When are these assertions (ever) correct?

[Fat Tone]

1) It has to be an Intel processor?

2) I need 256MB graphics ram? (in a gaming context)

[TransformX]

1. When encoding video or stuff like this. It's one of the only things in which cpu cycles (Mhz) do make a difference.

2. Not yet AFAIK unless you're doing OpenGL with Wildcat graphic cards.

[GNEP]

1) Before the AMD 386DX-40 came out

2) Not unless you like to boast without justification (and this reason seems to influence more buying-logic I've seen than anything else)

[Gurm]

There aren't even any games that REALLY push a 128-MB card unless you start using AA.

I guess you COULD, in THEORY, use up the entire 256MB of RAM with like 16xAA and stuff like that.

- Gurm

[Indiana]

Yes, 6x FSAA and 16x AF in very high resolutions (e.g. 1600x1200) could use more than 128MB of gfx-card RAM. But then, the GPU would be most likely too slow for most games to run decently at this res./quality settings...

As for the Intel-comment: I don't think this is ever true (would be the same when replacing Intel with AMD, btw.)
Even with Video-encoding, it majorly depends on the used encoding software: in TMPeg, e.g. Intel is faster, but there are some other MPEG2-encoding softwares where the Athlon64 is at least as fast.
DivX is slightly faster on Intel now, but there's a 64Bit Version of the DivX encoder coming soon, so...

Just look at the specific tasks you're doing, then look at the rel. performance of the CPUs and get the one which price/performance ratio best matches your needs. Looking for specific brands against logic was and is always a silly thing to do...

[isochar]

1. I believe that some companies create custom applications which are specifically coded for a specific Intel processors and chipsets...

[Wombat]

1) For a long time, Intel had a reputation of reliability, and AMD had a reputation for quirkiness. AMD has made Intel sweat enough that Intel has stumbled, and released/rushed some buggy products. Also, AMD has been getting some decent hardware support finally (even VIA got better, and they're the worst).

The "has to be Intel" thought is pretty much an outdated idea.

[Taz]

The Intel only thing is only really relevant if it's with an Intel chipset, as that's the cause of most problems rather than the CPU

[The PIT]

Well I use 900mb of ram when using my chess programs and more if I'm running something else as well. It depends what you're doing.

[Indiana]

Originally posted by Taz
The Intel only thing is only really relevant if it's with an Intel chipset, as that's the cause of most problems rather than the CPU

And even then the 875/865 boards operate quite flaky with some hardware out there (e.g. early AGP8x cards, but other compatibility issues are reported as well).

@ ThePit: you overread the graphics RAM...

[isochar]

Thought of another situation, some specialized software vendors require a certain platform to operate on - otherwise support won't be provided.

[gt40]

Originally posted by Indiana
@ ThePit: you overread the graphics RAM...

I believe he was being silly.

[az]

You're never quite sure with The PIT

AZ

[Marshmallowman]

2) in 3 years

[TnT]

2) Either:
a) When the next gen vid cards come out with 512 MB of RAM.
or
b) When HL2 comes out, so really 5 years.