Discussion Forums > Technology
Which would be better AMD or Intel?
nstgc:
I am disappointed Janai. You really think Apple products are 10 times faster? (a joke)
kitamesume:
gonna hijack this a little bit, but not off-topic.
ivy bridge's release date is announced as april 08, at that date, that is until AMD comes up with a better counter, intel will have all fields covered from top to bottom.
to note, since i3-ivy bridge will be delayed slightly than the appointed date, the bottom will be covered by the price dropped sandy bridges. unless AMD thinks twice of halting the phenom II line and drop it's price by a ridiculous amount then we can still hope for a little "AMD" goodies to be a viable option.
imho performance/watt is the leading factor when performance is negligible, also does price/performance but since lower wattage = more savings then thats abit covered.
nstgc:
I don't understand why AMD doesn't just shrink their Phonom chips circuits and sell those. They out preform the Bulldozer core. I understand that they are making the Bulldozer architecture because Intel patented everything else (according to Janai), but the desktop market doesn't need more than 4 cores at this time.
Also, I agree with Kitamesume that once ivy comes out, even the low end will go to Intel unless AMD can haul ass and put out something new and respectable fast.
Lupin:
--- Quote from: nstgc on December 29, 2011, 07:30:20 PM ---I don't understand why AMD doesn't just shrink their Phonom chips circuits and sell those. They out preform the Bulldozer core.
--- End quote ---
AMD squeezed out every bit of performance from the architecture in Llano. There's very little more to gain going forward with that architecture. Phenom 2 doesn't support the newer instructions (AVX, FMA, etc).
--- Quote from: nstgc on December 29, 2011, 07:30:20 PM ---I understand that they are making the Bulldozer architecture because Intel patented everything else (according to Janai), but the desktop market doesn't need more than 4 cores at this time.
--- End quote ---
AMD owns the x86-64 license. Intel cannot build 64bit chips without it. AMD can implement most of the Intel instructions. So no, it's not because of the patents. They simply have to start from scratch. Also, bulldozer was designed for servers in mind, not desktops so more cores does matter.
nstgc:
Even under server loads, Intel's current line out performs AMD's and with the added incentive of using less power/producing less heat.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version