Originally Posted by OGREtheBUFFOON
it's not off-topic. this is an "amd vs. intel" thread not just an "amd vs. intel only as it applies to lappies" thread. anything is up for debate imo
*btw, 64 voters so far
I don't mean off-topic for this whole AMD vs Intel debacle. He quoted my note responding to someone talking/asking about notebook performance in compiling and battery life. By quoting my post about notebook benchmarks with the multiple-processor server stuff, that's off of the sub-topic, and certainly irrelevant to that sub-topic.
A debate is one thing, but a debate requires thought and relevance to what you're responding to. Seeing something and immediately grasping at anything related to the opposite side and throwing it out is mindless argument.
Chalk me up to being anti-AMD if you want, but that's certainly not the case, as explained previously. Dismissing Dothan processors when battery life is a concern, is just plain silly. They are great processors, as demonstrated by the fact that AMD is only just now catching up to them as an overall notebook processor.
When low-power AMD64 chips get into more than one butt-ugly notebook, they may be the first thing suggested by more people. But that has to happen first. I'm hoping that happens soon, myself, as those will make some killer notebooks.
And related to this entire thread... http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/...elays64_1.html
|Windows Server 2003 for 64-bit Extended Systems and Windows XP 64-bit Edition for 64-bit Extended Systems now will not be available until the first half of 2005, a Microsoft spokeswoman said Tuesday.