[citation][nom]Eugenester[/nom]Dude, go back to your Intel fanboy base. If you think AMD is crappy, have some logic behind it you clueless dolt. And don't respond with that Intel has faster processors bs becuase they both cater to different markets. And how theu f are they "confusing" the market? Its very existence is stopping Intel to have a monopoly on CPUs and therefore charging w/e the hell they want to.[/citation]
Before you're so critical, try to be smarter.
Intel processors are roughly the same size as AMD, and perform a lot better. And i7 9xx and Phenom quad are very, very close in size. But, not in performance.
AMD is forced to be a bottom-feeder because of this reality, not because they chose to go after a different market. If they made a chip half the size that was cheaper, great. It's the same size, but it's just badly designed and has to be sold at low margins because it's inferior.
But, Killerclick is maybe more clueless. I don't know why he thinks AMD is confusing the market. Intel does that by itself. i7 860/870 cross i7 930. i5 670/680 cross i5 750. Some i5s are quads, some not. Some i7s are real Nehalems, some are Lynnfields. Then they have the i5 750s, which doesn't clock the same as the i5 750.
To me, AMD makes a Hell of a lot more sense than Intel.
No one was telling Intel to leave the market when they were producing the Pentium 4. AMD sells junk processors now, we all know that. We all knew that Intel sold junk with the Pentium 4. Did that mean they couldn't come out with something better? So why assume AMD can't? At least AMD knows they sell rubbish and price it accordingly. Intel was still overpriced when they sold the Pentium 4.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram