hafijur :
lol, intel are so far ahead. 4 years ago it was close now its the biggest gap in the history between intel and amd. Piledriver and bulldozer are massive flops. AMD would have been better off downshrinking the older phenom 2 cpus to 32nm. I find it staggering how from 45nm core 2 series penryn cpus on laptops to ivy bridge 22nm cpus they have improved so much. I think sandy bridge took amd by suprise and since then intel haven't looked back and amd engineers are scratching there heads to wonder how intel are doing this.
Intel nehalem was a big flop but at 3ghz the i7 competes against the fx8350 and this is on 45nm. At 4ghz it should match the fx8350 as well.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/100?vs=697
Sandy bridge gigantically improved effiency and ipc and added igpu for i7's and took half power consumption to destroy nehalem cpus. Thats when amd were blown away.
I SAID KNOCK IT OFF ABOUT INTEL ALREADY!!!!
Now you get the wrath...I warned you:
Intel has constantly been trying to use under handed, unethical practices to cut AMD out of any and all business possible, see here:
http://www.dailytech.com/European+Commission+Fines+Intel+145B/article15124.htm
http://www.edn.com/electronics-news/4313130/Intel-faces-New-York-antitrust-lawsuit
AMD has won 2 separate lawsuits against Intel and was a co-litigator in a 3rd:
In 1992, a court awarded AMD $10 million because Intel used business practices which violated industry ethical standards and were anti-competitive.
In 2009, a court awarded AMD 1.25 billion because Intel was back to the same old shenanigans and the same laws were broken, yet again. Additionally, this case required Intel to remove it's "Genuine Intel" CPUID check from the ICC Compiler...
which has still not been done to this day over 4 years later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_v._Intel
http://are.berkeley.edu/~sberto/AMDIntel.pdf
Intel has a history of providing biased benchmarks as part of their "propaganda" as it's come to be colloquially called among industry insiders...one such example is the recently unveiled AnTuTu benchmark scandal...that is but one of many.
Intel's process is Tri-Gate, which is a complicated process...but they use bulk wafers to produce it, instead of SOI. This means they must take a few extra steps in the production process (extra mask layers) in order to make the chips. This reduces yields, and results in an inferior quality of product with a greater variety of results seen in the capability of the CPU to achieve clockspeeds.
This is why all of their Tri-Gate CPUs are a crap shoot for overclockers.
Intel has undertaken every possible endeavor to cheat their way through keeping their competition out of the race, and have been caught and called out
numerous times the fact that there is anyone even willing to buy their products boggles my mind, as the company truly is
the evil empire. They paid Dell computers $6 billion for them to not offer an AMD product in their PCs when the Athlon was a superior product to Intel in every possible way. There are several other examples of this with other manufacturers.
No amount of performance per watt discussion will change anyone in this thread's mind about what kind of company Intel is, and so you can kindly shut-up about Intel from this point forward. Keep your Intel rants to yourself, all you are doing here is racking up post count and driving up the number of pages of this thread because, frankly, you're really starting to irk the people who read this thread for
productive information about AMD.
Now please...go do something else!!!