|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
AMD not visible in the Processor Market
Yes of course the series of launches of processors from Intel to put AMD off them market worked. Intel has launches only 2 of 3 and has already proven faster any Processor.
A recent testing conducted by Digit from Jasubhai Multimedia, said:
"It was a record in their lab" as they have seen no processor with so much capabilities and proved itself as the best in every aspect.
Its predecessor, AMD was a millenia behind the New Intel Processor.
We all know that Intel is the true leader. They have changed the Architeture completely from scratch and also they have become very successful. I am a great fan of Intel and I knew that Intel is not a mere processor making company but a very very powerful and worth-respecting company.
The new processors from intel is much cheaper than other processors from Intel, besides cutting down 60% of the cost making it very very economic. The price to satisfaction ratio tends to 0 as features tends to infinity and comparitively proce tends to 1. !!!
A recent testing conducted by Digit from Jasubhai Multimedia, said:
"It was a record in their lab" as they have seen no processor with so much capabilities and proved itself as the best in every aspect.
Its predecessor, AMD was a millenia behind the New Intel Processor.
We all know that Intel is the true leader. They have changed the Architeture completely from scratch and also they have become very successful. I am a great fan of Intel and I knew that Intel is not a mere processor making company but a very very powerful and worth-respecting company.
The new processors from intel is much cheaper than other processors from Intel, besides cutting down 60% of the cost making it very very economic. The price to satisfaction ratio tends to 0 as features tends to infinity and comparitively proce tends to 1. !!!
It's good to see Intel come back and kick AMD bottom. I wonder how AMD will answer to it.
I was really becoming an AMD fan but now that Intel is better, if I were to buy a processor I would go for the one with better performance.
I was really becoming an AMD fan but now that Intel is better, if I were to buy a processor I would go for the one with better performance.
That's a difficult discussion.
Actually we eventually read about the new series of processors and blablabla... we read those newsletters and so on... but actually they talk about brand new models that are, so far, inaccessible, considering that in Brazil they take a little longer to spread, and it would be unfair to give you a position without actually testing those processors. Mine is a AMD Athlon XP 2800+, it is nice, but as I'm a heavy user, I'm beginning to find it weak... but what can I say about the latest ones?
Actually we eventually read about the new series of processors and blablabla... we read those newsletters and so on... but actually they talk about brand new models that are, so far, inaccessible, considering that in Brazil they take a little longer to spread, and it would be unfair to give you a position without actually testing those processors. Mine is a AMD Athlon XP 2800+, it is nice, but as I'm a heavy user, I'm beginning to find it weak... but what can I say about the latest ones?
Intel is the largest employer in this county, with 7 (I think) campuses here (Washington County)... So... If you're buying a computer I have no problem whasoever with you sending the money for the proccessor to intel 
That said, every intel processor i've used has sucked. Then again, they've all been celerons (One exception, a Pentium II MMX a while back). The only really good computer I had was running an AMD Athlon 64 1800+... Well, that excludes the 486 a LONG time ago, of course. The new computer's an Athlon 64 2800+, with more ram and a better video card, but runs the same programs slower. Go figure.
That said, every intel processor i've used has sucked. Then again, they've all been celerons (One exception, a Pentium II MMX a while back). The only really good computer I had was running an AMD Athlon 64 1800+... Well, that excludes the 486 a LONG time ago, of course. The new computer's an Athlon 64 2800+, with more ram and a better video card, but runs the same programs slower. Go figure.
Processors have so far outstripped the boards they are running on that actually utilizing them is impractical for most people.
Intel does have it going on though. Im still running a 1.8 Pentium M with a 2MB L2 cash that just rips it up. I probably wont upgrade for 2 more years though, which will give AMD plenty of time to do something, whatever that may be.
Intel does have it going on though. Im still running a 1.8 Pentium M with a 2MB L2 cash that just rips it up. I probably wont upgrade for 2 more years though, which will give AMD plenty of time to do something, whatever that may be.
well i think that pentium is best for pcs
but for games amd is better and faster
i play lot of games and i know i should opt for amd though i say to myself that its better to have a cpu that can best handle everything
so my final choice would be Intel
but for games amd is better and faster
i play lot of games and i know i should opt for amd though i say to myself that its better to have a cpu that can best handle everything
so my final choice would be Intel
The only AMD I've ever had was on an ancient computer that is now about 15 or 16 years old (I believe it was AMD, got rid of it awhile back). Needless to say, it's not like it is now, but based on my small experience with (the past) AMD, I can confidently say that I perfer Intel much better. All my computers since then have had Pentium processors and I have no complaints.
 |