New Extreme Edition - WTF!!!

[Giancarlo]

Now I'm just mad I didn't get Socket 939. Grrr.

 

[prosser13]

I won't make the same mistake as you then I got to go, carry on defacing Intel's reputation for me please

 

[SSE4]

Anyone foolish enough to say that Athlon is low end of the market is pretty brain dead. Let me explain why, AMD has clearly mastered the 90nm standard. Additionally, Intel has suffered from poor business decisions, like the releasing of the Prescott. I don't think you Intel defenders, supporters, fanboys or whatever the hell you call yourselves, can or should defend the Prescott. Needforspeed, the fact remains that AMD was establishing itself in the market and doesn't have the resources to churn out instruction set after instruction set. They needed to establish themselves, and they did. People are claiming that Hyper-threading beats AMD's HyperTransport. The two are not the same thing. And AMD does in fact defeat Intel in multi-tasking.



Well apparently you are doing something wrong. My AMD 64 3000+ beats the 3.2GHz P4 with HT.

I'm not talking about the performance of the 3500+ I'm talking about the feel of the processor and how quickly the system moves in real-time application. AMD does not control 80% of the market. Therefore how does this translate to you? Well if you failed economics then it would translate into a landslide victory for AMD. It doesn't matter how good the processors are, sorry, but that's not what is under discussion when looking at the market. You're also wrong, because the AMD does not defeat intel in multi-tasking. That has to be one of the most ridiculous notions I've heard yet. And like I said in regards to SSE3, it was either hardware limitations or the cost of putting it into their processors. You didn't even get 939? Only an idiot wouldn't, sorry. Don't come rushing in here and yelling out the same incoherent arguments I have come to expect from the majority of AMD users.

 

[Giancarlo]

Intel doesn't control 80% of the market either. AMD does lead by a landslide. Stop being an idiot. I have not failed economics. The ones here defending Intel have failed. They have failed at every notice of intelligence. I'm not wrong. I'm never wrong when it comes to AMD and Intel. My processor is pretty good. It will last me a few years. I got it before the 939 made its big debut.

Incoherent arguments? Wake up, you're a noob. I have no respect for idiotic, moronic Intel users. They don't make arguments. Only grabbing onto the one or two non-real world benchmarks their crappy processors win.

 

[SSE4]

http://www.thechannelinsider.com/article2/0,1759,1709404,00.asp
That isn't too long ago. So you can rest assured Intel didn't lose a good 50% of the market share in a few months. So you have some serious issues you need to work out. AMD has been climbing rather steadily over the past few years though, and it's impressive the ground they have been making in server solutions and across the board. You're never wrong? You're full of yourself. It's interesting because I, unfortunately, know more about your own processor than you do. I don't grab on to benchmarks, but since you can't seem to suppress your blind rage at me saying "I like Intel," I understand how it could be difficult for you to arrange a proper argument.

 

[Giancarlo]

I never said Intel lost 50% of the market. I'm telling you that AMD is gaining on them and eating away at the advantage they had several years back. Intel doesn't hold any particular advantages right now, with the exception of the mobile processor market. And now AMD came out with the 64-bit Turion. You know more about my own processor then I do? That's pretty wrong, and pretty idiotic. You unfortunately know nothing.

 

[SSE4]

Actually, I said that. You said "Intel doesn't control 80% of the market either. AMD does lead by a landslide." But you can rest assured that they still own close to 80% of the market share. So you're the one that just changed your position after getting proven wrong. Of course I know about the Turion. I know a lot more than you would like to give me credit for. Intel is still holding on with companies like Dell consistently selling Intel PCs to consumers. Not to mention it's just a name that people know and trust.

 

[Giancarlo]

They do not own close to 80% of the market. Again learn economics and maybe you'll understand these basic facts. You are the ones who keep getting proved wrong. And don't screw with gurus around here, or you'll be banned. Who is it? You sound like the Intel version of AMD ZEN. You just don't register and start bashing people around here. I owned a Pentium 200MMX several years back, so I'm not an AMD Fan boy either.

I know more then you.

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

Intel doesn't control 80% of the market either. AMD does lead by a landslide. Stop being an idiot. I have not failed economics. The ones here defending Intel have failed. They have failed at every notice of intelligence. I'm not wrong. I'm never wrong when it comes to AMD and Intel. My processor is pretty good. It will last me a few years. I got it before the 939 made its big debut.

Incoherent arguments? Wake up, you're a noob. I have no respect for idiotic, moronic Intel users. They don't make arguments. Only grabbing onto the one or two non-real world benchmarks their crappy processors win.

I'm interested how you haven't failed economics if you seriously think that AMD - not backed by any major Computer Manufacturer, leads in anyway against Intel least of all a landslide

I'm not sure where Gaming Benchmarks - the only things AMD win - are real world benchmarks? We all know nobody can see more than 70 Frames a Second; even 50 more frames on an AMD is not a real world advantage Its an advantage for somebody who enjoys bragging to their friends I have 500Fps and those few who have had eye transplants with a Time-Lapse Camera Lense.

I never said Intel lost 50% of the market. I'm telling you that AMD is gaining on them and eating away at the advantage they had several years back. Intel doesn't hold any particular advantages right now, with the exception of the mobile processor market. And now AMD came out with the 64-bit Turion. You know more about my own processor then I do? That's pretty wrong, and pretty idiotic. You unfortunately know nothing.

Maybe you didn't directly but you said in the quote above that AMD lead by a landslide - that would mean a 50%+ Market loss by Intel over the last two years.

Does anybody but you know anything?

 

[Giancarlo]

I'm interested how you haven't failed economics if you seriously think that AMD - not backed by any major Computer Manufacturer, leads in anyway against Intel least of all a landslide

I never said it did. Can someone please find a post where I said AMD did lead in the marketshare? No, I said it led speed-wise. It is eating away at Intel's marketshare at any rate, as more computer manufacturers have switched over to it. It isn't backed by any major computer manufactor? How the fuck is that? I just was at circuit city and I saw it was.

I'm not sure where Gaming Benchmarks - the only things AMD win - are real world benchmarks? We all know nobody can see more than 70 Frames a Second; even 50 more frames on an AMD is not a real world advantage Its an advantage for somebody who enjoys bragging to their friends I have 500Fps and those few who have had eye transplants with a Time-Lapse Camera Lense.

Again stop evading the facts. AMD leads in far more then just gaming benchmarks.

Maybe you didn't directly but you said in the quote above that AMD lead by a landslide - that would mean a 50%+ Market loss by Intel over the last two years.

Does anybody but you know anything?

AMD leads by a landslide speed wise.