What is Digg?191 Comments
- mysteri0usdrx, on 11/19/2007, -14/+90Why do people keep buying into Apple being a "cool" brand. You are buying into a way to spend marketing dollars. which is quite perplexing.
- rompom7, on 11/19/2007, -3/+65We really _really_ need AMD to start throwing some competition Intel's way. Competition is a great thing for consumers.
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 11/19/2007, -4/+55Four years? You mean one year. The C2D's launched in August 2006. Before that time, I never heard anything about AMD dying out. They were pretty much on top for two years prior to 2006. Everyone said the same thing about Nvidia during the 5-series (when the ATI's 9800 Pro launched), and now look where we are! If AMD releases some kind of kickass processor next year, then everyone will quickly forget about what's happening now, and we'll see articles titled "Is Intel doomed?" Though, AMD is having some serious financial troubles which could actually put it to death entirely.
- Sarki, on 11/19/2007, -15/+58For the last four years we hear constantly about how AMD is about to die, how their latest gamble is truly their last, etc., and yet they still keep going.
- themoosejuice, on 11/19/2007, -6/+44I've always bought AMD. Lower priced for about the same speed.
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 11/19/2007, -0/+36Well, the launch of the HD38xx series actually put them right back into the graphics scene. Considering that the prices of the new 8800GT's are breaking $300+ now (and are sold out), ATI is holding firm with their 3870 at $219. The Phenoms launched this morning, and unfortunately the benchmarks aren't doing to well. In some cases, the X2 6400+ actually outperforms the Phenom quads. And it seems like they're launching at above their quoted price, some costing more than the Q6600! Kind of silly to pay more for the Phenom when it performs less.
It seems to me that AMD is going to be pushed solely into the graphics department. The HD3870 performs very similarly to the 8800GT 512 MB, costs less, runs cooler, makes less noise, and uses less power. It'll be a shame if the AMD processors die out, because then Intel will price gouge even more than they've been doing already. - Kamujin, on 11/19/2007, -18/+53Buried for thinking the world needs that dinosaur we call Apple.
- elvenseven, on 11/19/2007, -1/+34Don't die AMD. We need the competition going. Bought an X2 4000+ for the media center PC.
- pcpimpster, on 11/19/2007, -2/+28AMD is FAR from dead in the CPU game. In the high end their losing to Intel right now but they have good price to performance in the medium to low end. Ask the last 10 laptops i bought from Dell, all had the X2's and saved my company 150-200$ each. The difference to the common end user is trivial.
I think its kind of apples to oranges to compare AMD to Apple /no pun - qmeister, on 11/19/2007, -9/+33Apple is neither scrappy nor cool. Apple is the uncle you have that you aren't sure whether he's gay or not. He has a "roommate" and never seems to have a girlfriend. There isn't a question here about whether or not it's ok to be gay, it's just that you aren't sure, and he never talks about it. Apple is also the metro-sexual of the group. Sleek and shiny, prim and proper....everything in its place. For a platform to be scrappier than it's competition, it should be cheaper and easier to use, neither of which Apple can claim (try yes, they can try, but bottom line is it's not). For instance, my friend's mac keeps telling him that his boot disk is about full. He doesn't know what a boot disk is and what it means to be full...he's stuck. By making the machine so easy a monkey can use it, he now has no idea what to do....so he just ignores it, hoping it will go away.
AMD is scrappy and nimble. I hope they are successful. - clickwir, on 11/19/2007, -0/+24Description was decent until you mentioned apple. Then you lost all credibility.
- BOFH2, on 11/19/2007, -4/+28No.
- alpine75, on 11/19/2007, -1/+22Just imagine how expensive Intel cpu's would be without AMD's competition.
- nutsackninja, on 11/19/2007, -1/+22I love AMD's, when I build computers for myself and friends, its the only processor I buy. Great over clockers best bang for your buck in my opinion.
- Grimdotdotdot, on 11/19/2007, -3/+24I not convinced the tech world *need* Apple to exist, anyway.
- spyrochaete, on 11/19/2007, -2/+19Agreed. ***** summary. AMD has done fine in the past without even Intel's bland marketing.
- GeForce8800GTX, on 11/19/2007, -2/+18Why does Apple have to be in this? Does AMD suck Apple's dick? What the hell is going on here? For me it's always been among AMD, Intel, nVIDIA, and ATI.
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 11/19/2007, -2/+18What does comparing Steve Jobs to Bill Gates have to do with anything? If I'm going to be honest, Steve Jobs creeps me out. He reminds me of some strange cult leader. Bill Gates looks like a massive nerd, which is the type of face you want on an OS. I prefer my OS'd being backed by a massive nerd, than a "cool" guy. I'm not saying any of this matters, but since YOU brought it up...
- ToadLeg, on 11/19/2007, -3/+19They keep going cause I and a whole lot of other people keep buying their processors. You can get a dual core processor from AMD for under $100 now. To get anything as good from Intel, add $60.
Why was Apple mentioned in the title? There's only a few people who actually think Apple is a cool company. (and their computers are even more overpriced than Intel...a lot more)
Also, @GeForce8800GTX I don't think nVIDIA was planning on merging with anybody. AMD wasn't just looking to merge with a graphics card company and chose ATI; it doesn't work that way. The two companies decided that they would benefit if they merged. - getoffmybridge, on 05/05/2009, -1/+15AMD is fine. ATI still does very well in the graphics card market, and even if AMD's soon to be released Phenom doesn't perform as well as Intel's newest Penryn core processors, I feel there will always be a solid market for lower priced "almost as fast" offerings from AMD.
- ScornedPatriot, on 11/19/2007, -0/+14Well I've been hearing about how AMD will die since they started producing their own chips, starting with the K5... 10 years later still here.
- nullx42, on 11/19/2007, -7/+20if AMD is doomed then apple is *****.
- takamalak, on 11/19/2007, -2/+14It's *****. It's spelled with an 'i', not an asterisk.
- childprey, on 11/19/2007, -0/+12By about five frames per second, yes.
is each frame a second worth $20? - ToadLeg, on 11/19/2007, -0/+11AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 6000+ 3.0 GHz Processor: $160
http://www.amazon.com/AMD-Athlon-Dual-Core-6000%2B ...
Core 2 Duo E6750 Processor: $195
http://www.amazon.com/Core-2-Duo-E6750-Processor/d ...
Here's a benchmark between the 2 processors:
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx ...
The Intel processor beats the AMD processor by 10% on that benchmark (there's a lot of others you can see on that page too). Intel currently beats AMD for power at the high end. But at the low end:
AMD ADO4800DDBOX Athlon 64 X2 Dual-Core 4800+ 2.5GHz 1MB Cache Processor: $100
http://www.amazon.com/AMD-ADO4800DDBOX-Athlon-Dual ...
also a processor with slightly lower performance but only uses peak 45W power (that's very low):
Athlon X2 Dc BE-2300 AM2 1.9GHZ 1MB 65NM 45W 2GHZ Fsb Pib: $90
http://www.amazon.com/Athlon-BE-2300-1-9GHZ-65NM-2 ...
compared to the 4800: http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx ...
Compare that to the lowest priced Intel dual core processor:
Core 2 Duo E4500PROCESSOR: $140
http://www.amazon.com/Intel-BX80557E4500SLA95-Core ...
performance comparison: http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx ...
or a processor comparable to the x2 4800 in performance:
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe 2.13GHz 2M shared L2 Cache LGA 775 Processor: $158
http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Conroe-2-13GHz-shared- ...
performance comparison: http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx ...
If you want extreme performance and don't care about the price, Intel is currently the best. But if you want a dual core processor that will still be extremely fast, but a lot cheaper, AMD is currently the best. - ApokalypseNow, on 11/19/2007, -0/+11I was with you up until the last year, year and a half - now Intel is ahead, and AMD is sadly slipping further and further behind. It will take a big leap on their part to catch back up. I hope they do, though. AMD still makes quality chips at a lower price, but right now (and for the near future, at least) the high-end market is pretty much Intel's playground, and for the gamer on a budget, this is bad news.
- MioTheGreat, on 11/19/2007, -5/+16What?
Intel's processors are simply superior to AMD's right now. In both performance and manufacturing technology. - inactive, on 11/19/2007, -1/+12They hijacked the local leprechauns and put them to work in Slurm factories. Bastards.
