This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for nic4games
nic4games

311

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#1 nic4games
Member since 2005 • 311 Posts
is it ok if my computer is turned on 24 hours in three days?
Avatar image for fynne
fynne

8078

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 fynne
Member since 2002 • 8078 Posts
Sure.  At work we never power off our PCs.  You will see higher electric bills though.
Avatar image for 353535355353535
353535355353535

4424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#3 353535355353535
Member since 2005 • 4424 Posts
Sure.  At work we never power off our PCs.  You will see higher electric bills though.fynne
LOL
Avatar image for j3ninja10
j3ninja10

1434

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 j3ninja10
Member since 2007 • 1434 Posts
24 hours in 3 days? are you kidding me, what do you turn it on for only 3 hours then turn it off cause ur afraid it will get damaged?  why would you buy something and not use it, thats what i dont get.
Avatar image for harless
harless

367

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 harless
Member since 2003 • 367 Posts

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.

Avatar image for LahiruD
LahiruD

2164

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 LahiruD
Member since 2006 • 2164 Posts

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

Avatar image for RayvinAzn
RayvinAzn

12552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 RayvinAzn
Member since 2004 • 12552 Posts

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

LahiruD

Intel puts out its first decent processor this millenium, and the Intel fans just start crawling out of the woodwork. 

Avatar image for GRiMeY
GRiMeY

9722

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 GRiMeY
Member since 2002 • 9722 Posts

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.

Avatar image for DeeJayInphinity
DeeJayInphinity

13415

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#9 DeeJayInphinity
Member since 2004 • 13415 Posts
It's not a problem at all. Practically all PC hardware is designed to run for long periods of time without having to shut down at all. There are 2 problems when running PCs 24/7; electricity bills and heating. If you can handle both, then you're set to go. Your PC shouldn't live less because of that, and if it does affect its lifetime, you shouldn't notice it since you'll be on your new PC by then. It takes many years for a PC to break down. Many people still have PCs that are 10+ years old and still run very well.
Avatar image for 353535355353535
353535355353535

4424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#10 353535355353535
Member since 2005 • 4424 Posts

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

uhh, I think it may be a little more than that.

BTW, my parents own a shop, and the server has been running non-stop for, I dont know, forever.

Avatar image for Staryoshi87
Staryoshi87

12760

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#11 Staryoshi87
Member since 2003 • 12760 Posts
[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. 

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.

Avatar image for 353535355353535
353535355353535

4424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#12 353535355353535
Member since 2005 • 4424 Posts
Facts are facts, and the fact is the AMD 64 kicked the P4s ass! I know from personal experience
Avatar image for Staryoshi87
Staryoshi87

12760

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#13 Staryoshi87
Member since 2003 • 12760 Posts

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.

Avatar image for 353535355353535
353535355353535

4424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#14 353535355353535
Member since 2005 • 4424 Posts

[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

Avatar image for Staryoshi87
Staryoshi87

12760

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#15 Staryoshi87
Member since 2003 • 12760 Posts

Bah, I don't have time for this. Love on AMD all you want ;)

Avatar image for Runningflame570
Runningflame570

10388

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#16 Runningflame570
Member since 2005 • 10388 Posts

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.

Avatar image for RayvinAzn
RayvinAzn

12552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 RayvinAzn
Member since 2004 • 12552 Posts

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?

Avatar image for EJSGAME
EJSGAME

44

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#18 EJSGAME
Member since 2004 • 44 Posts
[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. 

 LMAO! no kidding!

Avatar image for LahiruD
LahiruD

2164

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#19 LahiruD
Member since 2006 • 2164 Posts
[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

 

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

Avatar image for RayvinAzn
RayvinAzn

12552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 RayvinAzn
Member since 2004 • 12552 Posts

Intel is the best.

AMD is a crap

LahiruD

Seriously, where are they all coming from? 

Avatar image for jfelisario
jfelisario

2753

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 jfelisario
Member since 2006 • 2753 Posts
[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. 

Avatar image for 353535355353535
353535355353535

4424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#22 353535355353535
Member since 2005 • 4424 Posts
these fanboys are crawling out of the woodwork!
Avatar image for Staryoshi87
Staryoshi87

12760

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#23 Staryoshi87
Member since 2003 • 12760 Posts
[QUOTE="LahiruD"]

Intel is the best.

AMD is a crap

RayvinAzn

Seriously, where are they all coming from? 

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.

Avatar image for RayvinAzn
RayvinAzn

12552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#24 RayvinAzn
Member since 2004 • 12552 Posts

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? 

Avatar image for Staryoshi87
Staryoshi87

12760

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#25 Staryoshi87
Member since 2003 • 12760 Posts
[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? 

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.... ;))

Avatar image for RayvinAzn
RayvinAzn

12552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 RayvinAzn
Member since 2004 • 12552 Posts

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.

Avatar image for Staryoshi87
Staryoshi87

12760

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#27 Staryoshi87
Member since 2003 • 12760 Posts
[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