| 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 | ||
| 281437 | 2004-10-17 19:02:00 | Never mind MurryP. :^O :^O :^O Jack (I love intel) ]:) |
JJJJJ (528) | ||
| 281438 | 2004-10-17 20:47:00 | > "No 4.0 From Intel" > > Interesting article here > overclockers.com > at overclockers.com Great article and clearly a well thought out counter-article to the AMD lovers out there. I always hated the Prescott. Too hot and the stock fan sounded like an aircraft taking off. Lo. |
Lohsing (219) | ||
| 281439 | 2004-10-17 21:04:00 | Thats a terrible article,At this point in time Intel have faltered and are unable to put a product on the market that can compete with AMD,what does that article say?....that AMD have fallen into the same ditch?.... Aye? The issue being that Intel have no comparable cpu,How can AMD be in the same "ditch",they have a the best cpu on the market,and have Intel on the backfoot in every department apart from sales. Whomever wrote that article seems to have missed the point entirely and instead says the p4 has come to the end of its develpment cycle and so will AMD's chip at some point. Wow,the guy is a genius,Strecthing out an obvious and irrilivent fact into a 2 page article. |
metla (154) | ||
| 281440 | 2004-10-17 22:16:00 | > Thats a terrible article,At this point in time Intel > have faltered and are unable to put a product on the > market that can compete with AMD,what does that > article say?....that AMD have fallen into the same > ditch?.... If you think about what is being said, it makes perfect sense. Intel have realised that simply scaling the product up in terms of clock speed doesn't generate the corresponding increase in performance previously seen. The Prescott chip was / is / always has been a pig of a CPU and now Intel will have to come up with a product to counter the upcoming FX55 CPU. Setting aside the doom and gloom of the article written by The Inquirer, it would take a brave person to call this the "demise of Intel." Bottom line, AMD have the upper hand currently and Intel now have to refocus their R&D into designing a better performing chip. It'll continue ad nauseum, ad infinitum like the endless Holden vs Ford, nVidia vs ATi, etc.... zzzZZZzzzzz.... Lo. |
Lohsing (219) | ||
| 281441 | 2004-10-17 22:26:00 | Its not about who has the upper hand at the moment,we all know that Intel will bounce back and the crown will continue to be passed back and forth while these 2 companies are able to compete, Its about the fact that Intels flagship cpu has crashed and burned,and that they have nothing on the books to take its place....at this current time.While this is not even close to the demise of Intel it is bigger news then just who has the best performing cpu on the market,and has nothing to do with the expected deveolpment parameters of the current AMD chip. Although it is of interest that the p4 was designed to scale up to 10ghz,and they have been terrible chips since around the 3.2ghz mark...Although a lot of the 2.4 to 3.2 chips were top quality gear. |
metla (154) | ||
| 281442 | 2004-10-17 22:29:00 | Agreed - I hate the Prescott chip. I hate the current 915 / 925 chipset as well... I think it would be hard pressed to develop something as top notch as the 865 / 875P chipset paired with a Northwood CPU. That was a sweet combo. Lo. |
Lohsing (219) | ||
| 281443 | 2004-10-18 02:09:00 | "Intel have realised that simply scaling the product up in terms of clock speed doesn't generate the corresponding increase in performance previously seen." I didn't interpret the article the same way. I saw it as Intel, because of the this monumental cockup and having lost the current war will HAVE to develop a cpu that doesn't rely on sheer speed ie cooler,quieter, more features yadayadayada in order to fight a holding action until Intel can fabricate an AMD killer. Sort of like Hitler fighting a war on two fronts, while developing a killer secret weapon to take out the Allies. Didn't work too well for him either. Not knocking intel I am more inclined towards intel than amd but their forward planning real sucked the big one on this occasion |
the highlander (245) | ||
| 281444 | 2004-10-18 02:47:00 | All you anti-intel idiots make me sick with your ravings. Intel make the only CPU's that anyone with more than half a brain would consider buying. Just because AMD is a bit cheaper you assume it is something wonderful. Anyone who wants the best is quite happy to pay a bit more for quality. Ditto for your over-clocking. If you want more speed then pay for it. Jack |
JJJJJ (528) | ||
| 281445 | 2004-10-18 02:52:00 | Lmao. And Jack once again demonstrates his complete lack of understanding on the subject ,Even removing price from the equation(which relates directly to value for money which is a good thing) AMD still make a superior product. You sir,have been marketed to,and you swallowed it all and gladly handed over the cash. |
metla (154) | ||
| 281446 | 2004-10-18 02:57:00 | > Lmao. > > And Jack once again demonstrates his complete lack of > understanding on the subject Agreed 0MG 1nT3l'5 m0r3 3xP3n51ve I+ mU5+ 83 83T+3R |
Pete O'Neil (250) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 | |||||