First picture of Intel's upcoming 64bit CPU?

[Davegod]

http://www.tbreak.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22802

 

[Jeff7181]

LOL

 

[Shimmishim]

it was posted on the AT news column .. pretty funny stuff

 

[JBT]

dp from GH

 

[Duvie]

I don't see why it is so funny....

Seems like a moron to me!!!


I am offended by the implications of "ripoff".....If any AMD fanboy thinks Intel is ripping off AMD's design, you are seriously the bunch of delusional 12-17 year olds I thought you were....

Sorry I don't get the AMD Fanboy humor!!!

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Duvie
I don't see why it is so funny....

Seems like a moron to me!!!


I am offended by the implications of "ripoff".....If any AMD fanboy thinks Intel is ripping off AMD's design, you are seriously the bunch of delusional 12-17 year olds I thought you were....

Sorry I don't get the AMD Fanboy humor!!!

 

[Zebo]

Plus is'nt AMD having to buy sse sse2 from intel? Seems the one "buying" is behind the curve if you ask me, no?

<<<< not a fanboy either way price/performance is all that matters. Duron was tough not to buy

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Plus is'nt AMD having to buy sse sse2 from intel? Seems the one "buying" is behind the curve if you ask me, no? <<<< not a fanboy either way price/performance is all that matters. Duron was tough not to buy

They get it for "free" because of their cross-licensing agreement, just how Intel gets to use AMD64 for "free."

 

[Jeff7181]

Cry cry cry ... geeze... it's a joke people... why don't you Intel "fanboys" make some funny pictures?

BTW, Duvie, it wasn't implied that it was a ripoff, it was clearly stated =)

 

[myocardia]

You know, there are obviously fanboys of both camps around here. What I don't understand is why those of you who are on the Intel side don't love the sh*t out of AMD. Haven't any of you been using computers long enough to remember when the fastest Intel chip went for over $1,000 and six months later, when they finally produced one faster, the the now-next-fastest cpu barely went down in price at all. Intel's slowest processor available at the time (they're obviously all too slow to use for anything buy keychains now) was ~2/3 the price of the fastest, because Intel owned the market. It stayed that way until AMD finally came out with the original Athlon. A 500 mhz Athlon would wipe the floor with a 600+mhz PIII in everything, including media encoding, so Intel had to start dropping their prices slightly. It took the Barton first, then finally the A64 to come out, before Intel's chip's finally became reasonable priced on a price/performance scale. Anyway, I can guarantee every one of you that if AMD went out of business tomorrow, as soon as the stocks of AMD chips were all sold, the prices you would have to pay for ANY Intel chip, including a Celeron would double, if not triple. So actually, these AMD fanboys are doing you a favor by buying AMD's chips. They're keeping them in business, and you can still buy whatever chip you wish to buy, even if that's a ~$1,000 3.4EE. And before you respond to this AMD fanboy's post, look at a little of the advice I give to people who are considering a whole new system. I'm thinking I recommend P4 more than anything else, if the person's need fit a P4.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: myocardia
You know, there are obviously fanboys of both camps around here. What I don't understand is why those of you who are on the Intel side don't love the sh*t out of AMD. Haven't any of you been using computers long enough to remember when the fastest Intel chip went for over $1,000 and six months later, when they finally produced one faster, the the now-next-fastest cpu barely went down in price at all. Intel's slowest processor available at the time (they're obviously all too slow to use for anything buy keychains now) was ~2/3 the price of the fastest, because Intel owned the market. It stayed that way until AMD finally came out with the original Athlon. A 500 mhz Athlon would wipe the floor with a 600+mhz PIII in everything, including media encoding, so Intel had to start dropping their prices slightly. It took the Barton first, then finally the A64 to come out, before Intel's chip's finally became reasonable priced on a price/performance scale. Anyway, I can guarantee every one of you that if AMD went out of business tomorrow, as soon as the stocks of AMD chips were all sold, the prices you would have to pay for ANY Intel chip, including a Celeron would double, if not triple. So actually, these AMD fanboys are doing you a favor by buying AMD's chips. They're keeping them in business, and you can still buy whatever chip you wish to buy, even if that's a ~$1,000 3.4EE. And before you respond to this AMD fanboy's post, look at a little of the advice I give to people who are considering a whole new system. I'm thinking I recommend P4 more than anything else, if the person's need fit a P4.

well said. I have no idea why they buy Intel still after taking it up the coolo so long. Also, It just bleeds stupidity to spend more money for same performance. IMO. I mean a watch, car or anything with a touch/feel/sense of style/ I can understand but chip? I don't get it. We buy memory based on price/performance alone why not processors and video cards. Oh well.

