Amd is Going Down, Intel Is King Again ** BS **

[440bx]

Regardless of who released the first dual core, my nights are never going to be same again. I just found out egyptians were the first to release pyramids

really !?

can you provide a link to back that up ?

 

[chiefwonk]

Look

In 2000
Amd was the first to break the 1ghz barrier with the Athlon
Nov. 20 Intel Introduces Pentium 4 1st new desktop processor

Apr. 23, 2001
Intel Launches 1.5 ghz Pentium 4 Chip design since the Pentium Pro processor in 1995 (if i remember correctly AMD and Intel during the few years to follow went back in forth in performance winners)


2003
AMD launches the Opterons and Athlong 64 processors (taking back the crown not only in performance but in price and not really looking back until now)

2005
AMD Releases the first true dual core cpu's Opterons and A64's

2006
Jan 05 Intel Releases its version of dual core the Core Duo
Aug Intel Releases the Core 2 Duo which retook the Performance Crown (the price battle continues)




LET me continue

in 2007 AMD will be king again cuz of K8L,,4X4 or a possible 2 socket quad core
Intel will release Quad core in late 2006 or 1Q 2007 but i believe 4x4 has a slight lead on intel quad core cuz of Hypertransport

 

[ivan_lee05]

yeah.... but how about the price? the heat? the power consumption?



your 4X4 is such a sucks..


your Quad Core is Too FAR away from now.

 

[lordroddington]

just to clarify...
i'm fairly certain that the pentium d 800 series was actually two cores on one chip, rather than two chips "glued" together. once they switched over to the 65nm 900 series they switched over to the two chip method. the fsb bottleneck was obviously there in the 800 series, but it was actually a dual core chip.

 

[joefriday]

Itaniums probably don't sell as well because they cost a lot more. Also, as pointed out already, the Itanium does not natively run 32 bit code, making the Opteron more desirable if 32 bit code will be used. However, in 64 bit applications, the Itanium is an incredible processor. Once again, we get down to "what's the right tool for the job?". Not everyone needs Itanium processors for their servers. NASA seems to be doing fine with their 10,000 Itanium super computer though.

You're judging the merits of a CPU based on its sales? That's pretty lame. I could do the same by looking at how many FX-62s AMD sells. I'm willing to guess the number would be pretty low compared to the number of Pentium D 805s being sold. Am I then to come to the conclusion that the Pentium D 805 is superior to the FX-62 because it sells better? :roll:

 

[Heyhey]

AMD's have to be some of the worst performing chips outthere , and they are really bad multitaskers , I adore intel actually , their chips are superior to AMDS.

 

[buckiller]

AMD's have to be some of the worst performing chips outthere , and they are really bad multitaskers , I adore intel actually , their chips are superior to AMDS.

good addition to this discussion....

 

[Heyhey]

thanks , im only stating the truth , AMD really cant make a decent chip worth buying.

 

[fredgiblet]

thanks , im only stating the truth , AMD really cant make a decent chip worth buying.

Hmmm...so all those thousands of benchmarks over the past few years showing AMD beating Intel are wrong? Strange...

 

[Heyhey]

thanks , im only stating the truth , AMD really cant make a decent chip worth buying.

Hmmm...so all those thousands of benchmarks over the past few years showing AMD beating Intel are wrong? Strange...

well The benchmarks by tomshardware over the years have shown that the Prescott Cpu's were superior in most benchmarks oover any other AMD processors available.

 

[fredgiblet]

AMD's have to be some of the worst performing chips outthere

Actually for the last 4-5 years AMD has consistently outperformed Intel. The Athlon XP beat the P4 regularly (though admittedly not always). When Intel released the Northwood (I think) P4, AMD dropped in the Athlon 64 and proceeded to win consistently again. In fact in the Athlon XP era (and even in the begininng of the A64 era) AMD's chips were faster AND cheaper.

and they are really bad multitaskers

Once again, the benchmarks don't back you up. Since the original Athlon AMD has always been competitive in every aspect of performance, sometimes not the best but (until C2D) always near the top.

I adore intel actually

That explains a lot

their chips are superior to AMDS.

The Core 2 Duo architechture is significantly better than the Athlon 64, but the original Athlon beat the PIII, the Athlon XP beat the original P4, the Athlon 64 beat the late model P4's, and lastly the X2 beats the P4-D. You are entitled to your opinon of course, but you are completely and utterly wrong.

