Intel copied us, says head of AMD

Well, in some ways there were definitely some copied moves for example although not the same, you have the X2 owning the Pentium D until Intel decided to release the C2D processor line.

But mostly they were independent when thinking 5 years back. And honestly Intel sucked until about now. Their pentium 4 series was just an OC'd Pentium 3 etc etc however now intel really turned on the heat. Either way, AMD is heading down the drains.

you laugh at somthing that is pretty much true? i guess.....


soulsaver

guess what.......intel 64 bit chips for the longest were not true 64 bit, it was emulated

guess what......amd64 bit processer platform, was true to life, 64 bit


cool huh? the 64 bit platform amd used was their own, at the time, any 64 bit proc that went head to head with another 64bit, would get stomped because of their design


anything else?


soulsaver

Actually, I'd agree with that for the most part. But now the answer isn't to complain about it (imitation is the sincerest form of flattery) but to make new innovations. Intel is ahead in the die-shrink and clockspeed races, so it's time to get imaginative.

lol yeh, they copied us then made it better than ours. lol

Duke what happened to your love for AMD man? When the FX line was out you were all over them.

I have love for my interests in general but I have more love for whatever is performing the best in the PC component world. Yes I have an AMD in my current setup, I expect that to change very soon.

Works for me. When you going to update your PC anyways? Oh and were in the hell are the video reviews Damn it!?

Im not expecting any significant upgrades to my PC until January. No reason to. Everything runs fine on my current PC... I haven't bought Crysis yet which would pretty much be the only thing that wouldn't run on my PC.

video reviews are in the future.

RGR.

Cant wait for the video reviews man they are awesome.

Well i thank you for that. you're one of the few people that i have received positive feedback on.

No problem man. I base most of my game purchases off of your reviews. (That and EGM/1up show) But so far you have not let me down. Just wish I could get to sR at work.

Me too, I've only had Intel but that's because when I bought my mom's Alienware I didn't know that the P4 was not superior to the X2's by AMD since I was computer ignorant back then.

And since then I've been intel just because they have simply been on top. If AMD stepped it up, I'd go AMD

Despite AMD coming up with 64bit x86 compatible CPUs.....how many of us are still using 32bit systems? Has there been any compelling reason to upgrade to 64bit other than the potential need for more than 4GB of RAM?

AMD introuduced their 64bit 4 years ago and we STILL are not using it. Heck, I've moved beyond two generations of AMD 64bit and still don't have a 64bit OS or any reason to use 64bit capability.

AMD would be in better shape if they hadn't frittered all their money away buying ATi. ATi and AMD would BOTH be better off if AMD hadn't bought ATi.

Sadly I agree with you Evil, I have never like ATi just had horrible luck with there cards, but AMD has always worked out well for me and I was really looking forward to the Quad core socket F chips.

it takes time once a merger happens for it to take shape, i highly doubt their mentality was "lets get to work now and kill intel"

they are working on a cpu that has built in ram and video, so i mean, come on that takes a lot of time and money and time.....

they are still putting out decent stuff, its not as if its so far diffrent that they arent making money.........people are still buying amd products they are still making money

i dont think it was a bad idea, i think it maybe wasnt the greatest idea for amd to buy ati, but im sure ati was in a bind that they couldnt afford to output a product that would compete with nvidia

people always give greif to the low end guy, they are trying, they work hard to put out products that will work

even when nvidia put out crap drivers, crap cards that faked preformence, and intel, northwood's and pet d's i mean everyone has a slump

they are slowly creeping from it


and about the 64 bit.........id rather already own a true 64 bit proc than have to buy a whole new one when 64 bit becomes a standard......not like somthing beyond 64 bit is coming out any time soon.....and not as if the price of 64 bit was so ungodly it wasnt worth it or a waste of money


soulsaver

Umm... No... Get it right...

Pentium 4 = NetBurst Microarchitecture. COMPLETELY different from the Pentium II/III (P6 microarchitecture, derived from P55C, the Pentium MMX).

Core 2 Duo = Derived microarchitecture from the Pentium M (a.k.a. the Banias microarchitecture, which itself was derived from the Pentium III). So, the Core 2 CPUs are essentially overclocked, multi-core Pentium IIIs with extra stuff added, if you wanna get plain about it. Obviously, this is a seriously gross oversimplification, but it gets the point across.



Actually, Itanium (a.k.a. IA-64) is TRUE 64-bit. It processes 64-bit code at full speed, with no performance hits. It can process 32-bit code, but its emulated, and is VERY slow (somewhere around the Pentium II or Pentium III level).

x86-64 are basically extensions to the standard x86 architecture. So if you wanna get REALLY technical about it, all AMD64 and Intel processors with EM64T aren't TRUE 64-bit, just 32-bit processors with 64-bit extensions tacked on. AMD developed the x86-64 extensions, but renamed them to the more branding-conscious AMD64. Intel essentially reverse-engineered the AMD64 extensions, adding a couple of its own so they weren't carbon-copies, and named them EM64T. Thus the reason why any "AMD64" versions of Linux work on Intel EM64T processors, and why the 64-bit versions of Windows work on both. There's not two complete copies of Windows x64, one for AMD processors, and one of Intel. There's just one. It works and functions fully on both. In fact, Microsoft originally developed Windows x64 around the AMD64 extensions. So there ya have it.




Windows is a 32-bit extension and graphical shell for a 16-bit patch to an 8-bit operating system, originally coded for a 4-bit microprocessor, written by a 2-bit company, that can't stand 1-bit of competition.