This topic is locked from further discussion.
Yes it is ok to leave your computer on 24/7. I haven't shut mine off for well over 9 months now, the occasional restart for updates or some such. It's sorta like a car, the hardest time on a pc is during startup. However make sure you have ample cooling, don't want to overheat your baby in the middle of the night.
One suggestion, turning your monitor on standby might be a good idea, most won't burn an image in, but they will last a shorter amount of time, relatively speaking, because it'll be on, unused for like 8-10 hours, where as it would normally be resting. But I haven't shut off my monitor in 2 weeks so i'm not one to talk.
uhh, I think it may be a little more than that.I read somewhere that leaving on a computer for 1 full year is about $30 extra to the bill.
Not sure if that's true.
GRiMeY
BTW, my parents own a shop, and the server has been running non-stop for, I dont know, forever.
[QUOTE="LahiruD"]3 days, 4 days, 5 days No problem at all with INTEL CPUs.
I don't know about AMD CPU.Bcoz AMD has a heating problem
RayvinAzn
Intel puts out its first decent processor this millenium, and the Intel fans just start crawling out of the woodwork.Â
Yeah, because my pentium 4 sucked ass. Oh wait, it handled things pretty well? Hmm...Suck it up, Amd fanboy. It's our time in the sun now.
Facts are facts, and the fact is the AMD 64 kicked the P4s ass! I know from personal experience353535355353535
It really did, but not by the insane amount people portray it as. From my experience, anyway. But now I've got Conroe to stand by, so it's all good.
[QUOTE="353535355353535"]Facts are facts, and the fact is the AMD 64 kicked the P4s ass! I know from personal experienceStaryoshi87
It really did, but not by the insane amount people portray it as. From my experience, anyway.
really, cuz In my experience, It really did beat out the P4 in the insane fashion people on this forum say it did. I once had a crappy dell with a 2.8 Ghz P4, 1GB dual channel RAM running@ 400 Mhz, and an ATI Radeon X300. When I played BF2, it would crash 1/4 of the time before loading a map
On my last PC(it wasn't mine, i was building it for my dad, and he let me borrow it) I was using an AMD athlon 64 3800+, 1GB single channel RAM running @ 667 Mhz, and integrated Nvidia GeForce 6100(integrated graphics) and it ran Battlefield 2 like a charm. Not only did it never crash, it also played at higher FPS, and with better lighting and texture than the P4.
so, yeah, the AMD64 kicked the **** out of the P4
If your cooling is good, there should be no issue. Actually repeatedly powering on and off your PC will reduce component life.
Bah, I don't have time for this. Love on AMD all you want ;)
Staryoshi87
Thanks I will, even if I don't care for their acquisition ATI.
Yeah, because my pentium 4 sucked ass. Oh wait, it handled things pretty well? Hmm...Suck it up, Amd fanboy. It's our time in the sun now.
Staryoshi87
Let's examine this one, shall we? I'm running on an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 - my first computer nearly a decade ago was a Pentium III - I've got nothing against Intel, but there's plenty of people who seem to think that for some reason AMD has never had a good chip. Including the prat that seems to think AMD chips had a "heating problem" despite running cooler than Pentium 4 for most of the past 5 years. This isn't about fanboyism, you're the one making it so. AMD had a good run. Intel's on a good run. I'm not on either "side" here, believing that one company cares more about you than the other one is for fools (or wannabe business majors).
Are you seriously defending the guy that said that AMD processors have a heating problem?
[QUOTE="LahiruD"]3 days, 4 days, 5 days No problem at all with INTEL CPUs.
I don't know about AMD CPU.Bcoz AMD has a heating problem
RayvinAzn
Intel puts out its first decent processor this millenium, and the Intel fans just start crawling out of the woodwork.Â
 LMAO! no kidding!
[QUOTE="Staryoshi87"][QUOTE="353535355353535"]Facts are facts, and the fact is the AMD 64 kicked the P4s ass! I know from personal experience353535355353535
It really did, but not by the insane amount people portray it as. From my experience, anyway.
really, cuz In my experience, It really did beat out the P4 in the insane fashion people on this forum say it did.I once had a crappy dell with a 2.8 Ghz P4, 1GB dual channel RAM running@ 400 Mhz, and an ATI Radeon X300. When I played BF2, it would crash 1/4 of the time before loading a map
On my last PC(it wasn't mine, i was building it for my dad, and he let me borrow it) I was using an AMD athlon 64 3800+, 1GB single channel RAM running @ 667 Mhz, and integrated Nvidia GeForce 6100(integrated graphics) and it ran Battlefield 2 like a charm. Not only did it never crash, it also played at higher FPS, and with better lighting and texture than the P4.
so, yeah, the AMD64 kicked the **** out of the P4
Â
I'm runnig C&C 3 in my PC with low graphics (P4HT 3.06GHz,1GB DDR2,Radeon X200) no problems at all.
