AMD To be a threat to Intel?
Heres a good read. . . .
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Quote:Speaking of P5 I saw something interesting on betaplace yetesterday.
I was trying to sign up for Longhorn, and when it asked my CPU, it listed P3,P4 and P5
I guess the name is set already.
Hell yeah... Pentium has the name recognition. They will never give that up. They would be stupid to change it. If they changed the name to...say... asshat. They would end up with all these people coming into stores and not buying the asshat because they have always heard that the pentium is better.
I was trying to sign up for Longhorn, and when it asked my CPU, it listed P3,P4 and P5
I guess the name is set already.
Hell yeah... Pentium has the name recognition. They will never give that up. They would be stupid to change it. If they changed the name to...say... asshat. They would end up with all these people coming into stores and not buying the asshat because they have always heard that the pentium is better.
Quote:They could call it the Penitum 242, or 246 lol
Then again AMD never was good at marketing
That's something that I never understood... THeir whole naming convention was based on the pentium. I guess they were going for value for the money but how could they ever hope to obtain the top spot if they rely on the pentiums for their names?
Then again AMD never was good at marketing
That's something that I never understood... THeir whole naming convention was based on the pentium. I guess they were going for value for the money but how could they ever hope to obtain the top spot if they rely on the pentiums for their names?
Quote:Quote:They could call it the Penitum 242, or 246 lol
Then again AMD never was good at marketing
That's something that I never understood... THeir whole naming convention was based on the pentium. I guess they were going for value for the money but how could they ever hope to obtain the top spot if they rely on the pentiums for their names?
I thought that AMD's numbering was based on performance relative to the original Athlons?
Anyway, I'd buy an asshat processor just for the name...and the label that says "asshat inside"...
AndyF
Then again AMD never was good at marketing
That's something that I never understood... THeir whole naming convention was based on the pentium. I guess they were going for value for the money but how could they ever hope to obtain the top spot if they rely on the pentiums for their names?
I thought that AMD's numbering was based on performance relative to the original Athlons?
Anyway, I'd buy an asshat processor just for the name...and the label that says "asshat inside"...
AndyF
Brand loyality is just about dead. THe Pentium name is more recognizable to those who aren't tech heads.
I think CPU's should be open source.
You get the chip for free and only pay for technical support.
That way we here at ntcompatible get free rides, while the little old lady who can't install the chip gets to pay for all of ours by calling Tech Support.
I think CPU's should be open source.
You get the chip for free and only pay for technical support.
That way we here at ntcompatible get free rides, while the little old lady who can't install the chip gets to pay for all of ours by calling Tech Support.
"I thought that AMD's numbering was based on performance relative to the original Athlons?"
That's correct, specifically the Thunderbird socket A variety.
That's correct, specifically the Thunderbird socket A variety.
Quote:"I thought that AMD's numbering was based on performance relative to the original Athlons?"
That's correct, specifically the Thunderbird socket A variety.
Everything I have ever read seemed to indicate that a 2500 performs the same as a 2500 MHz pentium.
That's correct, specifically the Thunderbird socket A variety.
Everything I have ever read seemed to indicate that a 2500 performs the same as a 2500 MHz pentium.
Quote:Till they hit 2800 or so
THe New C series with 800FSB are faster in most every way, so the 2800, 3000, and 3200 are not scaled to reflect.
Yeah, I realize that. But wasn't that the original purpose of the numbering system?
THe New C series with 800FSB are faster in most every way, so the 2800, 3000, and 3200 are not scaled to reflect.
Yeah, I realize that. But wasn't that the original purpose of the numbering system?
^^^
that was the iudea
se
and AMD 1700+ is only a 1.2ghz? but it is supposed to perform like a 1.7ghz Intel P4.
that was the iudea
se
and AMD 1700+ is only a 1.2ghz? but it is supposed to perform like a 1.7ghz Intel P4.
no .net, no P4.
I vote for TuxAthlon
AMD chips all the way
I vote for TuxAthlon
AMD chips all the way
sure amd will be a threat to intel as they always have been
a threat to 100% cpu market share is all.
intel will release the 64bit chip as soon as they are done milking the 32bit market, and not a second before.
a threat to 100% cpu market share is all.
intel will release the 64bit chip as soon as they are done milking the 32bit market, and not a second before.
Quote:sure amd will be a threat to intel as they always have been
a threat to 100% cpu market share is all.
intel will release the 64bit chip as soon as they are done milking the 32bit market, and not a second before.
Yep, pretty much. Getting developers for the Windows platform to move to 64bit compiles will be harder to do than, say, Apple is doing with their hardware and software. Even Apple is finding some apps will not work in 32bit emulation without updates and they have a much smaller software selection to work with. By the time their PowerBooks go 64bit though, it should be all resolved. I would love to use a dual 64bit AMD system as a video editing or server solution, but I would have to see an excellent motherboard to support (one with both Windows and Linux support, since you can get 64bit support there as well) it.
a threat to 100% cpu market share is all.
intel will release the 64bit chip as soon as they are done milking the 32bit market, and not a second before.
Yep, pretty much. Getting developers for the Windows platform to move to 64bit compiles will be harder to do than, say, Apple is doing with their hardware and software. Even Apple is finding some apps will not work in 32bit emulation without updates and they have a much smaller software selection to work with. By the time their PowerBooks go 64bit though, it should be all resolved. I would love to use a dual 64bit AMD system as a video editing or server solution, but I would have to see an excellent motherboard to support (one with both Windows and Linux support, since you can get 64bit support there as well) it.
