Intel and AMD kiss and make up

[Lance]

Quite an expensive settlement but hopefully it will give AMD some cash to play with

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8357266.stm

[Rik]

AMD now need to get talking to Mac, of course.

[Sebby]

I never thought I'd see the day!

[zappaDPJ]

I must admit I didn't expect that either.

While it pains me to write a check at any time...

Shouldn't that be 'cheque'?

[bobleslie]

Not according to these people.  


p.s I like a happy ending. 

[Sebby]

Shouldn't that be 'cheque'?

They spell it "check" in America...

Nope, me neither.

[D-Dan]

While not a fanboy - I've been an AMD man since I ditched the Amiga and built my first IBM compatible (I hate the term "PC" as though it applies to Windows boxes only - it's short for personal computer for crying out loud - even the ZX81 qualifies) so I'm pleased to see what is, essentially, an admission of guilt from Intel.

I've been following this for several months, and hated to see AMD not fulfilling their potential owing to lack of development funds. Hopefully, this will level the playing field for them.

Steve

[Sebby]

I agree, Steve. I always preferred AMD, and it's a shame that their processors fell behind in years gone by.

[D-Dan]

TBH - By all accounts the Phenom II series are a great stride forward, especially for an underdog that has been systematically squeezed out of the market by what, we can now confidently say, are underhanded, immoral and illegal practices - so let's see what they are really capable of.

I have probably the last of the AMD greats in my machine (Athlon 64 x2 6400 Black Edition) - and I'd like to put their next market leader into my next one

Steve

PS. And let's not forget that AMD own ATI - who are currently running rings around NVidia when it comes to performance for your bucks. I've read nothing but great things about the 5000 series gfx cards.

[bobleslie]

I agree, Steve. I always preferred AMD, and it's a shame that their processors fell behind in years gone by.

Did AMD fall behind in years gone by?  Evidence?  

Or did you mean commercially?

[Gary]

Did AMD fall behind in years gone by?  Evidence? 

Or did you mean commercially?

Amd with the X4800 hit the market, I had that when it first came out and it ran rings around Intel, who then trumped AMD with the core duo and then core 2 duo and now the i5 and i7. For evidence use google, the stats speak for themselves. I like underdogs and hope AMD can pull back, the thing is Intel are pretty much one step ahead with new technology and new core architecture and manufacturing processes like the 45nm chips that AMD did not have that at the time with the X4800, so AMD were stuck with 65nm procs that were power hungry and hot, even the 65nm Q6600 was faster than AMD offerings and the core 2 duo's wiped the floor with them completely, both in performance and energy consumption. The new core 2 duos still outperform AMD's offerings and overclock well, you can get an E8600 up to 4.25ghz and be stable.

At least the ATI graphics processors are running rings round Nvidia 

[bobleslie]

I agree in the last 3-4 years about Intel. Disagree before that. IOW in chip time frames Intel's resurgence is quite 'recent'. If you see what I mean?

[Gary]

I agree in the last 3-4 years about Intel. Disagree before that. IOW in chip time frames Intel's resurgence is quite 'recent'. If you see what I mean?

Before that I wil agree, AMD had the edge especially with gamers as well, they were the chips to have, then about 4 years ago it all went downhill, saying that Intel's unfair market practices did not help as well all well know.

[Sebby]

Did AMD fall behind in years gone by?  Evidence? 

Or did you mean commercially?

No need for the wink.

I mean in terms of performance. The evidence is that I've experienced it.

[bobleslie]

Post Core, I'll grant you. Pre-Core no way.

[Sebby]

I agree completely. In the days of the Athlon XP, they were great, but the X2 is nowhere near as good as the C2D.