 | View Full Version : RackShack - AMD vs. RAQ JokeU 01-04-2002, 09:57 PM Which is better? I'll be getting one of them, but I don't really know the difference. I heard AMD had more power, but RAQ was easier to use. AMD: http://www.rackshack.net/specsamd.asp RAQ: http://www.rackshack.net/specsraq.asp Thanks in advance. Chicken 01-04-2002, 10:01 PM Well, are you thinking of getting plesk or ensim with it as well? JokeU 01-04-2002, 10:08 PM It looks like you can get one that comes with Plesk or Ensim. What's the difference between the two and what does it do? JokeU 01-05-2002, 01:48 AM Anyone? Chicken 01-05-2002, 02:05 AM For that you'll want to either search The Control Panel Forum (http://www.webhostingtalk.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=9) or just go there and read through a couple of pages worth of posts. adhytia 01-05-2002, 02:09 AM On my experince Cobalt RAQ is use AMD Processors.. So that couple is the same... The different is, Cobalt Raq have their own software build by Sun Microsystem... But AMD Computer is on your own, you can install it whatever you want.... Adhytia JokeU 01-05-2002, 02:11 AM Thanks. I'll probably go with the AMD server. ckpeter 01-05-2002, 01:28 PM Originally posted by adhytia On my experince Cobalt RAQ is use AMD Processors.. So that couple is the same... The different is, Cobalt Raq have their own software build by Sun Microsystem... But AMD Computer is on your own, you can install it whatever you want.... Adhytia Not true, while they are all AMD processors, the raq uses AMD K6(450MHz), while the white box is AMD Althon 1Ghz. Huge difference, Peter web_res 01-06-2002, 03:19 AM Well it uses a AMD Duron 1 ghz, although not as big of difference between those two as the K6 450 mhz. joe52 01-06-2002, 12:41 PM Originally posted by web_res Well it uses a AMD Duron 1 ghz, although not as big of difference between those two as the K6 450 mhz. Actually, it's still a huge difference. A 1 ghz Duron is a lot closer in performance to a similarly clocked Athlon than it is to a K6-2 450. ckpeter 01-06-2002, 12:45 PM OK, I remembered incorrectly, its Duron. Still, A duron is much faster than the K62, its twice the speed, and with other enhancement I am sure. Peter web_res 01-06-2002, 02:51 PM Umm you misinterpreted me, I meant that there isn't a big difference with those two (Duron+Athlon 1 ghz) compared to the difference between the athlon/duron and the 450 mhz k6. islandesign 01-08-2002, 06:06 AM The AMD K6 2 series are grossly slow processors. I would guess that an AMD K6 450 CPU is about equal in speed to an Intel PII 300. Why Cobalt chose to build their boxes around such underpowered CPU's is beyond me (even if they could get the CPU's for $10 each!) If I were to ever get a RAQ, it would have definately been worth it to spend $50-$100 up front to get a decent CPU included! munaf 01-08-2002, 09:42 AM Originally posted by ckpeter Not true, while they are all AMD processors, the raq uses AMD K6(450MHz), while the white box is AMD Althon 1Ghz. Huge difference, Peter its mean that AMD white box is better then RAQ? ckpeter 01-08-2002, 11:17 AM Yes, the white box is a lot more powerful than the raq. You buy the raq mainly for the control panel. I guess cobalt use K62 beause that's what available at the time and they never changed it, perhapes because they want to standardize on one CPU. Peter |