though through the acquisition of ATI) is considerable as compared to what Intel has. I hate to say that, as I really do
like the Intel IGPs for what they are.
Disclaimers: I am not in any way affiliated with or employed by/for AMD. I am somewhat partial to their products and have been since the days of the Am486 CPU. However, I have just as many Intel-based boxen running as I do AMD--and all work fine.
* look sometime at the P4 processors. The Pentium 3
could give many early P4s a run for their money when running most programs, especially those that hadn't been optimized for a P4. Northwoods P4s were pretty good in most regards. The S478 and LGA775 Prescott processors, on the other hand, had a lousy performance to power consumption ratio. In addition, the thermal design power of the Prescott was poised to go through the roof. These things became such problems that Intel tossed out much of the work that was being done for future P4 CPUs and went back to the Pentium M mobile stuff (itself based on the P3) as the basis for all the Core/Core2/iX CPUs that followed.