Originally Posted by Time-Pilot
They are not really any better, just cheaper really. Plus they always seem to be a bit behind Intel, Motorola, and IBM in development.
If AMD is behind, then how come Intel is playing catch-up and adding AMD64 support to their future processors? Yes, this is a first, but still, Intel is playing catch up by implementing an AMD instruction set extension to their processors. One that bears the name of their competitors company no less.
Of course, none of Intel's tech documents even mention AMD, AMD64, or even x86-64 (The former vendor-neutral name of AMD64). While nobody expected Intel to call it AMD64, pretty much everybody is shocked at how badly Intel behaved in that it took people studying their released tech docs to confirm that Intel's instruction set is compatible with AMD64. Man, you should have seen Linus Torvalds (Creator of Linux) chewing Intel out over this one! He was royally pissed that Intel was being so petty, and even said (paraphrasing) "I have half a mind to rename it in the kernel from x86-64 to AMD64". Of course, he then said he wouldn't do it because it should remain vendor-neutral. But the fact is, this is an AMD creation.