EDIT: To be fair though, the PII was better than the K6 series...for the most part. And the Pentium M and Core series are excellent laptop procs.

 

[randomizer]

thanks , im only stating the truth , AMD really cant make a decent chip worth buying.

Hmmm...so all those thousands of benchmarks over the past few years showing AMD beating Intel are wrong? Strange...

well The benchmarks by tomshardware over the years have shown that the Prescott Cpu's were superior in most benchmarks oover any other AMD processors available.
Its the "Why does AMD suck so much?" Intel fanboy again :roll: . Unfortunately prescotts burn up too fast to be able to test them properly so maybe thats why they lost so many benchmarks.

EDIT: Dude just look at the CPU charts (I am now). I struggle to find a Prescott that wins anywhere.

 

[fredgiblet]

In multi-tasking the P4 EE 965 is beat by the X2 4000, which probably cost 1/3 as much.

EDIT: well one of the multi-tasking things at least.
EDIT: In the other one, it's on par with the 940.

 

[Heyhey]

thanks , im only stating the truth , AMD really cant make a decent chip worth buying.

Hmmm...so all those thousands of benchmarks over the past few years showing AMD beating Intel are wrong? Strange...

well The benchmarks by tomshardware over the years have shown that the Prescott Cpu's were superior in most benchmarks oover any other AMD processors available.
Its the "Why does AMD suck so much?" Intel fanboy again :roll: . Unfortunately prescotts burn up too fast to be able to test them properly so maybe thats why they lost so many benchmarks.

EDIT: Dude just look at the CPU charts (I am now). I struggle to find a Prescott that wins anywhere.

not true at all , Presscot CPU's beat the AMD in every other benchmark except Gaming. and they win by a sigificant amount in multitasking , encoding , decoding , and multimedia benchmarks. Lets face it , the AMD's run really hot , consideribly hotter then the Presscotts.

 

[young]

Look


LET me continue

in 2007 AMD will be king again cuz of K8L,,4X4 or a possible 2 socket quad core
Intel will release Quad core in late 2006 or 1Q 2007 but i believe 4x4 has a slight lead on intel quad core cuz of Hypertransport

AMD 4X4 is not the answer to Conroe or Kentsfield. Kentsfield samples are already out and it is a very impressive processor and 4X4 will not be able to touch it!!! We will find out how far AMD is behind or ahead when K8L launches mid next year.

 

[randomizer]

not true at all , Presscot CPU's beat the AMD in every other benchmark except Gaming. and they win by a sigificant amount in multitasking , encoding , decoding , and multimedia benchmarks. Lets face it , the AMD's run really hot , consideribly hotter then the Presscotts.

I think not. Are you talking about Prescotts or Preslers here? Only the Preslers win in any significant amount of benchmarks. And I dont know what planet you come from but AMD processors are much cooler than prescotts, except the FX-62 which doubles as a heater along with your prescotts.

 

[Heyhey]

Look


LET me continue

in 2007 AMD will be king again cuz of K8L,,4X4 or a possible 2 socket quad core
Intel will release Quad core in late 2006 or 1Q 2007 but i believe 4x4 has a slight lead on intel quad core cuz of Hypertransport

AMD 4X4 is not the answer to Conroe or Kentsfield. Kentsfield samples are already out and it is a very impressive processor and 4X4 will not be able to touch it!!! We will find out how far AMD is behind or ahead when K8L launches mid next year.

yess you are right , Conroe wont be touched at all by 4x4.

 

[randomizer]

Look


LET me continue

in 2007 AMD will be king again cuz of K8L,,4X4 or a possible 2 socket quad core
Intel will release Quad core in late 2006 or 1Q 2007 but i believe 4x4 has a slight lead on intel quad core cuz of Hypertransport

AMD 4X4 is not the answer to Conroe or Kentsfield. Kentsfield samples are already out and it is a very impressive processor and 4X4 will not be able to touch it!!! We will find out how far AMD is behind or ahead when K8L launches mid next year.
Have there been any test samples of 4x4 yet? If not then I cant see how you can say that it wont be able to touch Kentsfield. It could deal a definitive blow to Intel, and then again it could be nothing but a marketing gimic. We need hard evidence before we can make conclusions.

