I have to admit to being surprised they can'tbe specced with an AMD CPU.
But... although I'm just guessing here... that *could* be because of a contract Alienware have with Intel, to supply the CPU's for their Aurora desktop systems?
But what's your specific reason(s) for not being "into" Intel?
Whilst many of us years ago always opted for AMD CPU's rather than Intel CPU's, the reason for doing so back then was simply "bang per buck".
However... although AMD processors are still often (usually?) a bit cheaper than an equivalent Intel processors, the price gap isn't nearly as wide as it used to be.
And I think even the most die-hard AMD supporter would concede/admit that Intel's new i5 and i7 CPU's in particular, are better than anything AMD currently offer.
Truth be told... Intel have had the lead in CPU performance for a
couple of years now.
That's not to down the capabilities of AMD CPU's of course. There are still plenty of good AMD CPU's available.
But if I may be so bold as to say it... it's rather narrow-minded to completely disregard Intel CPU's as an option... especially in a powerful gaming system like the Aurora desktop?
I appreciate your opinion, but all I'm saying is Alienwares (Authentic Auroras) were AMD. When you seen the name Aurora you knew you were looking at AMD Killer Rig. Area51 was a Killer Intel Rig. So I am now looking for a New, but Authentic Aurora= AMD Killer Rig not a Area51=Intel Rig.
If you buy a New GMC Truck it does not come with a Ford motor in it!
You asked what reason(s) for not being into Intel: Past Experience in Owning and Having invested into computers that weren't worth what I paid for, then switching to others AMD and having experience of no problems .
Listen I'M not knocking Intel, if you like them then thats your choice.
Intel has a history of 'forcing' OEMs to build around their chipsets and that is probably what they did with Alienware/Dell. If you want to get a good price on OEM chips from Intel, you have to do what they say, which is why intel is being punished for it atm.
Quite frankly AMD is second rate at the moment when it comes to CPUs. It's an oxymoron to put any current AMD design in a performance gaming system. If you want value that's fine, but Alienware has never been known for that.
Alienware has been always known for years to hold the highest standard of Peformance systems of both always not just falling down to one. Just commenting for Intel ,doesn't get it. Maybe a Fake Aurora would be fine for those who don't know what they are talking about!
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed suit against Intel today, accusing the chip-maker of engaging in a decade-long run of anticompetitive practices. The FTC claims Intel used bullying tactics and bribes to steer computer makers such as( Dell), HP and others away from superior rival products. This echoes other recent cases that led to a $1.25 billion settlement with AMD and a $1.45 billion fine in Europe.
What's more, the FTC says the company is now abusing its market dominance to stifle competitors in the GPU market -- namely Nvidia, which has publicly accused Intel of foul play. According to Nvidia, Intel has deliberately misinterpreted its chipset license to prohibit the GPU-maker from producing chipsets for any Intel processor with an integrated memory controller -- or nearly all of the company's new CPUs. This is in addition to Intel allegedly keeping Nvidia's Ion out of netbooks through unfair bundling prices on Atom and chipset combos.
The FTC noted that it isn't seeking monetary damages from Intel. "We are frankly more focused on conduct," said Richard Feinstein, director of the FTC's bureau of competition. The case also isn't a direct antitrust suit, and only accuses Intel of violating competition and monopoly rules under Section 5 of the FTC Act, which is "broader" than antitrust laws. Also, unlike an antitrust violation, breaching Section 5 cannot be used to establish liability for plaintiffs to seek triple damages from Intel in private litigation.
Davet501
18 Posts
0
December 12th, 2009 10:00
Simple Dell bought Alienware and totally destroyed the systems.
TheRealFireblad
3 Apprentice
•
4.6K Posts
0
December 12th, 2009 10:00
Welcome to the forums
I have to admit to being surprised they can't be specced with an AMD CPU.
But... although I'm just guessing here... that *could* be because of a contract Alienware have with Intel, to supply the CPU's for their Aurora desktop systems?
But what's your specific reason(s) for not being "into" Intel?
Whilst many of us years ago always opted for AMD CPU's rather than Intel CPU's, the reason for doing so back then was simply "bang per buck".
However... although AMD processors are still often (usually?) a bit cheaper than an equivalent Intel processors, the price gap isn't nearly as wide as it used to be.
And I think even the most die-hard AMD supporter would concede/admit that Intel's new i5 and i7 CPU's in particular, are better than anything AMD currently offer.
Truth be told... Intel have had the lead in CPU performance for a couple of years now.
That's not to down the capabilities of AMD CPU's of course. There are still plenty of good AMD CPU's available.
But if I may be so bold as to say it... it's rather narrow-minded to completely disregard Intel CPU's as an option... especially in a powerful gaming system like the Aurora desktop?
ChAosq3a
4 Posts
0
December 12th, 2009 11:00
I appreciate your opinion, but all I'm saying is Alienwares (Authentic Auroras) were AMD. When you seen the name Aurora you knew you were looking at AMD Killer Rig. Area51 was a Killer Intel Rig. So I am now looking for a New, but Authentic Aurora= AMD Killer Rig not a Area51=Intel Rig.
If you buy a New GMC Truck it does not come with a Ford motor in it!
You asked what reason(s) for not being into Intel: Past Experience in Owning and Having invested into computers that weren't worth what I paid for, then switching to others AMD and having experience of no problems .
Listen I'M not knocking Intel, if you like them then thats your choice.
My Choice is : Alienware/Aurora/AMD/NVIDIA
AMD readies 3.6GHz Phenom II X4 975
joec63
1 Rookie
•
19 Posts
0
December 12th, 2009 17:00
The short answer is currently AMD is not offered in an Alienware(DELL) product, who knows going forward.
johnnyboy24
91 Posts
0
December 12th, 2009 18:00
I wish they did have AMD in there high-end products, but it seems it gets treated as second class :(
beamermt25
468 Posts
0
December 12th, 2009 18:00
Intel has a history of 'forcing' OEMs to build around their chipsets and that is probably what they did with Alienware/Dell. If you want to get a good price on OEM chips from Intel, you have to do what they say, which is why intel is being punished for it atm.
Redleg171
7 Posts
0
December 13th, 2009 02:00
Quite frankly AMD is second rate at the moment when it comes to CPUs. It's an oxymoron to put any current AMD design in a performance gaming system. If you want value that's fine, but Alienware has never been known for that.
ChAosq3a
4 Posts
0
December 15th, 2009 20:00
Alienware has been always known for years to hold the highest standard of Peformance systems of both always not just falling down to one. Just commenting for Intel ,doesn't get it. Maybe a Fake Aurora would be fine for those who don't know what they are talking about!
I guess a GMC should have Ford motor in it.
I think something got missed here!
ChAosq3a
4 Posts
0
December 16th, 2009 20:00
I thought I would Share this with you on The reason for Fake Auroras.
This is what all the Trash is about !
Intel back in the hot seat, sued by FTC over "anticompetitive tactics"
What's more, the FTC says the company is now abusing its market dominance to stifle competitors in the GPU market -- namely Nvidia, which has publicly accused Intel of foul play. According to Nvidia, Intel has deliberately misinterpreted its chipset license to prohibit the GPU-maker from producing chipsets for any Intel processor with an integrated memory controller -- or nearly all of the company's new CPUs. This is in addition to Intel allegedly keeping Nvidia's Ion out of netbooks through unfair bundling prices on Atom and chipset combos.
The FTC noted that it isn't seeking monetary damages from Intel. "We are frankly more focused on conduct," said Richard Feinstein, director of the FTC's bureau of competition. The case also isn't a direct antitrust suit, and only accuses Intel of violating competition and monopoly rules under Section 5 of the FTC Act, which is "broader" than antitrust laws. Also, unlike an antitrust violation, breaching Section 5 cannot be used to establish liability for plaintiffs to seek triple damages from Intel in private litigation.