Pentium v. Athlon.

[Betheny]

I have always been a Pentium user. However, when I was shopping for my (new) computer, I was talking to a fellow shopper about the Athlon processor. It turns out I ended up purchasing an Athlon 3200 HP Pavilion, and honestly, I'm liking it a lot.

Every Pentium I've ever had has had some sort of delayed reaction or it 'churned' a lot... this Athlon does not seem to. Then again, it could be that every computer I've owned up til now has been a Gateway or home-built from spare parts...

At any rate, discuss. I know there are fans of both here.

[Trinitis]

They are both pretty much on par. P has some bonuses that AMD don't, and AMD has some P don't. It just all depends on what your aiming for, really :)

[StrayRogue]

Pentiums are the safer mans chip. They are also more expensive. Athlons are good (and bad) because they don't have any restrictions on how much you overclock them. Beyond that they are pretty similar.

[Insodus]

I agree. Even for the most avid computer users they are pretty much on par with each other (taking into account price, performance, overclocking, etc). So for the average user they are about the same also. I always recommend AMD because they are cheaper, but thats just me.

As for the churning thingy, that was just the whole computer in general, and more specifically the hard drive. Cheap parts make for a cheap computer, no matter what the processor.

[Mistomeer]

I prefer Pentiums, but use Athalons because of the price.
The average user is never going to notice any difference.

[Meos]

2 ghz centrino ;p