We Have a Winner.........Zoso..........!
Yes zephead, Intel IS buying a "Stairway to Heaven"...!
You may have noticed in 1 or 2 of my posts that I'm not all too crazy about AMD.
As far as I'm concerned they can go over the hills and far away!
That would monopolize the industry and throttle competition, which would just hurt us, the consumers. AMD CPUs are priced better than Intel's offerings at the low-end and mid-end of the price range, where a chipmaker stands to make the most revenue.
It's not just price competition. If not for AMD's competition, Intel would not be pushed into making faster and faster processors, at least not as soon. I doubt that we would have the i7 series processors now.
I'm not too sure that's the reason mailpup, Intel probably would have progressed regardless just to keep making sales.
I think any manufacturer is their own competition. Products have to evolve or people will just keep using the old one. So it follows that this year's Intel has to be better than last year's anyway, regardless of what AMD does, or nobody will buy it.
Does AMD's existence add to their motivation certainly,
It's all biblical really, Pentium begat Pentium 2, which begat Pentium 3.....[ ]......et al.
Well first, AMD's chips are priced the way they are because of Intel's competition. There's no reason to assume that those prices are affixed out of the goodness of AMD's heart.
Second, without AMD, Intel would still be able to "throttle" itself. (In an auto-erotic sort of way, mind you).
I never said anything about the modern day core product line. AMD used to make cheaper, lower quality alternatives to Intel processors as a main means of survival.
I have an AMD 286 CPU with an Intel copywright on it. AMD was licensed to produce the same processors that Intel was making for awhile and they made their name as cheap alternatives. It wasn't until Intel produced the Pentium that AMD started making their own product line. And, if anyone recalls the K5 and K6, they were considerably less reliable overclockers. They couldn't be pushed as far as most Intel processors of the era and were more prone to reflections on the bus.
I agree that AMD has since evolved into a different company, but this fact does not change the company's history.
If AMD left the processor market, that might open up room for Via to crawl out from only producing low power (literally) processors.
I doubt Via would do anything of the sort, given that they don't have any fabs of their own. Their main source of income is chipsets (especially AMD chipsets), and while they would look to try and diversify, I don't think they would be able to stand up to a juggernaut like Intel.
IBM would have a much better chance of doing that, if they play their cards right.
That's what I was trying to say cap (maybe it came out wrong). We need both companies, so we can have better products at lower prices. No fanboyism intended.
Have I Got a Monopoly For You........
Personally, I think that we should all thank our lucky stars that Microsoft doesn't decide to go into the chipset business.
Although, it might be cute to have Bill Gate's picture on every CPU heat shield. That said, he might make a good mascot. Perhaps he would come to be known as the, "Aunt Jemima of Overclocking".
If AMD didn't exist, there would be some alternative to Intel, regardless of how slow and/or crappy the processors were. If one company controlled the entire desktop CPU market another would try to prevent a complete monopoly by introducing alternative products. After all, there are plenty of corners that Intel doesn't cut.
LMAO that made me laugh so loudly that I scared my cat! (who promptly mauled my thigh; NOT a good experience)
@zephead, I guess we'll never know, will we?
My last pc was an intel and the one before that and my current one is AMD and I personally love AMD.. Just my .02
Over time, i've had the general impression (maybe true or not, but my impression) that new software products seemed to use Intel as the "gold standard" for Quality testing. Issues with other vendor CPUs (like AMD) sometimes slipped through the crack and more often weren't revealed until after product release.
The most glaring example was the MS release of XP SP3 (which initially failed on many AMD processors) (and, btw, turned out to be an HP issue not MS. but still it was AMD that fell through the cracks)
Intel of course.
i think amd has more value for your money
I don't feel much about the 'value for money' argument in this regard, however, there is one major credit to AMD and i.e. with regard to 'continuity' of same socket types hence giving more options down the road to upgrade your processor and adding a bit more life to your existing rig.
AMD, I've used it since my first gaming rig back in 1999, my first system was intel when i was about 7, when i turned 8 I was given a choice, I chose AMD based on wanting to be different, all my friends parents had intel boxes, I wanted an AMD sticker.
Now that's definitely not the reason now, I've stuck with AMD and I've always seemed to come out on top, I've built many rigs for people and the ones who choose AMD are always happy with them, and they don't spend boo koo amounts of money.
Don't get me wrong Intel is great, and the rigs I have built with Intel have been pretty amazing, but they've cost a pretty penny.
But I love my AMD, it never sees over 52*C full load on air, and oc'd a bit, my whole rig under full load stays in the 40-50*C range.
None of my intel boxes i currently have or have built have ever done that.
Of course the newest intel i own is a 65nm presler.
But it all comes down to what you want to spend and what you want to do. I would highly recommend a new Phenom II quad core, i just built my buddies system as follows and it annihilates everything
EVGA nForce 790
8gb ocz ram
2 GTX 295's (at $600 each not really in the price range of anyone, but he wanted to go big. he wanted 3, i told him he was dumb xD)
Phenom II 965 BE
now im sure you wont go off and build this, but its a hella powereful AMD system
It powered through anything we threw at it, Crysis isn't as pretty as you would hope maxed lol
Always gone for INtel, not sure why but once i had tried one i stayed with it and now have a steaming hot Quad Core i cant fault it
AMD is the first I've used, and my experiences with Intel haven't exactly been great.
Personally I prefer Intel, they perform great and at the moment don't cost overly more than similar AMD chips, however seeing as the only AMD system in my house is a sempron 300 and my Intel chip is an i5 760, I don't have anything practical to go off when comparing the two lol.
AMD multicore rules. My dual core lappy, 4gb ram, 512mb Radeon HD 5470, runs Starcraft II (low settings), and only cost me $500 AU. It's an air cooled beast too.
We'll really see where things are at when intel's sandy bridge and amd's bulldozer cpu's hit laptops proper.