Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> AMD aims to reclaim CPU crown with 2007 quad-core
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | ...the puzzle is coming together and suggests that AMD may have a
> | shot at trumping Intel by mid-2007, at least until the blue team
> | rolls out 45 nm chips.
Did you actually READ the article???? The answer is obviously not
because it's full of "might" "perhaps" "maybe" "have a shot" and so
forth. The article CLEARLY says that Intel has the lead and the new
quad-core from AMD won't change that one bit.
While AMD is still very upbeat on its (continuing) success, the company
did not have such a great run recently. Just announced yesterday, the
firm's Quad FX (4x4) platform was not able to spark the kind of
enthusiasm we would have expected from such an innovative product. Most
reviewers, including Tom's Hardware Guide, were hesitant to point to
some benefits of the platform and CONCLUDED THAT IT ISN'T A COMPETITOR
for Intel's quad-core at this time. Even if AMD has been criticizing
Intel for quickly assembling a "pseudo" quad core processor (that
basically consists of two dual-cores) for the sake of having the first
quad-core in the market, doesn't change much the fact that AMD has
gambled away its lead, perhaps by underestimating how quickly an angry
Intel could strike back.
So sure... the new chips from AMD that will be out sometime next year
are already underperforming what Intel is shipping today.
Nice (fictional) headline - " Wintel Being Left Behind as AMD Quad Core
Takes Crown "
> They are Linux supporters.
How so? I see nothing that AMD is doing that Intel hasn't also done.