 |
 |
AMD spoofs the Matrix |
 |
 Posted: Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:29 pm |
 |
|
| Message |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 12:11 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 14, 2006 12:26 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| illusivemind wrote: | | Oh my gawd.... |
Exactly... when the old man reveals his name, I almost fell...
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:57 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
Oh My God. 
That truly requires a front page post. Any chance that part can be captured and posted to Youtube or some such? If not I'll try to post directions on how to see it.
And um, remind me to shy away from AMD chips. 
EDIT: Posted...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2006 11:34 pm |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| sfam wrote: | | And um, remind me to shy away from AMD chips. |
Why? They did hide it, didn't they?
Fight the Man, SFAM. I'm 100% AMD here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:15 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| [ETM] wrote: |
Fight the Man, SFAM. I'm 100% AMD here. |
Same here but at the moment AMD is having a hard time because Intel is really making it hard for them with their Core 2 Duo CPUs. They currently outperform any AMD processor available on the market
_________________
Linux 4ever!
http://microchip.bplaced.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:37 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| microchip wrote: | | [ETM] wrote: |
Fight the Man, SFAM. I'm 100% AMD here. |
Same here but at the moment AMD is having a hard time because Intel is really making it hard for them with their Core 2 Duo CPUs. They currently outperform any AMD processor available on the market |
This is true, but remember - Intel hasn't had a product like this in years, and since AMD is not the company they were when Intel ruled, this only means that we can expect an even better product from them to fight off the Core 2 Duo attack. Competition... it does sound wonderful, does it not? 
Last edited by [ETM] on Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:46 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:42 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
@ ETM, yes it does 'cause competition accelerates development and also brings prices down which is good for us, the consumers 
_________________
Linux 4ever!
http://microchip.bplaced.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:59 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| microchip wrote: | | @ ETM, yes it does 'cause competition accelerates development and also brings prices down which is good for us, the consumers |
If only the free-market actually did everything they said it does. 
_________________
-Just a thought-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:03 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| illusivemind wrote: | | microchip wrote: | | @ ETM, yes it does 'cause competition accelerates development and also brings prices down which is good for us, the consumers |
If only the free-market actually did everything they said it does. |
The free market DOES to everything it says it does, and MORE!!!
The problem is with the more...this "more" usually involves bending the consumer over and...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:47 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | @ ETM, yes it does 'cause competition accelerates development and also brings prices down which is good for us, the consumers |
Sorry bud, prices don't accelerate down, technological progress does, its called: "Moores Law". Its nicely summarized as: "Every 18 months the power of a processor is doubled while the price stays the same". So for example: buy a Pentuim 4 processor (1.5 GHz) for 800$ when it first came out, wait 18 months and you can by a Pentium Extrem Edition Processor (3.2 GHz) for approx the same price.
| sfam wrote: | | illusivemind wrote: | | microchip wrote: | | @ ETM, yes it does 'cause competition accelerates development and also brings prices down which is good for us, the consumers |
If only the free-market actually did everything they said it does. |
The free market DOES to everything it says it does, and MORE!!!
The problem is with the more...this "more" usually involves bending the consumer over and... |
The real problem is that anything that can become scarce can have a price put on it (and we know what happens when there is a price tag), this includes humans(sex slavery, black market organ,etc), our environment (key word because once we damage our enviornment, natural will continue exits .... just without us) and our minds (inequality of resources causes unequal stratification of individuals [such as worker, soldier, king,etc] which makes us work & die for pathetic ideas and social forces).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:11 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Sorry bud, prices don't accelerate down, technological progress does, its called: "Moores Law". Its nicely summarized as: "Every 18 months the power of a processor is doubled while the price stays the same". So for example: buy a Pentuim 4 processor (1.5 GHz) for 800$ when it first came out, wait 18 months and you can by a Pentium Extrem Edition Processor (3.2 GHz) for approx the same price. |
Moore's Law concerns transistor density, not speed or power.
Price does indeed go down, though. However, I'm pretty sure that you weren't getting a 3.2GHz P4 Intel Extreme Edition for the price a P4 1.4 (the P4 didn't go down to 800MHz) was only 18 months afterwards, even that the P4 debuted in 2000 and the P4EE didn't even show up until September 2003 (and the Intel Extreme Editions are always *ridiculously* priced for their performance increase)
Moral of the story really is that the marketing guys and the engineering guys don't operate on the same calendar (but what else is new).
| Quote: | | Same here but at the moment AMD is having a hard time because Intel is really making it hard for them with their Core 2 Duo CPUs. They currently outperform any AMD processor available on the market |
Oh, I dunno. Yeah they're not in the top 1% of performance WRT desktop processors (I dunno if Intel has released their server Core2 CPUs yet), but you're not getting killed if you pick up an AMDX2 64 3800 for the ridiculously decent price it's at right now. Plus Dell is packing in AMDs to their boxes now, showing that AMD is taking space where Intel used to be the only choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:17 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
Intel already rolled out their Core 2 Duo CPUs and are currently (as of November) rolling out their Core 2 Quadro CPUs while we have to wait for quad-core CPUs from AMD until mid of 2007
_________________
Linux 4ever!
http://microchip.bplaced.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:29 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| microchip wrote: | | Intel already rolled out their Core 2 Duo CPUs and are currently (as of November) rolling out their Core 2 Quadro CPUs while we have to wait for quad-core CPUs from AMD until mid of 2007 |
Yeah, and if we see quad-core CPUs in consumer PCs in any really notable amount I'll be really surprised. Your average user isn't even using all of a dual-core CPU much less a quad-core.
So yeah, Intel has the advantage for the 1% of the market that needs that sort of power (though apparently once you get to quad-core, AMD can start edging out Intel again because the intel quad core is, AFAIK (2) dual-core units sharing a memory bus on a single wafer, whereas the AMD quad-core design has individualized direct memory access for each of the 4 cores), but that matters not to their core business and general consumer market. So as for it hurting them financially, probably not so much (Especially, again, with their Dell deal).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:25 am |
|
|
| Message |
|
|
|
| Knara wrote: | | microchip wrote: | | Intel already rolled out their Core 2 Duo CPUs and are currently (as of November) rolling out their Core 2 Quadro CPUs while we have to wait for quad-core CPUs from AMD until mid of 2007 |
Yeah, and if we see quad-core CPUs in consumer PCs in any really notable amount I'll be really surprised. Your average user isn't even using all of a dual-core CPU much less a quad-core.
So yeah, Intel has the advantage for the 1% of the market that needs that sort of power (though apparently once you get to quad-core, AMD can start edging out Intel again because the intel quad core is, AFAIK (2) dual-core units sharing a memory bus on a single wafer, whereas the AMD quad-core design has individualized direct memory access for each of the 4 cores), but that matters not to their core business and general consumer market. So as for it hurting them financially, probably not so much (Especially, again, with their Dell deal). |
You're right. Intel does very little to optimize their multi-core architecture, they just cut chips from wafers and "glue" them together while AMD is doing a much better job. Just look at their cache performance and you'll see the difference when compared to Intel CPUs
_________________
Linux 4ever!
http://microchip.bplaced.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next
|
| |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
