Show your support for AMD or Intel.

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

Shenkoa

Golden Member
Jul 27, 2004
1,707
0
0
Intel has been on the top of the microprocessor OEM market for many years. With the introduction of the K7 (Thunderbird) AMD has gained ground. With every launch of the K7, rather it be the palomino, T-Bred or Barton, AMD has gained ground inch by inch. AMD's newest offerings, the K8 has been far superior to the Intel's Pentium 4 which has been Intel's longest supported processor. Since the launch of the dual core processor, AMD has been gaining OEM market and has won the hearts of PC enthusiasts all over the world.

Intel has been milking the P4 for every dollar they can squeeze out of it. Intel has recently discovered that there are no marketing tricks that can make up for the signs of the P4's age in modern benchmarks. Intel's answer is the Conroe and Merom cores set to come out in the not so distant future. Their have been benchmarks floating around the net that show the Conroe and Merom to be ahead of their time and over 2 times faster then the modern Opteron and X2's. I believe that the benchmarks are to good to be true, if they are true then it would be because of Intel's massive fabs and endless funds.

The truth is, AMD's engineers are just as good if not better then Intel's engineers and if AMD had the large fabs and large amounts of money that Intel has, AMD would be untouchable. However with the current lead that Intel has in the commercial market, any advantage that Intel has hurts AMD.

The only way AMD is ever going to become as large and as popular as Intel is if we support AMD and pledge our selves to only purchase AMD products. The goal would not be biased, but to support AMD so they can afford to release more competitive products and gain more ground.

Please pledge yourself to one or the other.
 
V

Vegitto

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
5,234
1
0
I won't pledge to whatever, I'll just buy what I want, when I want it, whether the box says AMD or Intel.
 
T

TrevorRC

Senior member
Jan 8, 2006
989
0
0
Intels architecture is YEARS older than the K8. Hence why the Conroe is going to smoke the current set of AMD offerings. K8 is now several years old.

Also... I buy whatever is best.

This thread is fanboyism at its best.
 
S

Shenkoa

Golden Member
Jul 27, 2004
1,707
0
0
I dont recall "fanboyism" as even being a word. Any way, this thread is not for bias. This thread is for support.
 
F

Fox5

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
5,957
7
81
Originally posted by: TrevorRC
Intels architecture is YEARS older than the K8. Hence why the Conroe is going to smoke the current set of AMD offerings. K8 is now several years old.

Also... I buy whatever is best.

This thread is fanboyism at its best.
Click to expand...

How is it older? The P4 got a modern update in Prescott, which was quite a significant change. I'd say Prescott and K8 were on the same level.
 
S

swtethan

Diamond Member
Aug 5, 2005
9,071
0
0
Originally posted by: Shenkoa
These numbers are way to high to be realistic, I would not be suprised if Intel has created the Conroe with a special unit inside of it that makes it produce high numbers in benchmark application.

Imo their marketing team are scum.
Click to expand...

shenkoa is the ultimate fanboi

(from another thread)
 
Keysplayr

Keysplayr

Elite Member
Jan 16, 2003
21,211
50
91
Originally posted by: Shenkoa
I dont recall "fanboyism" as even being a word. Any way, this thread is not for bias. This thread is for support.
Click to expand...

Both companies get enough support from us. In dollars, which is all AMD/Intel cares about. And how to get them out of our wallets and into theirs.

I have to wonder what was going through your mind when you made this poll.

 
S

stevty2889

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2003
7,036
8
81
I chose whats faster, but the real choice would be best bang for the buck, and overclock the crap outta it.
 
J

jazzboy

Senior member
May 2, 2005
232
0
0
Sorry but this is rediculous. I'm not going to be "pledging" support to anyone. I'll buy the best bang for the buck when the time comes.

It's getting really sad nowadays as it's obviously become fashionable to bash the leader ("they never do anything right and/or are a monopoly") and support the underdog ("they can't do wrong").

I know that AMD are certainly competitive - their standard A64s are equal or better than Intel's P4 and their A64 X2s definitely beat Intel's PD. But look at the prices AMD charge - apart from Intel's Extreme Edition dual cores, AMD charges more compared to rivaling Intel dual cores. When it was AXP vs Northwood I remember people saying that AMD would never be so cruel to charge lots for their CPUs if they were leading.

And lets not forget that, thanks to AMD, computers are staying on nice-n-outdated x86 instead of the better IA-64 that Intel proposed. Many computer experts have always said that IA-64 was going to be better. But thanks to AMD's unwillingness to look at IA-64 (or something else) we'll now very likely have processors which are slower than what we could have had.

Sorry but to me, AMD are not the 'nice' company that people make it out to be. They will be fine, there's no need to do any of this "pledging alliance" to them. They've been in much worse situations before and pulled through just fine.

In my view, saying that you're going to purchase an AMD chip just because they're the underdog is silly and makes you look as silly as Mac "Steve Jobs is god" fanboys.
 
S

Shenkoa

Golden Member
Jul 27, 2004
1,707
0
0
Originally posted by: jazzboy
Sorry but this is rediculous. I'm not going to be "pledging" support to anyone. I'll buy the best bang for the buck when the time comes.

