amd vs intel
Not very often I comment, but the last post by Laxman needs answering -
1. If the Core2 Duo chips by Intel are all they are made out to be, how come the cores can't talk to each other? Those made by AMD can.
2. If the allegations the EC is examining against Intel are true, Intel deserve all they get for dirty tricks and restricting the market for processors in their favour.
3. If AMD are SO bad, how come thay have contracts in their pockets from firms like dell for the new Phenom processors? And also that their opteron server processors seem to be far more in demand than any similar processor offered by Intel?
4. Ref the ATI aquisition, have you read the reviews for the new ATI HD 4850 card, and its new big brothers that will be on sale soon?
5. Intel encourage customer ignorance about their products through the way they label them. AMD clearly differentiate between X2/X3/X4 chips, as well as the X£ and X$'s being marketed under the Phenom brand. Intel is nowhere near as clear in its labelling. Not only do we have Core Duo and then Core 2 duo, we now have Core 2 Quad - why not just Core Quad, as non tech users loking at the current name would be hard=pressed to work out if they were getting an x2, x4 or x8 chip?
I rest my case