3 ms·
The comparisons in this article seem rather hand-wavy. "This thing is X% faster than this thing which was Y% slower than this other thing so they're about even
by suprjami 10y ago
The comparisons in this article seem rather hand-wavy.
"This thing is X% faster than this thing which was Y% slower than this other thing so they're about even."
Even if these comparisons are true, AMD equaling Intel 2 years after release is nowhere near the competition we need in the CPU market.
- dman 10y agoOn the other hand Intel hasnt done anything groundbreaking in the last two years either.
- BuckRogers 10y agoNot groundbreaking but they do make steady, consistent progress. Which is more than you can credit their competitor for.
- bubuga 10y ago> Not groundbreaking but they do make steady, consistent progress. Not where it matters, which is the price/performance ratio. It doesn't matter if Intel is able to put in the market their Formula 1 chips at a Formula 1 price, when most of the world deals with a Honda Civic budget. When we factor in the fact that the Formula 1 chip isn't even the bottleneck in the system in most cases, the comparison only gets worse.
- BuckRogers 10y agoThat's not true but if it were: why isn't AMD's marketshare so great? Good products win, AMD proved that with the Athlon. They don't have good products today.