Comments on: AMD to Intel: This is what quad-core is all about

By: Ontolon

Ontolon — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 21:21:31 +0000

This is the thing. What do you want to do with your computer? How much do you want to pay? How much energy does it take to do it?

AMD processors provide the bang for the buck. Their designs for the chips are excellent, and provide the alternative to Intel.

Intel has the power and the dollars to produce more chips, offer more choices, and incentives for other companies to buy their products.

It’s all about the money and market share.

AMD is a company I’d like to see continue to exist. I don’t want to be stuck using intel when they decide to run AMD to the ground, and then have intel make products that are unreliable. Competition breeds innovation and that is the story. AMD must survive for this reason. I mean, do we want to use crappy products? Remember Cyrix?

By: Darko

Darko — Tue, 11 Dec 2007 17:34:15 +0000

just think, AMD wouldnt be around constantly whining and crying about intel if it wasnt for their first lawsuit against Intel to be able to clone the Pentium 2 as a cheaper choice. For a company that has taken Intel to court over and over constantly crying and whining so they can have INTEL’S technology is rather pathetic. Yes, AMD started making their own technologies, the first being the Thunderbird, but at a price of Intel’s technology. Remember people AMD would not be around if it werent for their constant crying in court rooms as usual when they start to falter off. (like now, and look, back in court with Intel) What else can they make up and plant in people’s minds to get more of Intel’s technology? Hi-K Gate tech next? OMG Get real people do your research and look whats goin on you AMD crybabies

By: Digicol

Digicol — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 10:21:53 +0000

So is there any more news on these processors? 2007 is almost over and AMD are trailing in Intels wake! I will be building 2 new systems for with a budget of about £600 ($1,200) for each base unit.

I need to know how far off these porcessors are from being released. If they do not get off their backsides and do something soon I will be looking at Intels awesome offerings.

Anyone shine a light on the release date?

By: John

John — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 18:38:50 +0000

Man I can’t believe that AMD’s single core athlon is so bad compared to intels Q6600. Oh wait, they are different products, with different techs, with different specs. Post the numbers from shipping products or get off the PR wagon. It’s fine if AMD is the winner, that’s great. This chatter is useless.
Back to the regularly scheduled program…

By: Nick

Nick — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 23:40:26 +0000

George, I am reading and reading more about Intels Peryn 45 Nm processors, and then even further down the road in 2008 another impressive sounding change in their chips. Can you tell me if AMD will offer an alternative any time soon. Loved the article on the AMD Quad core. Hope it is something special.
Let me know.

By: Antonio

Antonio — Thu, 24 May 2007 12:08:17 +0000

Intel Vs AMD war can be understood with a simple aspect:
-AMD creates and develops technology.
-Intel uses it’s power to copy and enhance AMD’s work and uses it as Intel results.

See:
-PPro: -A true enhanced copy of AMD 6 series
-Core: -A true enhanced copy of Opteron concepts (increased paralellism, shorter pipelines, …), shown since 7 series
-Multi core: (no explanations needed)

Intel made an incredible mistake with Netburst and RDRAM to desperately answer to AMD Athlon, It seems will happen the same now, with Quad core…

By: George Gardner

George Gardner — Wed, 16 May 2007 00:16:29 +0000

Hey, call me AMD PR if you want, but in my experiences, AMD is a more than sufficient processor for an excellent price.

But who’s bashing Intel? I just presented the facts, and you, awr, came to that conclusion. I certainly did not try to make you feel threatened by AMD’s advantage with quad-core processors.

By: Prem

Prem — Tue, 15 May 2007 16:03:11 +0000

All this is completely meaningless – what matter is how does the chip perform. We know Intel performance for 6 months since they launch quad-core – we have no clue about AMD. Their PR just says numbers without any details to what it is compared – nothing measured. Just promises for long time… I suggest to call new chip Phantom :-)

By: mlauzon

mlauzon — Tue, 15 May 2007 13:18:07 +0000

Said like a true Intel fanboy, I’ve used both companies processors, both are good for what they do.

‘awr’: can you tell me the first company — Intel or AMD — that made the first 1GHz processor?!

By: awr

awr — Tue, 15 May 2007 04:46:47 +0000

You’ve fallen for the AMD PR line .. oh, wait .. you ARE AMD PR