Amd is better than intel, for gamers like me -;-

In my professional opinion, Intel makes superior products. AMD wouldn't even be around if it wasn't for Intel. AMD started out as, and is still, the cheap knockoff alternative to real Intel hardware.

That's not necesarily true zep, here's a did you know for noob comments. Intels architecture in their newest line of cpu's was done by who first, ooohhhhhh AMD.

And the Pentium 3-4 got smoked by similarly priced AMD processors (Athlon and up) several years ago. It wasn't until the Core series that Intel took the lead again.

wiscountryboy has probably purchased another new system since this thread was started but I still say Intel is better (at least for what I use my system for).

Yes zephead, Intel IS buying a "Stairway to Heaven"...!

I concur..
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.

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)