Last message on previous page:

Unfortunately in terms of pure CPU performance I think Intel has AMD beat for the foreseeable future. Comparing the roadmaps of the two, AMD is falling further and further behind, it is a good thing they are diverging into new projects like Swift and Fusion (as well as their GPU business) because I think the days of AMD challenging Intel for the CPU performance crown are over... unless Nehalem turns out to be a massive flop of course.

This got to be the lamest excuse for AMD's lackluster performance....

Yep, but it works for me

It kinda makes sense tho. Think about it this way. It did take Intel ~2 years to get back on top, with their massive R&D budget. I have a feeling it will take AMD even longer to catch back up, being that their market cap is lower than Intel's R&D expenditures.

So in a way, it makes sense. AMD is still chugging along with the cards they've always played. Intel just finally woke up is all.

It does make sense.

However during the period where AMD "smoked" Intel for 3 years, Intel was selling more cpu's than AMD was, even with a worse cpu. Intel also had lots of spare cash anyway something AMD doesn't have. Thats not an excuse its a fact.

Even so AMD has no excuse for the problems it has with Phenom's performance. They had a very long time to make it work already.

How many quartly loses did Intel post during that time?
Was Intel ever in danger of bankruptancy?
Did Intel see their stock lose 85% of its value during that time?


This situation is different.

This thread was for Amd fanboys to just chill and quit coming up with threads. I am a AMD fanboy and ive bowed down to the big machine..not given up but realize that we are in trouble

Then you are a disgrace to the true fanboys.

Have a look at some BaronMatrix posts for some inspiration.

Yea, any one who would torture a dog like that can't really be a true AMD fanboy! Give that dog the damn hotdog for goodness sake!!!!!!!

How does it make sense? Back in the Prescott days, while Intel was losing left and right, they were still profitable. In fact, if Intel were to keep on selling Prescott, with AMD selling Venice, Intel would still be profitable, while AMD increasing in size.

Fast forward to 5 years later, AMD not only is losing left and right, they're also losing time to have a remote chance of making a come back. From the roadmap we know so far, AMD won't debut any significant product possibly until Swift, and that's given there's simply no information regarding AMD's new architecture.

AMD's Star is already done for. Transition to 45nm K10 would likely repeat what happened to 65nm transition: a little less clock, and a little less heat. The K10 architecture, although sophisticated, is not complete (or crippled). This means before 2009, or even 2010, AMD will continue to lose money. By the last quarter of this year, Nehalem will debut, and AMD will soon see their server and HPC market share drops like there's no tomorrow. They're still 5.5 billion in debt, which they are paying approximately 400million per quarter in interest, and the senior notes are supposed to due in 2012. With shrinking CapEx, time is running out fast.

Within your minds, AMD has another one and half year to make a come back. However, in reality, they only have about one year to debut something. After that, either AMD will shrink to the point where they're forced to exit x86's market, or file Chapter 11.

I never said they have 1.5 years. I don't think they'll ever be able to catch Intel again honestly, at least not without some major help from IBM. Intel realized that given enough time of them sitting on their laurels, AMD can make something spectacular. The way Intel is working now though, awake and aware, they'll always be 1-2 steps ahead of AMD.

Well you have to consider that during those times Intell was more than well established in the cpu market. Kind of a monopoly. They are a much larger company who spent more on advertisements and promotions than AMD. I don't think I have ever seen an AMD comercial.

They could sell cheap to govt. agencies because of their size. I work for a state govt. I have never seen an AMD system in any of our departments and I am talking about in the last 13 years. All the state surplus is Intell. I think it says a lot if your average Joe works on a computer all day that says Inell inside. He may never know that there is an AMD. Like I said there are a lot of other factors you need to consider. How many people are/were well informed about cpu's? Most people stick with the status quoe.

Meh.

I just go with whichever CPU offers the best performance for the price I am willing to pay.

...I actually thought it was a homosexual guy. ...and no, that's not necessarily the same thing as a girl.

The main reason why Intel could sell so many CPUs when they were not as good is because (drum roll)........ thats right!!!! Much larger manufacturing capacity and abilities. If you can make 1 million CPUs and the competitor can only make 100k who will sell more? Just common business sense.

It could be. Not always but could be. Maybe hes just a emo. They tend to have fellings....of death and crap. And like to cry in the dark. Or maybe just a girl trapped inside a mans body who like girls or just love crazy ol Spears.

what comes out of the northern end of a horse heading south?

it depends, where is the orbital cavity and the rectal sphincter? it also begs the question of the health of his GI tract and whether or not he's had a problem with acid reflux. What is the animal's diet, and is he capable of defacating. I don't know a lot about horses. enlighten me.

jaguarskx has got the right idea, simply buy from who has the best product. I am not a fanboy of either Intel or AMD, I choose from whoever has the best tech avalible when building my computer. This year that was Intel, whoever has the best in a year or so thats who gets my hard eard money.

You dont need any road, you have the tardis