 

[young]

Look


LET me continue

in 2007 AMD will be king again cuz of K8L,,4X4 or a possible 2 socket quad core
Intel will release Quad core in late 2006 or 1Q 2007 but i believe 4x4 has a slight lead on intel quad core cuz of Hypertransport

AMD 4X4 is not the answer to Conroe or Kentsfield. Kentsfield samples are already out and it is a very impressive processor and 4X4 will not be able to touch it!!! We will find out how far AMD is behind or ahead when K8L launches mid next year.
Have there been any test samples of 4x4 yet? If not then I cant see how you can say that it wont be able to touch Kentsfield. It could deal a definitive blow to Intel, and then again it could be nothing but a marketing gimic. We need hard evidence before we can make conclusions.


4X4 is not a true 4 core processor vs. kentsfield that is a true 4 core processor.

 

[Heyhey]

Look


LET me continue

in 2007 AMD will be king again cuz of K8L,,4X4 or a possible 2 socket quad core
Intel will release Quad core in late 2006 or 1Q 2007 but i believe 4x4 has a slight lead on intel quad core cuz of Hypertransport

AMD 4X4 is not the answer to Conroe or Kentsfield. Kentsfield samples are already out and it is a very impressive processor and 4X4 will not be able to touch it!!! We will find out how far AMD is behind or ahead when K8L launches mid next year.
Have there been any test samples of 4x4 yet? If not then I cant see how you can say that it wont be able to touch Kentsfield. It could deal a definitive blow to Intel, and then again it could be nothing but a marketing gimic. We need hard evidence before we can make conclusions.


4X4 is not a true 4 core processor vs. kentsfield that is a true 4 core processor.

Exactly !! . AMD cant make a decent processor.

 

[Action_Man]

This thread needs to be locked.

 

[randomizer]

sorry randomizer
we are really talking about C2D vs any amd proc. please defend amd from C2D. that is funny!

I'm not talking about C2D, I'm talking about prescott. Im not that stupid as to mix them up. And no I will not try and defend AMD against C2D because theres no point, only fanboys do that.

Read this:

Presscot CPU's beat the AMD in every other benchmark except Gaming. and they win by a sigificant amount in multitasking , encoding , decoding , and multimedia benchmarks. Lets face it , the AMD's run really hot , consideribly hotter then the Presscotts.

This guy needs to get his info right.

 

[young]

AMD has been making better processors than Intel passed few years. We have to thank AMD for making good processors or we will not have Conroe to enjoy now!!

 

[randomizer]

Look


LET me continue

in 2007 AMD will be king again cuz of K8L,,4X4 or a possible 2 socket quad core
Intel will release Quad core in late 2006 or 1Q 2007 but i believe 4x4 has a slight lead on intel quad core cuz of Hypertransport

AMD 4X4 is not the answer to Conroe or Kentsfield. Kentsfield samples are already out and it is a very impressive processor and 4X4 will not be able to touch it!!! We will find out how far AMD is behind or ahead when K8L launches mid next year.
Have there been any test samples of 4x4 yet? If not then I cant see how you can say that it wont be able to touch Kentsfield. It could deal a definitive blow to Intel, and then again it could be nothing but a marketing gimic. We need hard evidence before we can make conclusions.


4X4 is not a true 4 core processor vs. kentsfield that is a true 4 core processor.

Exactly !! . AMD cant make a decent processor.
And neither can Intel, the Pentium D is not a true Dual Core processor, whereas the X2 is.

EDIT: I better erase a few quotes or my posts are gonna be huge! :lol:

 

[9-inch]

sorry randomizer
we are really talking about C2D vs any amd proc. please defend amd from C2D. that is funny!

I'm not talking about C2D, I'm talking about prescott. Im not that stupid as to mix them up. And no I will not try and defend AMD against C2D because theres no point, only fanboys do that.

Read this:

Presscot CPU's beat the AMD in every other benchmark except Gaming. and they win by a sigificant amount in multitasking , encoding , decoding , and multimedia benchmarks. Lets face it , the AMD's run really hot , consideribly hotter then the Presscotts.

This guy needs to get his info right.

By judging his pattern, I believe this guy is porkster. Only losers like him will believe that intel's presshot was better than AMD's K8 processor (call it single or dual core).