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 11/19/2007, -0/+1020%? The most I've seen was 10%. Average percentage difference for the 3870 is about 7%. And considering there's nearly $100 between the cards, also with the other things like temperature, noise, and power usage?
- farmera2005, on 11/19/2007, -6/+16Umm.....I call Bullsh*t
- JammoBlammo, on 11/19/2007, -0/+10AMD is not doomed. Maybe the latest gamble was a bad one, but I also remember a few years back that they were the first on the x64 bandwagon, with Intel reverse-engineering their chips for compatibility. They may not be as rich or powerful as Intel, but they're far from dead.
- thugok, on 11/19/2007, -4/+13iBullsh*t?
- KevinO, on 11/19/2007, -1/+10I'd rather work for Gates over Jobs any day as well. Jobs is a stuck up pos who apparently acts like a bug crawled up his ass and dies.
- inactive, on 11/19/2007, -0/+7I really wish that were still the case. I was planning on buying another AMD last year when I built a new system, but the difference was so big that I would be foolish not to get a C2D.
I hope AMD has an ace up their sleeve. - SmokeMeAKipper, on 11/19/2007, -0/+7We've started purchasing AMD based business systems for the same reason, cost savings.
- mikesol, on 11/19/2007, -3/+10You're completely right, but this is Digg, so you are going to get buried by a bunch of rabid apple fanboys. Sorry!
- a1programmer, on 11/19/2007, -1/+8Long live AMD!!!
- plizard, on 11/19/2007, -1/+8pics or didn't happen
- MrViklund, on 11/19/2007, -4/+10Buried because of extreme stupidity and inaccuracy.
- Herald42, on 11/19/2007, -0/+6If that's the case, what's with the rabid Linux following?
- foxhoundadmin, on 11/19/2007, -0/+6nvidia's geforce 8800 gt doesn't do bit stream decoding on h.264 NOR vc1.
you must be pretty rich if you can afford a pc with a cpu that can play either codecs at 1080p AND a new graphics card! - inactive, on 11/19/2007, -1/+7Yeah not only that but low to mid range OEMs will still use AMD chips in many of their models. Even if the nerdy enthusiast market abandons AMD, the OEMs won't.
- childprey, on 11/19/2007, -0/+6On the other hand, I pity the guy who's gotta work for Ballmer
- Super6, on 11/19/2007, -3/+8I've always run AMD CPU's but when I build my new PC in a month AMD is literally forcing me to buy the Q6600. At only $275 and easily overclockable to more than 3ghz nothing from AMD touches it.
- Drahkar, on 11/19/2007, -2/+7AMD's biggest folly was the ATI purchase. I personally swear by using AMD Processors, but I won't touch ATI video cards. I'm exclusive to NVidia and will probably be so for a long time in the future. They should have purchased NVidia.
- plizard, on 11/19/2007, -1/+6well considering i paid a 1/5 of what the intel equivalent was when i just built my machine, i would think no to being doomed
- Tyr7BE, on 11/19/2007, -1/+6You could go on, but then I'd have to keep ridiculing you point by point.
Apple was all the rage until the Starbucks crowd caught on. As soon as iPod became a buzzword for beatnicks with ***** for brains I jumped ship, and have been happily going non-Apple ever since. True, they make some slick hardware, but the marketing hype alone has made them untouchable for me. - foxhoundadmin, on 11/19/2007, -0/+5they had their day during the k7 days, because intel dropped the ball with its netburst architecture.
boy did netburst SUCK! it was the win me of cpu architectures. :P - iofthestorm, on 11/19/2007, -0/+5Redesign their CPUs from the ground up? Do you have any idea what that entails? Don't you think there's a reason we don't have any more major x86 CPU manufacturers? It's not like Intel scrapped Netburst and completely built a new architecture, the Core architecture is based off of the Pentium M which was based off the Pentium III architecture. Great designs don't simply come out of a void, and just scrapping their existing designs isn't going to help anything.
- a1programmer, on 11/19/2007, -0/+5Exactly... People keep talking about how they're on their last limbs, etc, etc... Given the size difference in the companies, it's simply amazing what AMD has done with what they've had.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 188 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is