So I can explain it to the people at work when I tell them AMD is an overall better CPU? And so I can beat down the "Intel Loyalist." I can explain the L Cache ok - the size, inclusive and exclusive- but need a better description of core architechture and FPU. Anyone? Bueler? Bueler?
Where can I find a good overall(technical&historical) description of how AMD has managed to get ahead of Intel?
- Thread starter KDOG
- Start date
HAHAHa the document you are refering to does not exist, because the event you speak of does not exist either! 
It just "happened" in the mind of AMD zealots, when us Intel Zealots knew the real truth!
It just "happened" in the mind of AMD zealots, when us Intel Zealots knew the real truth! Mac rules!!!
Maybe not... I just need to stand for something.
CPU history
-----------
i286/8
i386SX/16
i486DX/33
i486DX/100
Pentium/133
PPro/200
Celeron/300a
P3/700E
What the hell is an AMD???
Maybe not... I just need to stand for something.
CPU history
-----------
i286/8
i386SX/16
i486DX/33
i486DX/100
Pentium/133
PPro/200
Celeron/300a
P3/700E
What the hell is an AMD???
KDOG, http://www.aceshardware.com has an excelling selection of articles on CPUs from the past two years. Some of it can get pretty technical, but the author goes out of his way to try to explain things. It goes in-depth on the features of many different CPUs, and points out the relative strenghts and weaknesses of each. Read the articles in order to get your historical timeline. The site has a slight pro-AMD slant, so I think it might be what you're looking for.
My opinion: When you're running at 800 to 1000 MHz, who cares about a slight difference in performance? Screw the benchmarks at that speed, and give me the CPU that costs less.
My opinion: When you're running at 800 to 1000 MHz, who cares about a slight difference in performance? Screw the benchmarks at that speed, and give me the CPU that costs less.
As much nitty gritty information is available can be found at http://sandpile.org/
They really don't go extensively into performance (e.g benchmarks), but all the details are there all the way back to the 8086, if you are interested
They really don't go extensively into performance (e.g benchmarks), but all the details are there all the way back to the 8086, if you are interested
Depends on what you mean by "ahead".
As a business enterprise,
it would take at least ten (10)
AMDs to equal one (1) Intel.
In terms of averting bankruptcy,
AMD wins,
because Intel never came close.
In terms of being the most highly respected
name in CPUs, AMD has WON! (The number 2 spot).
As a business enterprise,
it would take at least ten (10)
AMDs to equal one (1) Intel.
In terms of averting bankruptcy,
AMD wins,
because Intel never came close.
In terms of being the most highly respected
name in CPUs, AMD has WON! (The number 2 spot).
AMD is not ahead of Intel - at least in resources. Intel has 5x the income, piles of spare cash, lots of fabs, influence, and a fanatical marketing dept. They also make decent chips. Intel is just too spread out right now. Execs at Intel are afraid that as chip sales drop, they won't be able to maintain growth, so they are putting more and more resources into this internet stuff
AMD is making a beter x86 chip right now, but Chipzilla also doesn't want to eat AMD because the DOJ would try to slay them with antitrust.
Chipzilla would like to eat Transmetta though
AMD is making a beter x86 chip right now, but Chipzilla also doesn't want to eat AMD because the DOJ would try to slay them with antitrust.
Chipzilla would like to eat Transmetta though
That description doesn't exist because amd hasn't managed to pull ahead of intel. I'ld have to say they're about neck and neck. You can debate that all you want. No industry has a real advantage over the other. Ask any graphics designer or someone who works heavily with graphis or 3d rendering and they'll tell you the mac chips rule. Amd and intel don't even come close there. So you see no one company is better then the other.
It's simple. Intel kept sending out modified versions of an old processor core and made you pay through the nose, AMD came out with a kickass new processor that not only beat what Intel could offer but was cheaper. And that's how AMD won the hearts of millions of computer junkies everywhere. I joined the AMD bandwagon long before the Athlon though.
Just one small correction ...
Intel, the company, is worth approximately 30X times what AMD is worth.
And how did AMD get ahead? They hired away Intel's top design guru. Alas, he has since left AMD as well and works for some company called Transmeta, whoever they are ...
Intel, the company, is worth approximately 30X times what AMD is worth.
And how did AMD get ahead? They hired away Intel's top design guru. Alas, he has since left AMD as well and works for some company called Transmeta, whoever they are ...
As much as I like AMD, Intel has produced better CPU's for much longer than AMD (not even a year yet. I don't consider a K6-2 a threat to the pentium 2 or 3).
Heh thats what we're talkin about, it never was, the Athlon just brought its competition closer to Intel to be of a neusance, The T-bird was going to be the Coppermine killa but they didnt see Intels Slick Willy past the horizon!
Haha you are exactly right Sandorski, it isnt even the first yet, all these processors and still nadda surpass.......
You are correct. The K-6 beat the stuffing out of Pentium... until Pentium II came out a month later
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter