I noticed intel promotion logo at the end of the E3 Trailer. Is this just a business partnership? or are they implying better performance on intel (as oppose to AMD)?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$Intel probably paid them for it. Not suprising, really. Any major game developer has corporate sponsors.

Or maybe they were running the demos on Intel machines, as they were?Hope this helps,Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Development TeamActive Sky V6 Proud SupporterHiFi Beta TeamRadar Contact Supporter

I'm pretty sure that everyone displaying their software at E3 had machines PROVIDED to them for the booths. As I recall everything there were Intel machines, with Nvidia graphics (7800's) and 2G of ram. I might be wrong but several E3's ago I believe it became the norm to have the boxes supplied so the teams did not have to lug along their own hardware for their booths.hornit

I have been with non-Intel chips for about 9 years now. My next chip will probably be an Intel (Conroe). The midrange Conroe beats the best AMD has to offer by about 20% across applications. The AM2 is an old platform. Conroe is new, so we will have a longer life in terms of upgrades.RH

LOL, the AM2 tech was just released, how can that be an old platform? Personally I'll wait to see what AMD have coming or out once I get ready to upgrade AFTER FSX is released, it's still a ways away and there will something to counter the Conroe.Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/mcdcvabanner.jpgCalVirAir International

I should have said the Athlon 64 is old. They will be squeezing juice from a turnip trying to get much more performance out of this old processor.RH

I used AMD for many years, then switched to the professional brand - Intel and that solved many hours of frustration each week.Intel is perhaps priced higher than AMD, but then again, you mostly get what you pay for.Intel might also seem a little 'dry' to some 'gamers' compared to AMD that seem all glitzy about their products, but then again, whats better? Fact (Intel) or fantasy (AMD)?

I have to be candid here, I had an AMD chip some time ago, the Intel chip that came before it is still going strong, and that is 3 AMD's and 2 AMD boards later. Now both my machines are Intel and I don't even look at AMD anymore. It's true, Intel is Rolls Royce price, but with RR reliability.

I've been using AMD's without any problems at all for years. The cost a lot less than Intel, I'm sure part of Intels higher cost is from all this marketing they do.

My last 4 FS computers have been built with AMD chips and I have never had a problem. I wonder how much money I have saved and how much better my performance has been?Hope this helps,Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/Active Sky V6 Development TeamActive Sky V6 Proud SupporterHiFi Beta TeamRadar Contact Supporter

I'm another that's been using AMD for about 10 years now without issue.I guess it depends on your setup, but mine have been flawless!

Well, we all have our opinions. AMD is the best in my opinion and as far as hours of frustration, that ended with the old AMD sets. I wont argue that for business apps and some other apps that Intel may be better, but AMD have been widely regarding as superior in price/performance for gaming for quite a while now. NEVER have I had an ounce of trouble with my AMD processors and Im on my third now.

if it's not intel, i don't run it.i can't stand their misleading naming scheme for one. seiously.. xp1800, xp3200++++++ azzzxdfd223232+!!! and so forth all just numbers corresponding to nothing. Fx64.. ZMx3343 i never bought into the hype of amd because it is mostly vapour. and hardly cheaper if you really want to have a good system. also the resale value of intels can't be beat. 3 years later they still have value. yes i've used AMD. no, never going that route again.

>if it's not intel, i don't run it.>>i can't stand their misleading naming scheme for one.>seiously.. xp1800, xp3200++++++ azzzxdfd223232+!!! and so>forth all just numbers corresponding to nothing. Fx64..>ZMx3343 >>i never bought into the hype of amd because it is mostly>vapour. and hardly cheaper if you really want to have a good>system. also the resale value of intels can't be beat. 3 years>later they still have value. >>yes i've used AMD. no, never going that route again. Intel also uses a numbering naming scheme now, Intels numbers are actually less meaningful than AMD's. AMD's have always been cheaper when buying a new system for me, usually by up to 20% for the same performance. As for resale, I don't think most computers enough value left after 3 years for resale to even be a factor considering they'd probalby sell for 1/10th the original price.