It's getting really sad nowadays as it's obviously become fashionable to bash the leader ("they never do anything right and/or are a monopoly") and support the underdog ("they can't do wrong").

I know that AMD are certainly competitive - their standard A64s are equal or better than Intel's P4 and their A64 X2s definitely beat Intel's PD. But look at the prices AMD charge - apart from Intel's Extreme Edition dual cores, AMD charges more compared to rivaling Intel dual cores. When it was AXP vs Northwood I remember people saying that AMD would never be so cruel to charge lots for their CPUs if they were leading.

And lets not forget that, thanks to AMD, computers are staying on nice-n-outdated x86 instead of the better IA-64 that Intel proposed. Many computer experts have always said that IA-64 was going to be better. But thanks to AMD's unwillingness to look at IA-64 (or something else) we'll now very likely have processors which are slower than what we could have had.

Sorry but to me, AMD are not the 'nice' company that people make it out to be. They will be fine, there's no need to do any of this "pledging alliance" to them. They've been in much worse situations before and pulled through just fine.

In my view, saying that you're going to purchase an AMD chip just because they're the underdog is silly and makes you look as silly as Mac "Steve Jobs is god" fanboys.
Click to expand...

Thats not what this poll is about. Supporting AMD allows for their to be competition, there are a lot of idiots that will buy Intel every single time, I dont think this is good for the economoy. If AMD was to go down, we would not have any decent competition. Therefor crappy CPU's.

 
T

TrevorRC

Senior member
Jan 8, 2006
989
0
0
If AMD went down, Intel would be guilty of having a monopoly over the industry.

They keep AMD in their place; right around 20% of total market share. [If you spout off that 80%-of-retail bit, I'll kill you.]

Also, I wouldn't all Northwood to Prescott a HUGE difference.

Meh.
Maybe.

A refresh.

Whereas K8 with AMD64/etc. was a HUGE leap. [At the time, and now. Compare a 2.0 AMD chip to a 3.0 Prescott, which was what had been released then. AMD was wiping the floor with Intel back then, price-performance wise.]

Conroe is just another hop.
Until AMD cracks Dell and opens up a few more fabs, Intel holds most of the chips in this game. [get the pun? :p]
Even with their current fabs operating at 150%... still sold out.

I don't see AMD winning any time soon.
--Trevor
 
F

Fox5

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
5,957
7
81
Originally posted by: TrevorRC
If AMD went down, Intel would be guilty of having a monopoly over the industry.

They keep AMD in their place; right around 20% of total market share. [If you spout off that 80%-of-retail bit, I'll kill you.]

Also, I wouldn't all Northwood to Prescott a HUGE difference.

Meh.
Maybe.

A refresh.

Whereas K8 with AMD64/etc. was a HUGE leap. [At the time, and now. Compare a 2.0 AMD chip to a 3.0 Prescott, which was what had been released then. AMD was wiping the floor with Intel back then, price-performance wise.]

Conroe is just another hop.
Until AMD cracks Dell and opens up a few more fabs, Intel holds most of the chips in this game. [get the pun? :p]
Even with their current fabs operating at 150%... still sold out.

I don't see AMD winning any time soon.
--Trevor
Click to expand...

Wah? How can you call K8 a huge leap yet Conroe is nothing but a hop.
The k8 has barely anything added over the k7, it's practically a k7 with an integrated memory controller, and the IMC doesn't take up a very large amount of transistors or space anyway.
Prescott had huge changes from the P4, they just didn't turn out to more performance (ie, higher mhz) like Intel had hoped.
And Conroe is a true next gen architecture beyond anything else out there, it is not just a small hop.
 
H

hans007

Lifer
Feb 1, 2000
20,212
18
81
i generally dont care, i go for value. right now i hae a dual core intel. i wanted dual core, and this 820 cost me $140 on ebay which AMD could not match, so i guess its the better value.


before they had thec heap dual cores i had an athlon 3000+ socket 939. which was also good and a good value at the time.


that said i hvae like $15000 in intel stock right now, so if its down to equivalent choices ill get the intel one right now. (i.e. i just built a server, and it was between basically a sempron 2800 socket 754, or a celeron 2.66 lga775, and i went and got the celeron .... it also managed to cost less)
 
T

TekDemon

Platinum Member
Mar 12, 2001
2,296
1
81
lol I'm pledging to Intel but mostly because I plan on purchasing some of their stock shortly (sorry, but the pocketbook comes first).
 
H

hans007

Lifer
Feb 1, 2000
20,212
18
81
Originally posted by: TekDemon
lol I'm pledging to Intel but mostly because I plan on purchasing some of their stock shortly (sorry, but the pocketbook comes first).
Click to expand...

yeah the stock is fallinga lot as of late, but i am going to buy more.

im predicting something along the lines of the following at their april 19th analyst report


-they will probably meet estimates or slightly exceed the mean estimate as they have really set the bar low with the reduced estimate warning earlier
-they will then say something about how nand flash prices are pretty good and they have lowered costs of that by going to 65nm flash production
-they will then say their cpus are lowered cost because of the 65nm transition
-then they will mention conroe/merom/woodcrest and say that that is in the future and will make them very competitive again in the low to mid range server market and high end pc market that amd has taken over
-then something about apple selling lots of imacs/macbooks and how that is "new growth"

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom