| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 50273 | 2004-10-15 20:34:00 | Read it and weep Intel dreamers | metla (154) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 281427 | 2004-10-16 08:27:00 | > > who released the 1st "Useable" 64 bit CPU? AMD > > Pretty sure it was the Apple G5, then came the > Itaniums which are still "useable" in servers. I meant for running Windows/Linux PC's Not Apples or Servers. X-( |
MartynC (5610) | ||
| 281428 | 2004-10-16 09:09:00 | So, Apple and Intel where the first companies to come out with 64bit cpus, even if the intel one works best in a server, and the Apple on only works in a apple computer. Daniel |
dwnz2003 (5250) | ||
| 281429 | 2004-10-16 09:42:00 | > Who cares. Lots of people follow the hardware scene,They would find it of interest,as would those in the market for a new CPU,To say that what you own does you so who cares is plain stupid,firstly no one said you had to care or cares if you care,Plus all our PC's at one time where purchased brand new and someone at that time (hopefully,although they probally just bought intel out of ignorance) weighed up the pro's and cons of what they were purchasing. Aside from that as i mentioned its much more then AMD just having the best performing chip at the moment(a title theyhave held for 2 thirds of the last 3 or 4 years anyhow,not to mention most advanced tech,and best value for money) The newsworthy part of the article is that Intel have fallen flat on their faces and are unable to get a product on the market that even pretends to compete with AMD,who are as mentioned a tiny player with bugger all sales. Intel owners....ppppffftttt. |
metla (154) | ||
| 281430 | 2004-10-16 21:37:00 | If I have a pentium 2, does that make me lame? | Growly (6) | ||
| 281431 | 2004-10-16 21:54:00 | > If I have a pentium 2, does that make me lame? no, not as much as me, i got a old p1 mmx lying around somewhere, think of it in this way....keep it for like another 5 years and you got a piece of history :D |
Prescott (11) | ||
| 281432 | 2004-10-16 23:00:00 | Interesting article. The better performance of the small players the better it is for us buyers. If AMD continue to get a bigger share, and they should as they are cheaper and more powerful, then the competition will get fiercer, margins decrease and lower prices for us. The danger is Intel may decide to reduce their price so much they take losses for a while (and they have the money to do it) in order to blow AMD out of the market so they can eventually return to happier times of overpriced hardware in a monopoly. If AMD wasnt around would we see such a rapid increase in hardware? Yup, I care. |
parry (27) | ||
| 281433 | 2004-10-17 10:27:00 | "No 4 . 0 From Intel" Interesting article here . com/articles1123/" target="_blank">overclockers . com at overclockers . com |
the highlander (245) | ||
| 281434 | 2004-10-17 16:17:00 | Why are Intel outselling AMD by about 10 to 1? I have owned two AMD machines. The first one used to die regularly and both of them kept the house warm in Winter. I'll stick with Intel thank you. Jack. |
JJJJJ (528) | ||
| 281435 | 2004-10-17 17:47:00 | The danger is Intel may decide > to reduce their price so much they take losses for a > while (and they have the money to do it) in order to > blow AMD out of the market so they can eventually > return to happier times of overpriced hardware in a > monopoly. > > If AMD wasnt around would we see such a rapid > increase in hardware? Yup, I care. Now that is a very astute observation. There are laws against Those Tactics, but since when did American Monoply's respect, let alone obey the law. D. |
drb1 (4492) | ||
| 281436 | 2004-10-17 18:46:00 | X-( X-( X-( SCREAM Just for you Jack ;) Murray ;P |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||