Comments on: AMD also enters the quad-core CPU market

By: gomen

gomen — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 20:41:21 +0000

AMD are gay end story.

By: h-man

h-man — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 20:39:33 +0000

INTEL wins with its 8 core, and 32 Core cpu’s out next year…
hahhaha sucked in AMD!!!!!!!!!

By: Emm

Emm — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 15:18:39 +0000

Ok dude… so:
Intel = two dual-core wafers glued toghether = Same shit, bigger price & more heat!

AMD = 4 cores that share a L3 Cache so that processing can be done inside the CPU, among the cores, without the data leaving it (if instructed so)! = In the future, one Core could be a GFX processor, one a PhysX PU and the other two regular CPU’s… CPU name: AMD Fusion

MS doesn’t love intel… that’s why when intel tried to push an agreement between them for it to be the exclusive company to deliver 64-bit PU, MS just pissed on that agreement and released Windows XP PRO 64 with support for AMD64 CPU Family.

By: NoiZ

NoiZ — Mon, 10 Sep 2007 09:52:31 +0000

Das any of u read about build of procesors INTELS x4 are not x4 at all they are x2 DUAL CORE they stic 2 dual cores on one die amds shit is the first real quad amd is slower when releasing products but tones more inovative and now when they got some gpu theconlogy i hope they incorporate thet in thers next gen cpus becouse it is like this ms loves intel that is whay intel seems always faster but they are not intel point is just make it faster stres out fsb always whit this dame ram spedds so market for inte is in ram speed not in cpu. anwhays if intel dont get they shit too gether amd will win in long run.

By: ELCouz

ELCouz — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 22:05:34 +0000

@ xyztynz

i know that but we all know that windows still have a HUGE consumer market share compared to linux.

damn windows !! lol
/me still use windows for apps compatibility even if ubuntu is better (WINE made alot of progress but thats not enough for stopping me using win )

Ubuntu + Compiz Fusion FTW !!!

By: xyztynz

xyztynz — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 20:35:42 +0000

Hopefully AMD gets it shit together and starts putting out product that can compete performance and price wise with Intel processors, otherwise we’ll be back to having Intel overprice its chips.
@ 28 you might not be able to run Windows on SPARC, but Linux runs just fine.

By: Stalk3r

Stalk3r — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 19:56:03 +0000

ahhh shit…AMD is fucked up real bad
why the fuck keeps delaying these mudda fucking CPUS? esspecially PHENOM???
anyway il still go for the x2 6000+, cuz i don’t have enough money for intel’s Q6600.

By: ELCouz

ELCouz — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 19:22:25 +0000

SPARC is not a consumer product and will never be

Only VIA,AMD and INTEL are targeting consumer market.

Try running windows on a SPARC cpu and you will understand why its not popular on home desktop

By: hikaricore

hikaricore — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 18:30:29 +0000

Intel is pure evil, and makes chite processors. ^_^

By: Mr. X

Mr. X — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 17:41:18 +0000

GO SPARC! woot !

By: me

me — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 17:32:22 +0000

Im still waiting for those SPARC processors to come out on desktops then we get some action

By: busted

busted — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 17:21:40 +0000

You guys act like everybody or at least the majority of the market were buying high-end machines/processors.

By: ELCouz

ELCouz — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 16:37:52 +0000

AMD should have bought NVIDIA instead of ATI … nvidia (first nforce) chipset were develloped at first for amd

By: ZV

ZV — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 16:07:49 +0000

AMD got sidetracked when buying ATI and unless they can come out with a good, CHEAP chip then they are not going to make it.
I loved AMD but the Intels are so much faster.

By: stevejobs

stevejobs — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 16:00:18 +0000

just make it go faster and better..and cheaper.. thats all we want

end of story