Instead I recommend digging into what you are going to use the processor for and how the architecture will aid or inhibit that. Then you will have a more clear answer of the better architecture.
Hello, Mr. Fruehe. When I put forth the question, and rather haphazardly, I completely forgot you were here. I am not sure how to respond, save for being a bit embarrassed. You spent a lot of time and thought into your reply, so I am thankful. I hope I can return the favor.
Let me try to put my question in better context. Until very recently, I was uninterested in hardware matters. I am a software guy at heart. I create programs and frameworks and "enterprise" modules, chat with accountants and executives, manage a few IT people, etc. You get the picture. I am not completely detached from hardware, for obvious reasons, but I am not too deeply interested in it. So it doesn't come as a surprise that I am (was) one of the people who had the idea that Intel/AMD were in a virtual racehorse track, overtaking each other every now and then.
When I started to get more deeply interested in hardware, thanks to some of my software R&D interests that are intrinsically bound to hardware, I eventually learned the discrepancy between the financial states of AMD and Intel (circa 2008-2009). From there, I wondered how AMD could catch up, considering the chasm between the two companies' R&D budgets.
And then, yesterday, imagine my surprise when I read the article I linked to, that outlined in very specific detail, how the whole "leap-frogging" thing between AMD/Intel is a myth, and how Intel is pretty much just competing with itself. I am not familiar with such history, so I threw it out here and asked for feedback. Additionally, I asked what could that mean for the future? My question was merely a generic one: if AMD, in a span of years upon years, was never able to overtake Intel except when Intel got lazy, is it possible for AMD to still eventually overtake Intel? I guess everything is possible, but is it likely?
If anything, I am probably just seeking some reassurance that in the high-tech race between AMD/Intel, although history has shown mostly an Intel triumph, nothing is etched in stone, R&D budgets notwithstanding.
Much of intel's market position has less to do with having better products and had more to do with the ways that they used to do business.
This has changed.
Yes, and I do hope this makes a lot of difference. I am outside of the US. Being an AMD proponent of some sort since the Athlon X2, the biggest obstacle I find is the difficulty of sourcing AMD parts. One of the biggest (if not the biggest) PC store chains here is 100% Intel only. While the rest of the popular PC chains do carry AMD products, sometimes the listings are laughable - a deluge of Intel parts, compared to a trickle of AMD ones.
(As a side note, things have improved a little. Although we still generally can't find, for example, Phenom II 965's here, the cheap Athlon II X4 surprisingly made its way here rather fast, and tends to fly off the shelves rather quickly in my estimation)
So I do hope that AMD's latest agreement with Intel regarding business practices becomes something worth much more than the $1.25 billion in cash from Intel.
Intel fans will tell you intel is better. AMD fans will tell you AMD is better. Because you are already pre-disposed to say that Intel has the advantage then I think you already have your answer.
I would love to be told, with good reasoning behind it, that AMD will definitely "kick ass", as JHH would put it. I still recommend AMD parts whenever the corporations I serve as a consultant in needs to rollout low-cost PCs for their purposes. I can justify it thanks to the value AMD parts give right now, especially the latest Athlon II X4 620 part. I can't seem to order/recommend enough of it.
I personally believe that 2011 will be an interesting year, but I only have half of the data. However, I would propose that I have half of the data which might be more than many of the others that are giving opinions.
If you can share any of it, I can only but appreciate it very much.
)
Facebook
Twitter