[QUOTE]\nkony pravi:\n\nSeriously, do you think the Pentium optimizations are better than the \nAMD ones?[/QUOTE]\n\nIt doesn't matter, rather that the applications being tested\nmust have codepaths optimized for the generation of\nprocessor tested. In many cases, they don't have the AMD\noptimizations which is a reason for a workstation type use\nof these apps to benefit from use of a P4, but\ngeneralization about performance levels must factor for this\nas well, that the buyer MUST also buy the software. \n\nDifferent software will need assessed on it's own, not\nvaguely assumed to have similar performance per CPU\narchitecture.\n\n\n[QUOTE]\nAMD's 64bit optimizations aren't used very well yet either. But all it \ntakes is to download properly compiled software (Linux) and you do.[/QUOTE]\n\nThe operating system itself is not at issue, either of these\nalternatives are plenty fast enough for the OS. Rather the\napplications are the key and no OS optimization is enough\nwithout the app optimization.\n\n[QUOTE]\nAnd AMDs are practically faster than Intels. I know the numbers look \nneater on Intel processors, but AMDs very simply make a computer more \nresponsive. I'm guessing it's something to do with overall design.[/QUOTE]\n\nThere are several factors, and it's not that Intel's\nofferings aren't a good alternative, only that the specific\nuse must be weighed against the performance/_total_price of\neach.