On Thu, 9 Dec 2004, Roy wood wrote:
1. Fact : more AMD systems fail than Intel ones
Disputed. We no longer use P4s at our dedicated server facility because of
their interesting failures. We do have occasional failures with XPs but
only one so far with an Opteron box. About 2/3rds of the boxes currently
there are AMD-based. The most reliable boxes we have are the K6-2's which
just keep on running forever.
I woul agree with that assessment... Since I started installing AMDs with the exception of the very early K5s, AMDs have been consistently more trustworthy (and usually faster) for a smaller investment every single time. I have installed and sold a vast number of machines and problematic Intel-based machines outnumbered AMDs by a rate of at least 5:1. As Dave pointed out many factors contribute to that than just the cpu itself but as a general rule AMDs are generally more heat resistant than the Intel ones... Most of the failures I have seen are due to inadequate cooling in either manufacturer but where liquid cooling (or peltier elements) have been applied I have seen virtually zero AMD defects compared to a general defect ration
Phoebus _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