 

[kyparrish]

Originally posted by: myocardia
You know, there are obviously fanboys of both camps around here. What I don't understand is why those of you who are on the Intel side don't love the sh*t out of AMD. Haven't any of you been using computers long enough to remember when the fastest Intel chip went for over $1,000 and six months later, when they finally produced one faster, the the now-next-fastest cpu barely went down in price at all. Intel's slowest processor available at the time (they're obviously all too slow to use for anything buy keychains now) was ~2/3 the price of the fastest, because Intel owned the market. It stayed that way until AMD finally came out with the original Athlon. A 500 mhz Athlon would wipe the floor with a 600+mhz PIII in everything, including media encoding, so Intel had to start dropping their prices slightly. It took the Barton first, then finally the A64 to come out, before Intel's chip's finally became reasonable priced on a price/performance scale. Anyway, I can guarantee every one of you that if AMD went out of business tomorrow, as soon as the stocks of AMD chips were all sold, the prices you would have to pay for ANY Intel chip, including a Celeron would double, if not triple. So actually, these AMD fanboys are doing you a favor by buying AMD's chips. They're keeping them in business, and you can still buy whatever chip you wish to buy, even if that's a ~$1,000 3.4EE. And before you respond to this AMD fanboy's post, look at a little of the advice I give to people who are considering a whole new system. I'm thinking I recommend P4 more than anything else, if the person's need fit a P4.

well said

if a gamer asks what he should buy, i recommend athlon xp; if someone backing up DVD's or creating other media content asks what to buy, I recommend a P4C, if someone who is on a similar budget as mine asks what to buy, i sell them my old athlon and upgrade to the latest and greatest AMD chip!!!

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: kyparrish well said if a gamer asks what he should buy, i recommend athlon xp; if someone backing up DVD's or creating other media content asks what to buy, I recommend a P4C, if someone who is on a similar budget as mine asks what to buy, i sell them my old athlon and upgrade to the latest and greatest AMD chip!!!

I hope you meant Athlon64...

 

[kyparrish]

Originally posted by: MDE

Originally posted by: kyparrish well said if a gamer asks what he should buy, i recommend athlon xp; if someone backing up DVD's or creating other media content asks what to buy, I recommend a P4C, if someone who is on a similar budget as mine asks what to buy, i sell them my old athlon and upgrade to the latest and greatest AMD chip!!!

I hope you meant Athlon64...

yup, i missed that in my edit

...goes back to drooling over new a64 2800...

 

[myocardia]

Now that I've thought about this a bit more, anyone who considers themselves an AMD fanboy should feel nearly the same about Intel. They are definitely more expensive, yes, but they are much cheaper than AMD's chips would be, if Intel were to go out of business/stop making processors. Although I personally don't think AMD would raise their prices nearly as much at first (they'd be so happy, just being able to make a profit on every chip at first ), with no other competition, Athlon64's would no longer be the deals they are now, either. Anytime their is competition in any market, the winner is always the consumer, period.

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: myocardia
Now that I've thought about this a bit more, anyone who considers themselves an AMD fanboy should feel nearly the same about Intel. They are definitely more expensive, yes, but they are much cheaper than AMD's chips would be, if Intel were to go out of business/stop making processors. Although I personally don't think AMD would raise their prices nearly as much at first (they'd be so happy, just being able to make a profit on every chip at first ), with no other competition, Athlon64's would no longer be the deals they are now, either. Anytime their is competition in any market, the winner is always the consumer, period.