I'm turning my PC on @ about 12.00PM & turning off @ about 11.00PM.
Sometimes 2 or 3 days runing without shutdown or restarting.
No problems.
Intel is the best.
AMD is a crap
[QUOTE="LahiruD"]Intel is the best.
AMD is a crap
RayvinAzn
Seriously, where are they all coming from?
Intel's hiding shed :roll:
Seriously, those guys will be biting their tongue when the Core 2 duo killer comes to town, this coming from a Core 2 Extreme user...... that's just how this business works, same deal with the 8800's, their time will come, ATI is just playing catch up for now, but I will accept the fact that someday my 8800's will be beaten, there's no other way to think about this. And this is sooo beside the point anyways, yes TC, turning on your PC 24/7 is fine. I've been doing it for several months already, just remember to do the occasional restart so that it won't bog down the system processes.Â
[QUOTE="LahiruD"]Intel is the best.
AMD is a crap
RayvinAzn
Seriously, where are they all coming from?Â
The opposite end of the spectrum that the socialist AMD fanboys are coming from? I was saying that MY P4 worked great, and it did. AMD64s were better, but P4s weren't junk. Two factors make up my CPU choice. 1) If it's Intel and 2) What performs better. If they're similar I'll take Intel everytime. And I don't appreciate personal attacks, considering what I've said in other threads had nothing to do with economics, but my personal feelings about AMD. Also, I'm in the top 5% in a nationally-ranked college in case you were wondering.
The opposite end of the spectrum that the socialist AMD fanboys are coming from?
Staryoshi87
Except I don't recall nearly as many blatantly false statements coming from them, nor so many pointless "upgrades", like people advising someone with a still perfectly viable PCI-e Socket 939 system to run to a Core 2 Duo motherboard. Completely forgetting that a change like that will cost three times what a decent dual-core processor for 939 would cost.
Why, are you standing up for the Intel fanboys or something?Â
[QUOTE="Staryoshi87"]The opposite end of the spectrum that the socialist AMD fanboys are coming from?
RayvinAzn
Except I don't recall nearly as many blatantly false statements coming from them, nor so many pointless "upgrades", like people advising someone with a still perfectly viable PCI-e Socket 939 system to run to a Core 2 Duo motherboard. Completely forgetting that a change like that will cost three times what a decent dual-core processor for 939 would cost.
Why, are you standing up for the Intel fanboys or something?Â
As an intel fanboy, I wouldn't recommend that change at this time. (Unless they had the money to spend freely, of course) This is becoming too time consuming, though, as I have finals to work on =/ I'll leave things open for people to bash Intel because they're Intel. ;) (If you let P4 go I'll let X2/FX go.... ;))
As an intel fanboy, I wouldn't recommend that change at this time.
Staryoshi87
Neither would I - and it's reccomendations like that which really make me question a lot of the fanboyism floating around. It has gone beyond brand preference into the realm of inane advice and asinine recommendations regarding upgrades. Not all Intel fans are like this, of course - but quite a few are, and their numbers seem to be swelling (or at least posting) at an alarming rate. My concern is first and foremost for the buyer of the parts - I try to give out the best advice I can, and if I'm unsure of something, I try to make that clear. If I do give bad advice, I generally apologize. The only people I would recommend AMD to at this point are extremely tight budget machines (and with the E4300 prices being what they are, those days are fast coming to an end as well), but that doesn't mean AMD is a bad company, or makes a bad product. They're simply behind the curve for the time being.
[QUOTE="Staryoshi87"]As an intel fanboy, I wouldn't recommend that change at this time.
RayvinAzn
Neither would I - and it's reccomendations like that which really make me question a lot of the fanboyism floating around. It has gone beyond brand preference into the realm of inane advice and asinine recommendations regarding upgrades. Not all Intel fans are like this, of course - but quite a few are, and their numbers seem to be swelling (or at least posting) at an alarming rate. My concern is first and foremost for the buyer of the parts - I try to give out the best advice I can, and if I'm unsure of something, I try to make that clear. If I do give bad advice, I generally apologize. The only people I would recommend AMD to at this point are extremely tight budget machines (and with the E4300 prices being what they are, those days are fast coming to an end as well), but that doesn't mean AMD is a bad company, or makes a bad product. They're simply behind the curve for the time being.
Oh mi gosh! I agree! =D
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment