See, that's what really frustrates me about the computer industry. They just can't leave a newly invented item alone for more than 3 months. They're constantly implementing meaningless upgrades that make no sense at all. For example this chipset; as soon as I saw this article I knew I was in for a good laugh. It's such a pointless stupid revision, and a waste of money. I could really go on, but too tired. You obviously get my point. Everyone here knows upgrades are a waste of money, UNLESS it's really important and something that's worth while.
I am what you would call depressingly comfortable...
Ok you might not need to upgrade right now but somebody else might be on an older system and will appreciate the new (small) performance "increase".
Anyway the real issue is Intel is worried that AMD is battering it performance wise. They are going to have to do a lot better i think if they want to keep up with the Athlon 64 series:
Read that. As long as that review is accurate (which i think it is), it shows that Intel is struggling in almost every area of performance.
Got a hardware problem? - check your PSU... If it isn't that, then I don't know.
The problem with Intel's new chipset(s) is that it would cost a lot of money to upgrade to DDR2 and PCI-E. Your only alternatives to use there newer CPU's.
AMD on the other hand still supports the mainstream DDR. When AMD feels the industry is ready for DDR2, then they will move to it.
This is wherer Dual Core comes into play. The new Athlon 64 (Toledo Core) will have an integrated Dual Channel DDR2 Memory Controller and will support DDR2 667 Memory (RAM). But this will be later on in Q2 2005 to Q4 2005.
Custom AMD HAF 932 Red Dragon GAMING MOD!!!