AMD has come up with more revolutionary leaps and implementation than intel… first 64bit proc(affordable mainstream market… not the “FIRST” 64 bit proc), first dual core proc, first integrated memory controler proc, ect. faster front side bus. My opinion stands with AMD as the better CPU.
Not like intel who makes slight un-noticable changes to a core, doubles the price and stamps “EXTREME” on it.
[quote=“Delirious”]AMD has come up with more revolutionary leaps and implementation than intel… first 64bit proc(affordable mainstream market… not the “FIRST” 64 bit proc), first dual core proc, first integrated memory controler proc, ect. faster front side bus. My opinion stands with AMD as the better CPU.
Not like intel who makes slight un-noticable changes to a core, doubles the price and stamps “EXTREME” on it.[/quote]
Maybe you post stuff like this because you cant afford intel…
Haha!
[quote=“jleaman”]
[quote=“Delirious”]AMD has come up with more revolutionary leaps and implementation than intel… first 64bit proc(affordable mainstream market… not the “FIRST” 64 bit proc), first dual core proc, first integrated memory controler proc, ect. faster front side bus. My opinion stands with AMD as the better CPU.
Not like intel who makes slight un-noticable changes to a core, doubles the price and stamps “EXTREME” on it.[/quote]
Maybe you post stuff like this because you cant afford intel…[/quote]
I can afford Intel… but why? AMD offers more power for my $ the only time I would buy intel is for their Centrino processors because well AMD doesnt have an offering that compares as of yet. I dont really follow hardware but that was true last time I looked. Oh and jason as far as I know everything stated by delirious is true are you going to refute these statements?
The demographics of the laptop market have so far precluded many AMD offerings. Laptops were previously sold only to blue suited, necktied accountant clones who’d only buy stuff with IBM and Intel stickers on them…
The AMD vs. Intel battle is an old one, as old as nVidia vs ATi. It’s a tug-o-war, one leads the other follows, then they switch positions and the other leads while the previous follows. Remember Voodoo? TNT2 baby.
A couple of months ago, ATi was the way to go. Now it seems to be nVidia.
Centrino is good for battery life, but Celeron M is getting rave reviews. I myself am I Celeron M believer - it’s the little CPU that could.
AMD offers better bus speeds, but right now Intel offers higher CPU/RAM speeds. Yes, it comes at a price premium… but so did DDR when it first came out.
When you have competition in a fierce market like this, the turnover is really high, and the introductory prices are a joke. But it’s the price you pay to be at the forefront of the technology revolution.
Right now, AMD/nVidia is the way to go. Few months from now… who knows?
Thinkpads, yes.
I saw laptops in college student’s hands as far back as 1997. Dell’s Inspiron 5000 series flourished among many demographics, including the jet setters, college crowd, and blue-logoed die-hards back in 2001.
Whatever happened to Cyrix? I used to have a PR166 in a machine years ago. The first one I had burned up as those suckers could overheat, it was replaced under warranty, and I think even that one finally died a fiery death too.
[quote=“VMS”]
Whatever happened to Cyrix? I used to have a PR166 in a machine years ago. The first one I had burned up as those suckers could overheat, it was replaced under warranty, and I think even that one finally died a fiery death too.[/quote]
National Semiconductor bought them out, then VIA bought them.
I wouldn’t necessarily say that AMD has had more revolutionary leaps than Intel. You can’t blame either side for the direction they took in the processor business. When Intel was planning the P4, clock speed sold, plain and simple. That is still very true today. Why else would AMD have these “performance ratings”? But you know what, if AMD didn’t do it, they’d be dead in the water right now.
Also, yeah, AMD may have been the first to market for dual-core, but really, AMD dual-core is a mess in terms of finding a motherboard. With Intel, you know for sure what motherboards support dual core. AMD, no. You gotta do some reasearch. When you got a customer right there in front of you, they’re usually not too happy about the wait (I’m a computer salesman, btw).
AMD does this as well. It’s called the FX series of processors. Ridiculously priced, with not a whole lot to show for it.
Can’t wait for the new apple stuff to come out on wensday…