Yep, competition sprus innovation. Without Intel pushing them, AMD would have never brought AMD64 around, let alone the original Athlon.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: MDE

Originally posted by: myocardia
Now that I've thought about this a bit more, anyone who considers themselves an AMD fanboy should feel nearly the same about Intel. They are definitely more expensive, yes, but they are much cheaper than AMD's chips would be, if Intel were to go out of business/stop making processors. Although I personally don't think AMD would raise their prices nearly as much at first (they'd be so happy, just being able to make a profit on every chip at first ), with no other competition, Athlon64's would no longer be the deals they are now, either. Anytime their is competition in any market, the winner is always the consumer, period.

Yep, competition sprus innovation. Without Intel pushing them, AMD would have never brought AMD64 around, let alone the original Athlon.

True, but the inverse of that is that the newest $1000 Intel processor for sell today would the new 100mhz fsb PIII 900 Katmai, if AMD had never existed or had never come out with the Athlon.

 

[MDE]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: MDE

Originally posted by: myocardia
Now that I've thought about this a bit more, anyone who considers themselves an AMD fanboy should feel nearly the same about Intel. They are definitely more expensive, yes, but they are much cheaper than AMD's chips would be, if Intel were to go out of business/stop making processors. Although I personally don't think AMD would raise their prices nearly as much at first (they'd be so happy, just being able to make a profit on every chip at first ), with no other competition, Athlon64's would no longer be the deals they are now, either. Anytime their is competition in any market, the winner is always the consumer, period.

Yep, competition sprus innovation. Without Intel pushing them, AMD would have never brought AMD64 around, let alone the original Athlon.

True, but the inverse of that is that the newest $1000 Intel processor for sell today would the new 100mhz fsb PIII 900 Katmai, if AMD had never existed or had never come out with the Athlon.

We can go in circles with this .

 

[myocardia]

But why do some people here want to turn everything into an argument? If you aren't one of them, go find someone who was around at that time and ask them about it. We are both right, what exactly is there to argue about?

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: myocardia
But why do some people here want to turn everything into an argument? If you aren't one of them, go find someone who was around at that time and ask them about it. We are both right, what exactly is there to argue about?

That's what I was getting at... if Intel junkies are sick of seeing AMD > Intel pictures (remember the Athlon raping the Pentium 3?) someone should start creating some Intel > AMD pictures... I WANT TO SEE THEM!

*EDIT* Lets get some nVidia > ATI and ATI > nVidia pictures and go post em in the Video forum and REALLY piss people off, lol.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181

Originally posted by: myocardia
But why do some people here want to turn everything into an argument? If you aren't one of them, go find someone who was around at that time and ask them about it. We are both right, what exactly is there to argue about?

That's what I was getting at... if Intel junkies are sick of seeing AMD > Intel pictures (remember the Athlon raping the Pentium 3?) someone should start creating some Intel > AMD pictures... I WANT TO SEE THEM!

*EDIT* Lets get some nVidia > ATI and ATI > nVidia pictures and go post em in the Video forum and REALLY piss people off, lol.

Jeff's wanting to start a war, it seems. Oh well, even though the only two boxes in my house have AMD chips in them (at the moment), I might do just that, Jeff, but you're gonna be the one who posts them.

 

[chsh1ca]

When in doubt, make fun of Apple. If you think Intel fanboys are wasting their money on the $1000 P4EE, you should see how much some of these Mac users waste.

 

[myocardia]

Mac=only way I know of to spend $3000 or more on a computer that's only good at websurfing, typing documents, and photo editing. Besides, I wouldn't buy a mac if they cost less than a PC. Who wants to own a computer that you can't buy any good software for, besides what Adobe makes? Oh, I forgot about how with Mac's, you have to buy a new OS everytime the software you like using comes out with a new version!

 

[MDE]

...or pay for an incremental OS upgrade (10>10.1). Microsoft would be burned at the stake for pulling something like that.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: myocardia
Mac=only way I know of to spend $3000 or more on a computer that's only good at websurfing, typing documents, and photo editing. Besides, I wouldn't buy a mac if they cost less than a PC. Who wants to own a computer that you can't buy any good software for, besides what Adobe makes? Oh, I forgot about how with Mac's, you have to buy a new OS everytime the software you like using comes out with a new version!

Woohoo... time to make fun of Macs!

Myocardia... you make the pics and I'll gladly post them as long as they don't violate the forum rules =) No nude pics of Carrot-Top, lol.