It makes sense that both AMD and Intel would have similar success rates
on their chips - these things aren't the sort of thing that typically go
"bad" once they've made it past the manufacturing stage. After
manufacturing, the chip either works or it doesn't, and it is tested in
the factory with a BIST (Built in Self Test) pin before it goes to
market to verify against defects. After that, the only way I can think
of a chip having problems is heat, which is often times problems with
the case or cooling systems, and not the chip itself. Heat usually
even just causes errors in data and not usually permanent damage, though
that is possible if the temperature got high enough. So I wouldn't
expect reliability differences between AMD and Intel, just performance
differences since they have different implementations of the ISA...
Randy Barlow
Lee Fickenscher wrote:
I have to agree with Ken 100%.
I have found basically zero difference between the reliability of AMD
and Intel. Your choice of motherboard and/or memory is much more
likely to affect your stability than your choice of processor.
I generally choose AMD just because I feel that they have a better
price/performance ratio. They certainly have a better power/
performance ratio lately with the exception of the Pentium M, which
would probably be the only Intel chip I would choose to use over AMD.
-Lee
--
TriLUG mailing list : http://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
TriLUG Organizational FAQ : http://trilug.org/faq/
TriLUG Member Services FAQ : http://members.trilug.org/services_faq/
TriLUG PGP Keyring : http://trilug.org/~chrish/trilug.asc
